Originally Posted by
Greg Bockelman
Actually it says that the pilot HAD served more than 1,000 hours as a 121 PIC. And if he was employed by a 121 carrier ON July 31, 2013, he would be covered. But if he was NOT employed by a 121 carrier on July 31, 2013, it would NOT be covered. That makes no common sense to me.
That is the insane part and it makes no sense.
I agree that it says that. You had to be employed on the date of implementation. It seems to punish the person who left the industry. Furloughed? You are still employed right. Why does it punish the person who left the industry two years earlier and now wants to come back a few years later - I don't know. You'd have to ask the alphabet soup of organizations that made the rule. Most here have pointed the finger solely at the FAA - but forget that representatives from every aviation organization were part of that rule making.
KSCessnaDriver - seems to me that they made some distinction with pax carrying being held to a higher esteem than freight hauling doesn't it?