Boutique Air
12-21-2022, 11:41 AM
#2231
New Hire
Joined APC: Sep 2022
Posts: 5
"Only three posts for you; not off to a good start."
I guess I'll go shotgun insults at peoples grammar a few hundred times. Then you'll HAVE to respect me!
People are taking issue with you because you added absolute squat to the conversation. You just insulted some grammar on a forum (with improper grammar). I bet you're just a blast to be around.
I guess I'll go shotgun insults at peoples grammar a few hundred times. Then you'll HAVE to respect me!
People are taking issue with you because you added absolute squat to the conversation. You just insulted some grammar on a forum (with improper grammar). I bet you're just a blast to be around.
12-21-2022, 02:51 PM
#2232
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,024
Fourth post and you're not doing any better.
You don't have even the qualification to fly for Boutique. Perhaps you should grow up a little before you start striking out, maybe even find out what you're talking about (start by reading the thread), before you be the smart ass that it appears you really want to be.
You don't yet have a multi rating, you have four posts, and you sound like a teen who really thinks he knows more than a he does. Grow up, then you can speak up.
You don't have even the qualification to fly for Boutique. Perhaps you should grow up a little before you start striking out, maybe even find out what you're talking about (start by reading the thread), before you be the smart ass that it appears you really want to be.
You don't yet have a multi rating, you have four posts, and you sound like a teen who really thinks he knows more than a he does. Grow up, then you can speak up.
12-21-2022, 04:47 PM
#2233
EJET Driver
Joined APC: Apr 2020
Posts: 31
It’s funny that you think I’m a former employee. You have no clue who I am and it’s obvious in your statements.
The comments about the CP who is now the DO of Boutique are public. The links have been posted previously in this forum if you take the time to do your own research.
SS (CEO) recently removed all per diem, deadhead pay, and made it that reserve shifts are now non commutable based on the shift times. These alone are major pieces that perspective pilots should know before going to BTQ.
I will add that MX has gone down hill ever since the early spring because of the three different Directors of MX in that time frame. The last two were fired for trying to improve the MX of the fleet and SS didn’t want to cover the costs. This is why there is three aircraft that are without engines in Dallas. I saw them in my own eyes this month. These same aircraft if you open the logbooks are now being scavenged for parts to keep the rest of the fleet flying.
Another recent change is the pilots no longer have a direct line to MX Control. They now have to call dispatch and explain the problem to someone with no aviation certification. This leads to a call from the DO or new CP (who is a great guy) trying to convince the pilots to not write it up. This happened to me several times all before MX Control calls to write up the aircraft officially in flight docs.
They still have one person in MXC who isn’t even a mechanic.
The comments about the CP who is now the DO of Boutique are public. The links have been posted previously in this forum if you take the time to do your own research.
SS (CEO) recently removed all per diem, deadhead pay, and made it that reserve shifts are now non commutable based on the shift times. These alone are major pieces that perspective pilots should know before going to BTQ.
I will add that MX has gone down hill ever since the early spring because of the three different Directors of MX in that time frame. The last two were fired for trying to improve the MX of the fleet and SS didn’t want to cover the costs. This is why there is three aircraft that are without engines in Dallas. I saw them in my own eyes this month. These same aircraft if you open the logbooks are now being scavenged for parts to keep the rest of the fleet flying.
Another recent change is the pilots no longer have a direct line to MX Control. They now have to call dispatch and explain the problem to someone with no aviation certification. This leads to a call from the DO or new CP (who is a great guy) trying to convince the pilots to not write it up. This happened to me several times all before MX Control calls to write up the aircraft officially in flight docs.
They still have one person in MXC who isn’t even a mechanic.
12-24-2022, 01:52 PM
#2234
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,024
Originally Posted by FlightLife2020
It’s funny that you think I’m a former employee. You have no clue who I am and it’s obvious in your statements.
Originally Posted by FlightLife2020
Former Booty Q pilot here,
I don't give a damn who you are. The only thing that need be known about you is that you are a liar. Anything further is a waste of time.
This message is hidden because FlightLife2020 is on your ignore list.
12-25-2022, 04:30 PM
#2235
EJET Driver
Joined APC: Apr 2020
Posts: 31
You really must have a sad life to attempt to defend BTQ. But it’s okay I won’t expose who you are. Every fact I said about BTQ is correct and I don’t really care if you whine about it.
