Quote:
Originally Posted by fjetter
Fixed it for ya....SIC pay to play programs shouldn't be used for any revenue generating flights. If their GOM/OpSpecs requires a SIC then the company should hire, train, and pay SICs. If that's too expensive then adjust your opsecs/gom to include A/P in lieu of SIC.
Maybe issue the airline hiring boards have is not so much the legality of the time rather the fact that it is pay to play.
Incorrect in many ways..... The SIC is not a required crew member on the freighters so why would a company pay someone? The SIC is compensated for all passenger flights but CASW has authorization to use an SIC in all operations but don't need them at the same time. The wording is "at the desecration" or something like that. Basically if the SIC doesn't show on a freight trip then no big deal.
If the program is all someone has at the time then who are we to judge? You're not taking anyone's job and are able to get out of the flight school mentality and into the real world at the same time; very valuable when trying to become a professional pilot.
The pay the play with CASW boils down to renting the airplane to build time, just like renting your C172 from the FBO but the difference is the quality of time you receive. The old mentality of saying play to play sucks just doesn't cut it anymore in this new world of HR5900 and the over saturation of CFIs. If you want to help your career progression bad enough, this is a reasonable way to do it.