Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums > >

Aviation Law Legal issues, FARs, and questions

 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums

    Already registered? Login above

OR
 
To take advantage of all the site's features, become a member of
the largest community of airline pilots in the U.S. and beyond.

The advertising to the left will not show if you are a registered user.

Join the Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-16-2017, 12:59 PM   #31
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,026
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AirOverTheLog View Post
Wrong Jonny Boy. It's all about the money $$$. Dollar bills yo!!! FAA = Money, NTSB = Safety
Sweet! Where can I get this money you seem to be all-knowing about?
JamesNoBrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 01:15 PM   #32
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,026
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Sort of.

CMO staffing is (obviously) determined by the size of the airline. I know personally of one airline which was under increasing and draconian scrutiny from their CMO (co-located with airline HQ which happened to be in a very nice geographic location)...well the airline threatened to move some HQ functions and their certificate to another base (which was a decidedly NOT very nice geographic local). The CMO got in line real quick, even the line pilots saw the difference.

In this particular case, IMO the CMO was out of line to begin with, essentially implementing personal vendettas. But just goes to show that the FAA may not be as impartial as one might expect.
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.
JamesNoBrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 05:42 AM   #33
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,804
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Sort of.

CMO staffing is (obviously) determined by the size of the airline. I know personally of one airline which was under increasing and draconian scrutiny from their CMO (co-located with airline HQ which happened to be in a very nice geographic location)...well the airline threatened to move some HQ functions and their certificate to another base (which was a decidedly NOT very nice geographic local). The CMO got in line real quick, even the line pilots saw the difference.

In this particular case, IMO the CMO was out of line to begin with, essentially implementing personal vendettas. But just goes to show that the FAA may not be as impartial as one might expect.
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.
JohnBurke is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Garbage station coming at LGA! Donkey Hangar Talk 1 03-29-2009 11:42 AM
FAA sets up high-level alerts for missed airline inspections CRJ1000 Major 1 04-19-2008 02:15 AM
Southwest Airlines Article from CNN UnlimitedAkro Major 60 03-11-2008 12:14 PM
New FAA Requirement: Reduce Safety (by John Carr, NATCA President) AUS_ATC Hangar Talk 0 03-08-2006 06:56 PM
NWA "replacement" maintenance falling behind? CRM1337 Major 1 10-02-2005 07:12 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:25 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.0, Copyright ©2000-2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2012 Internet Brands, Inc.