Netjets latest & greatest:
10-22-2017, 04:15 PM
#2812
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: Gear *****
Posts: 266
Wow...........
Originally Posted by WingNutz
Interviewed months ago in CMH, made it to Day 2 and was told the following week everything went great and they had good new!!! LOL Congrats!! You have made it into our pilot pool and we will be in touch in the next few weeks with details for the next step...weeks if not months go by and was now told you need to do a Skype interview after already being told your pretty much hired and in the pool...Scheduled Skype interview which lasted 10 mins and was called the next day and told "Thanks but no Thanks" Over 6 feet and fit tested out of the Phenom...Don't waste your time with this joke of a company and move on to something better...Feels like the weight was lifted off my shoulders after that call...Peace Out NJ ✌🏻
10-22-2017, 06:56 PM
#2813
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by Jetlife
Best case is for congress to implement to avoid lawsuits.
Not sure NetJets has the pull on Capital Hill to make this happen either. There will be tons of pushback from other operators.
10-22-2017, 07:27 PM
#2814
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,063
Originally Posted by G550Guy
Agreed. The only way they could get this done without serious lawsuits costing millions is to have Congress change the law.
Not sure NetJets has the pull on Capital Hill to make this happen either. There will be tons of pushback from other operators.
Not sure NetJets has the pull on Capital Hill to make this happen either. There will be tons of pushback from other operators.
10-22-2017, 07:36 PM
#2815
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by Flyfalcons
Not if the law doesn't affect other operators.
That’s the point... many 135 operators use 65+ old pilots and will push against changing the law. The FAA/Congress couldn’t implement a change specifically for NetJets only.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
10-23-2017, 03:40 AM
#2817
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: MD-11 FO
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by Flyfalcons
If you've seen the recent AIN article, that's exactly what is being introduced. Not too many other 91K/135 operators with more than 100,000 flights annually.
They are only going to apply the rule to operators that fly xxx hours per year? Thats insane if you think about it.
64 year old senior Netjets pilot Joe flies the low day schedule and lives in Montana, he averages 275 flight hours per year in a nice glass cockpit Phenom.
68 year old Charter pilot Jim flies when he's told too and lives in Teterboro, he averages 1000 a year in a crappy old Lear 35 with a so-so autopilot.
Who's more of a danger to the public? Congress has a long road ahead if they take this route. This smells like discrimination to me.
10-23-2017, 05:22 AM
#2818
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: C47 PIC/747-400 SIC
Posts: 2,100
Originally Posted by G550Guy
They are only going to apply the rule to operators that fly xxx hours per year? Thats insane if you think about it.
64 year old senior Netjets pilot Joe flies the low day schedule and lives in Montana, he averages 275 flight hours per year in a nice glass cockpit Phenom.
68 year old Charter pilot Jim flies when he's told too and lives in Teterboro, he averages 1000 a year in a crappy old Lear 35 with a so-so autopilot.
Who's more of a danger to the public? Congress has a long road ahead if they take this route. This smells like discrimination to me.
10-23-2017, 07:23 AM
#2820
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,919
This goes beyond safety in the cockpit. These loopy dinosaurs are a huge training cost. Extra sims during recurrent, failing initials in new fleets and having to go back into their old fleet because they can’t learn 1990s technology. Also hire liability to cover medically. This isn’t just about safety in the cockpit although that is a factor.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