Just a reminder again to everyone don’t work there unless you want to deal with someone like the message above.
Just a reminder again to everyone don’t work there unless you want to deal with someone like the message above.
01-24-2023, 02:50 PM
#2236
New Hire
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by VOLLU
Boutique Air is a California based commuter air carrier which operates flights to and from small communities without commercial passenger service. When a new pilot joins Boutique, they are required to complete a company specific training program. The resulting “Part 135” certification only qualifies the pilot to fly for Boutique. If a pilot leaves Boutique to fly for another airline, they must complete another certification program for the subsequent carrier.
Boutique tries to stem the tide of its high pilot turnover rate by requiring its new hires to sign a Boutique Air PC-12 FIRST OFFICER NEW HIRE AGREEMENT and TRAINING CONTRACT.” Under that contract, the new pilot is obligated to reimburse Boutique for a pro rated portion of the $14,000 training program if the pilot resigns from Boutique less than 24 months after certification.
About six months after completing the training program, the pilot resigned from Boutique due to what he described as a “toxic and unsafe” work environment. Boutique filed a lawsuit against the pilot for reimbursement.
Under California Labor Code § 2802(a) “an employer shall indemnify his or her employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties.” In other words, Boutique cannot require the employee to bear the cost of training that qualifies them only to fly for Boutique. Under California Labor Code § 2804, any contract which obligates the employee to reimburse the employer is “null and void.”
In the California case “In Re Acknowledgement Cases,” the appellate court, interpreting Labor Code sections 2802 and 2804, ruled that the Los Angeles Police Department may not recover the cost of LAPD mandated training which qualifies the employee for no employment outside of the LAPD.
The case is pending in the Superior Court of Fulton County, GA. The pilot is represented by attorney Lawrence Silverman of the Southeast Consumer Law firm in Marietta, GA.
Boutique tries to stem the tide of its high pilot turnover rate by requiring its new hires to sign a Boutique Air PC-12 FIRST OFFICER NEW HIRE AGREEMENT and TRAINING CONTRACT.” Under that contract, the new pilot is obligated to reimburse Boutique for a pro rated portion of the $14,000 training program if the pilot resigns from Boutique less than 24 months after certification.
About six months after completing the training program, the pilot resigned from Boutique due to what he described as a “toxic and unsafe” work environment. Boutique filed a lawsuit against the pilot for reimbursement.
Under California Labor Code § 2802(a) “an employer shall indemnify his or her employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties.” In other words, Boutique cannot require the employee to bear the cost of training that qualifies them only to fly for Boutique. Under California Labor Code § 2804, any contract which obligates the employee to reimburse the employer is “null and void.”
In the California case “In Re Acknowledgement Cases,” the appellate court, interpreting Labor Code sections 2802 and 2804, ruled that the Los Angeles Police Department may not recover the cost of LAPD mandated training which qualifies the employee for no employment outside of the LAPD.
The case is pending in the Superior Court of Fulton County, GA. The pilot is represented by attorney Lawrence Silverman of the Southeast Consumer Law firm in Marietta, GA.
Is there any follow up to this case!?!?
09-08-2023, 02:48 PM
#2238
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2023
Position: Twin jet, left
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by NMTX18
Hey all, went back quite a bit in the thread, but was wondering how things are going in 2023 for FO's? How many hours are FO's flying per month? I appreciate any info!
This popped up while checking the 121 pay scales for me
You’d be much better off getting a job with a reputable company, frankly you’d look better getting a gig flying pipeline, skydivers, towing gliders, etc compared to warming the seat in a VERY single pilot plane for a company who is very well known is that airframes community as a **** show
Even legal, yeah some HR folks might be ok with the time logged right seat in a 12, but if you get a real pilot on the hiring board they’ll probably chuckle and hire someone else with real flight time
YMMV
09-15-2023, 09:15 AM
#2239
New Hire
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Position: 737 ca
Posts: 6
SIC approved flight time
A friend and former employee of Boutique Air told me that at one time they lost approval from their fsdo to consider first officers required crew members. Meaning FO s could not legally log sic time. He had friends that were pulled out of new hire class from a regional because their flight time was in question. Does anyone know if they have gotten this issue resolved? Are there any similar operations that have this program? Sorry if this subject has been addressed already.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
