Question for the flying lawyers around here, with a preface to same.

Quote:

"The AP (7/25) reports that the Kansas State University at Salina’s pilot program has been granted an exemption from the FAA “that will allow students to become professional co-pilots more quickly than other schools’ graduates.” Instead of being required to fly 1,500 hours before becoming co-pilots, graduated will only have to fly 1,000 hours. Kurt Barnhart, an official at the school, “said the exemption gives the students advantages in time and cost over students at flight schools that don’t meet the FAA requirements.”


This smells of job discrimination based upon nothing, nada, thin air. Why should a pilot with a 4 yr mechanical or electrical engineering degree from MIT with 1,200 hours have to take a back seat to a K-state grad with an "aviation degree" and 1,000 hrs??

Question: With the grant of this new exemption, can the MIT grad now sue the FAA, and win?

Put another way, has the FAA just opened itself to a rash of lawsuits?

 

Lobbyists for the big aviation universities lobbied congress to get that allowed in the new law. The FAA would probably get beat up by congress if they didn't follow through.

Any lawsuits would have to challenge the law itself, not just the FAA. I don't see a case... the average juror ( or judge) would see nothing wrong with extra credit for an aviation degree... even though professional pilots know better.

 

Don't you mean the lobbyists lobbied the FAA rather than Congress? It was the FAA, not Congress, that has granted the exemption.

Also...

Why can't a lawsuit challenge an exemption to a law rather than the law itself? Wouldn't s plantiff simply be saying "I'm OK with the law, but dispute the exemption(s) granted to it?"

Consider...

The MIT grad calls a high-time airline CA to testify in court..."Captain, who would you rather have as your partner in a sim-check...an MIT grad who graduated with a 4.0, an electrical engineering degree, and has 1,200 flt hrs, or a K-state grad who graduated with a 2.5, an aviation degree, and has 1,000 flt hrs."??

"In your PROFESSIONAL and expert opinion, Captain, who is more qualified with these basic credentials to be your First Officer?"

 

Then are you going to sue delta because they require a degree?

 

I still don't see why people are in such a tizzy over this. In the grand scheme of things the difference between 1,000 and 1,500 hours is so negligible who really cares. It isn't that hard to find the hours.

 

Not trying to head this off topic, but it might be somewhat relative to the degree of how well a student performs at the University.

At Community College of Baltimore County, the one in which I am attending now Part 141, requires a minimum GPA of 3.0 to continue with the program, specifically Flight Training. The Air Traffic Controller Majors are also held up to this GPA standard.

Flight Attendant and Aviation Business degrees at the school can ride the 2.0 if they choose to.

I get what you're saying even if the comparison is a MIT 4.0 Electrical Engineer vs a 3.0 GPA Aviation Management with similar flight hours. From first glance you would choose the MIT student, but I would hope that most Universities, that incorporate an Aviation degree with Flight Training, are not letting their students pass through with sub par work to show for it. I know many Universities have shut down their programs simply because they were failing so many Flight Training students because of the rigid standards. It looks bad on a University in terms of drop out rates.

At least in terms of CCBC, with the classes I've taken with Professor Doug Williams (Director of the Program) and Chris Komsa, they are definitely not letting their students half ass the program. I received a health care degree in Respiratory Therapy which required a maintained minimum 3.4 GPA along with many qualification exams to be passed. The classes were excruciatingly tough. Private Pilot Ground School with Komsa felt just as tough. With him being former Air Force and Airline Pilot, he expects the students to excel.

 

Why would an MIT grad become an airline pilot?

 

I agree. Can't we just be happy we took a huge step forward? Part 141 and 91 have had time differences for awhile, private/commercial. I don't think anybody sued over that. And between the 4.0 MIT grad vs 2.5 aviation grad, I'd rather look at the person overall, not his GPA and degree.

 

Interestingly enough, there are MIT graduates that have become panhandlers on the street because they enjoy it. I met a guy that got his Master's Degree at Syracuse university. He did a thesis on panhandling in New York City. He calculated that he was making roughly about $80,000 a year, non-taxed. Despite being incredibly intelligent and a very hard worker at the time, he enjoyed the lifestyle enough that he has made a career out of it.

Professional panhandling. At least I know I always have something to fall back on.

 

The law was written with an allowance for the exemption... otherwise the faa couldn't just make up an " exception" to a federal law. The law allowed the FAA to fill in the details which they did.

Recent case law has affirmed that a federal agency acting within the scope of it's jurisdiction has significant latitude with rulemaking... it's a high hurdle to get a court to intervene, it would almost require illegal activity on the part of the agency or constitutional issues with the rule. There are no constitutional issues here, flying is a privilege not a right.