Originally Posted by kevair464
(Post 2680524)
Some companies require a re-current contract as well.
An example: Company A required a 1 year initial type pro-rated contract on new hires. Company A then requires a 6 month contract be signed for each re-current class. For PICs, this means you have two very small windows per year to seek new employment without being on the hook for $$$. I can see Initial type contracts as these are pricey and the true "value" to the pilot. But re-current contracts? Isn't that just part of the price of doing business? How does one get a new job without incurring costs if you are literally under contract forever? Unless of course you refuse to do currency training If it is a desirable sought after place to work then there will not be a need for a contract. But, a person only has his word and should stand behind it. |
Originally Posted by BtownPilot
(Post 2643180)
I am going to break my contract with my 135. Its a realllly big amount. Am I screwed or is there actually always a way to get out? One reason I am, originally it was suppose to be half the time even as they advertised on their job posting on their website but when I already turned down other positions and moved for the job, boom double the time... Any good attorney recommendations? hopefully I can find one that has never had a client pay out.
Thanks! |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 2677947)
Ouch.
Reminds me of the guy that logged time in numbers he saw on the ramp. One turned out to be an inspector's personal airplane. The same inspector giving him the check ride... |
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 2683295)
Now that story is BS and has been making the rounds for 30+ years.
It was actually relayed to me in person by an inspector during a check ride, regarding his own personal airplane. I'm sure it's not the only time it's happened. |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 2683327)
It's been around in a lot of different forms for a lot longer than that, but it's not BS.
It was actually relayed to me in person by an inspector during a check ride, regarding his own personal airplane. I'm sure it's not the only time it's happened. It’s been making the rounds. Does t really matter if it’s true or not, it just signals a certain attitude. |
Nobody could fool Inspector Badflaps with phony logbook entries. He knew all of the tail numbers by heart, because they were single digits. 😁
|
Because the Wrights only built a couple!
|
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 2683295)
Now that story is BS and has been making the rounds for 30+ years.
|
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 2683456)
I was told the same story by an 80-year old FAA POI while he was trying to find a reason to fail me on a asst. Chief 141 ride.
It’s been making the rounds. Does t really matter if it’s true or not, it just signals a certain attitude. |
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
(Post 2683584)
Because the Wrights only built a couple!
The red one was a dog. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:46 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands