FAR 135 Subpart E Flight Crew Req's.
FAR 135 Subpart G Crewmember Testing Req's
FAR 135 Subpart H Training
FAR 135 Subpart J MX Req's
FAR 135 Subpart K HazMat
Seems like a long and expensive row to hoe?
My Co. was one of the first to decline flying contract work for Active Aero after the treatment of the -20 crews. There is not more flying to be had, rather, the AA side of the house is losing some of its most treasured customers to a savvy desire to find a better deal in this challenging economy. More AA work is going to other brokers who pay their contractors faster and thusly are losing customers needing the smaller (less than -9) work flown. Stands to reason, they may be revising their business model to fly the -20 (and much smaller) work at lower costs in an effort to secure their old relationships.
I don’t understand how you can do indoc/recurrent in a day and start the line the next. Even previously trained joes need IOE on the certificate holder’s ops specs by the bulk of training programs approved by the FAA. Different story altogether for “Recalled” employees resuming flying but, even those guys get a line/route check after recurrent ground instruction when returning from a layoff. The feds do not typically approve manuals that say I pilot can be away from flying for 6+ months, return and not go through some length of ground/indoc/recurrent training to include line and route checks for the crews and operator before generating any revenue. Not even for a seasonal operator.
As a "contract" non payroll employee, you are in the same boat as the companies contracted to fly USA/AA work. Particularly with regard to Bankruptcy Court proceedings. Others have suggested and I would agree, the guys at the top are riding the gravy train as long as they could. Returning to USAJet as contract labor would be the "extenze" in the Big Dick's and they would likely hold little more regard in the end than the -20 guys first got this past summer?
In any case, RVSM, 135 Subparts E , G, H, J, K, when you add it all up, more junior guys will be contracted because they are more likely still "current" and the expense alone should lack justification for the return. Also, how can you justify to the State of Michigan that a Former employee is not really an employee on “recall” and escape the LI, UI and workers compensation taxes that was once collected when someone returns to the same job they previously held, but now, as "contract labor"?
One last thought. If there was one remaining crew on the payroll flying the -20 through this mess and an opportunity came along in just this scenario, would you still fly along side your brothers contractually? Or, with less seniority than someone else who should get the call first? Will you be on the street and replaced when you decline the trip that will breach Duty/Flight limits?
Only you will know these answers. But, the writing will be on the wall if the bulk of your flying turns out to be 50 to 500 # -15 piece count loads that is in no way competitive to what others are giving trips away just for the cash flow. There is not anymore flying to be picked up overall, since after the -20 guys were let go and instead more fish in the pond are bidding against AA/USA work. Some of the guys on the cargo board side need to tell their bosses of this and decline bidding on AA work to keep them from bidding their -20’s for the lesser load work. I suspect this is a ploy by USA Mgmt to quell the losses of what little bit of flying there is left to competitors and continue bucketing water out of a dying ship.
Sorry, Yip, nothing personal. Just business.
100-1/2
