Pt.135 On-Demand,Pax or Freight,Mgmt adherence to FAR'S

[G-force]

If anyone flying 135 charter/pax-freight was following the FAR's and in return got the proverbial AX for doing so,we need to hear from you.

If you were flying Pt.135 On-Demand charter, pax or freight,and a mgmt person,Dir of Ops/Chief Pilot gave you a DIRECT ORDER to perform or not perform and action that would be considered a violation by a FSDO Inspector,then,we need to hear from you.

Please only serious replies!!!!!

Have had first hand experience with this issue and believe that all the problem lies with mgmt and local FSDO's due to their relationships that are not on the PROFESSIONAL LEVEL.If we as pilots want better employers in the 135/charter segment of aviation,then we MUST have mgr's with better training,better ethics and values.

 

[jergar999]

If anyone flying 135 charter/pax-freight was following the FAR's and in return got the proverbial AX for doing so,we need to hear from you.

If you were flying Pt.135 On-Demand charter, pax or freight,and a mgmt person,Dir of Ops/Chief Pilot gave you a DIRECT ORDER to perform or not perform and action that would be considered a violation by a FSDO Inspector,then,we need to hear from you.

Please only serious replies!!!!!

Have had first hand experience with this issue and believe that all the problem lies with mgmt and local FSDO's due to their relationships that are not on the PROFESSIONAL LEVEL.If we as pilots want better employers in the 135/charter segment of aviation,then we MUST have mgr's with better training,better ethics and values.

I have first hand experience with this exact situation. I was doing my preflight inspection on a Metro and going through the logbook noticed it was due for a service check. The company AAIP called for service checks and phase inspections every fifty hours, alternating between the two. I told UPS not to load the aircraft and called the CP. He told me to head home for now, and said he would take care of it. I got a call not fifteen minutes later to let me know the aircraft was ready and loaded, and that I needed to be there ASAP. The CP had called a mechanic and told him to pencil whip a service check as fast as possible, then called UPS and told them to start loading without me.

I talked with my feet, and never looked back. A friend of mine called me two months later to tell me they had been shut down.

I guess technically I didn't get the axe, but had I stayed and forced the issue I'm sure I would have.

 

[AerroMatt]

...Uhhh. Oops! Sorry! You said only serious replies.

I guess I'll do as Diesel has suggested. I'll go back on the Veranda, since you're already on the cross.

 

[G-force]

Real World-charter

I have first hand experience with this exact situation. I was doing my preflight inspection on a Metro and going through the logbook noticed it was due for a service check. The company AAIP called for service checks and phase inspections every fifty hours, alternating between the two. I told UPS not to load the aircraft and called the CP. He told me to head home for now, and said he would take care of it. I got a call not fifteen minutes later to let me know the aircraft was ready and loaded, and that I needed to be there ASAP. The CP had called a mechanic and told him to pencil whip a service check as fast as possible, then called UPS and told them to start loading without me.

I talked with my feet, and never looked back. A friend of mine called me two months later to tell me they had been shut down.

I guess technically I didn't get the axe, but had I stayed and forced the issue I'm sure I would have.

Did you consider letting them terminate you?? Atleast you could possibly draw un-employment! What about the FAA whistle-blowers HOTline??

Have given much thought about the solution to this problem confronting this segment of aviation,it may require a change in FAR's,Pt 119 for mgmt persons to pass some required test on ethics & values,however,getting changes to FAR's is not easy!!
If you have any suggestions on how to resolve the problem,there are a lot of us that would like to hear about it,so feel free!!

 

[ClassG]

Actually, I believe the problem lies with PILOTS who are often willing to help the company to complete the mission, mistakenly believing they will be appreciated (as though there were some kind of reward to be gained) by their company. Wanting to be the hero often out-weighs the risks involved.

Also, the fact that MOST flight instructors have NO experience in airline and charter ops plays a huge role here. They are, therefore, often not equipped to properly "educate" a commercial pilot candidate for the Real World.

I would agree that management carries the bulk of the responsibility here (since somebody higher up than the pilot generally knows when something is getting ready to happen that COULD lead to a violation, and then doesn't share it with the crew).

But if the crew learns of a potential violation, they should not accept the trip. Maybe crews should be required to have additional training in professionalism, ethics, and JUDGEMENT before being allowed to become a professional pilot.

