Sweet! Where can I get this money you seem to be all-knowing about?

If that ever seems like the case, it should be worked at a high level, by your congress representative, by contacting the FAA managers, and so on. These people have telephones and they are not secret. They are also bound to investigate complaints from the public. You can hold them accountable for this, it's just that many times people are "scared" to talk to them, thinking that there's some sort of magical power they have to somehow harass or affect them. Those of us that are trying to uphold the faith of the American people do not need any "bad seeds" trying to undermine it, ultimately it just makes our job harder in the end to let those kind of attitudes persist or exist.

That said, staffing positions are determined by the size and complexity of the airline. More complex airline=more people and to some extent, higher pay for the more complex position, but there's no direct relationship as claimed before, it doesn't work like that. You might get authorized to hire more people if an airline gains airplanes and becomes bigger (but not always!), but there are only about 3 pay-grades that active inspectors exist at, and only two where they have oversight (assigned airlines and certificates), so it's generally not a wide range of pay. The only way to get an increase in pay is to get a step-increase (longevity that increases the first few years and then every few years after that, gradually tapering off) or get a promotion to the next grade, which takes applying and getting selected for a job. You can sometimes get a pay increase by a grade by taking a temporary detail, but that's usually a double-edged sword, may turn into permanent, may put you right back where you started. Most inspectors are either topped out in grade or one grade away from topping out though, because the 2-grade span I mentioned above is where you have the ability to have oversight, which makes you "useful" as an inspector. Point I'm getting to is that there isn't much range in grade and pay.

Sounds very much like a child saying "give me what I want or I'll hurt myself."

Still not paying off the FAA. In fact, insofar as the ridiculous assertion that the airline or airman is paying the FAA, it's irrelevant.

[QUOTE=JohnBurke;2308920]
The Miranda warning applies to police, in criminal cases, but not to inspectors in administrative cases. /QUOTE]

NOT ENTIRELY CORRECT

Statements gained in administrative cases, like tax, ATF Inspections and Immigration cases, can and will be used in a criminal proceeding.

There's a 1968 case that held that evidence(statements) gaining in administrative questioning can be used in a criminal proceeding, (see https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed...91/1/case.html).

In most cases an FAR violation is handled administratively, BUT SOME FAR VIOLATIONS HAVE PARALLEL CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS.

Here's an example of evidence gain during an administrative action used in a subsequent criminal action.

The Threat of Parallel Investigations: When Civil Isn?t Civil

Always consult AOPA or your legal counsel before dealing with the FAA.

[QUOTE=OnMissed;2379491]Valid point, but I would argue that ANY tax matter has criminal potential. Even if you didn't MEAN to screw up your taxes, it could still be a crime.

But in aviation if you say missed a crossing restriction, the potential for a criminal investigation is pretty much zero (in the US). So it might work out for you to come clean and rely on the new enforcement philosophy.

But if there's any complications like alcohol, lying to the FAA or any other fed, or any sort of ancillary criminal activity you'd better keep your trap shut and get a lawyer. Same for any sort of intentional FAR violations, or bent metal (in the later case, to protect you from civil lawsuits from other parties, not the FAA).