Today, there is very little training on what to look out for and what NOT to do (especially in the Part 135 environment) offered to the commercial pilot candidate. This may be on purpose. Knowledge is power. Too much knowledge and a culture of caution would mean lost trips, lost revenue. Not good for business.

Blame everybody - in fairness.

ClassG

 

[G-force]

Agree,mostly

Actually, I believe the problem lies with PILOTS who are often willing to help the company to complete the mission, mistakenly believing they will be appreciated (as though there were some kind of reward to be gained) by their company. Wanting to be the hero often out-weighs the risks involved.

Also, the fact that MOST flight instructors have NO experience in airline and charter ops plays a huge role here. They are, therefore, often not equipped to properly "educate" a commercial pilot candidate for the Real World.

I operators are.

But if the crew learns of a potential violation, they should not accept the trip. Maybe crews should be required to have additional training in professionalism, ethics, and JUDGEMENT before being allowed to become a professional pilot.

Today, there is very little training on what to look out for and what NOT to do (especially in the Part 135 environment) offered to the commercial pilot candidate. This may be on purpose. Knowledge is power. Too much knowledge and a culture of caution would mean lost trips, lost revenue. Not good for business.

Blame everybody - in fairness.

ClassG

Agree with you mostly,although mgmt must take 95% of the blame,since they hold all the cards.
At majors,regionals and some fractionals there is a UNION on the property which PROTECTS pilots from UN-ETHICAL mgmt.At charter operators,there is NO UNION,so pilots are not protected at all.
Today there is more opportunity than ever before,The TSA is literally driving thousands of pax away from scheduled carriers and into the charter/corporate/fractional segment of aviation.

A well run charter operator will be able to get new clients and keep old ones,a bad operator will lose clients and remain stagnant or go out business altogether
To IDENTIFY who the GOOD operator are seems to be little difficult for a lot of pilots.

 

[FL420]

Not 135 but 121. Otto refused to fly a B757 with unresolved maintenance issues and was able to prove he was fired in retaliation.

World Air Holdings Inc. Subsidiary Settles California Pilot Lawsuit

May 15, 2006 World Air Holdings Inc. announced that North American Airlines, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, has reported a full and complete settlement totaling $2.3 million to resolve a California lawsuit filed by former pilot Randall Otto. Otto had previously won a jury verdict for actual and punitive damages of $12.6 million in December 2005, which was reduced after post-trial motions to $3.1 million in a ruling by the Alameda County judge in March 2006. Otto originally filed his lawsuit in 2003, alleging wrongful termination

 

[G-force]

After the Verdict

Not 135 but 121. Otto refused to fly a B757 with unresolved maintenance issues and was able to prove he was fired in retaliation.

World Air Holdings Inc. Subsidiary Settles California Pilot Lawsuit

May 15, 2006 World Air Holdings Inc. announced that North American Airlines, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, has reported a full and complete settlement totaling $2.3 million to resolve a California lawsuit filed by former pilot Randall Otto. Otto had previously won a jury verdict for actual and punitive damages of $12.6 million in December 2005, which was reduced after post-trial motions to $3.1 million in a ruling by the Alameda County judge in March 2006. Otto originally filed his lawsuit in 2003, alleging wrongful termination

Did this pilot ever collect even one dollar after the lawyers got through???
Also,did this pilot,Randall Otto ever get another job in aviation? Does he even want to?????

 

[FL420]

Did this pilot ever collect even one dollar after the lawyers got through???
Also,did this pilot,Randall Otto ever get another job in aviation? Does he even want to?????

Randy Otto was hired as a B757 Captain by TransMeridian Airlines post North American. I don't know what he is doing now after TMA went tits up.

A fairly typical retainer for an attorney is 1/3 of the award, which in this case was settled at $2.3 million. He had some real high-powered expert witnesses that had to be paid but their fees could have been part of the final settlement.

 

[Say Again Over]

Part 135 and FAR compliance can't be used in the same sentence, I have worked for at least ten 135 operators and not one complied completely with the FARs, as a matter of fact my very last 135 employer has been brought up on a Federal rap (and the DM) for falsifying maintenance records at our Air Ambulance, along with bank fraud. The biggest operator (135) I worked for was part of the Mesa Group of Farmington, NM., some of the most flagrant law breakers I've ever worked for, they're all the same in my eyes.