Quote:
Originally Posted by gloopy
LOLwut?
If anything they're too permissive. The company has no obligation to allow outside flying when it faces FAR limits for what you can do. Any outside civilian flying it allows is at its discrection as it should be unless you're facing imminent furlough, a UNA or some other special case.
I think both you and Herkflyer are missing my point. If the company says no to outside flying, I FIRMLY believe they should have to compensate you. They are inherently restricting your one trade. Flying airplanes. If they want to monopolize that, they should be forced to compensate you. I'm not advocating for whether they should allow it or not. I for one would not fly outside because the inherent risk(accident/violation) is much too great. But for those that want to and have fulfilled their obligation to Delta(flying a line within the LCW, or being available on reserve, Delta should not be allowed to simply say no with no recourse.
I'm saying that ONLY IN THE EVENT THEY SAY NO, they should have to compensate.
For instance, I know a guy who wanted to do some CFI work outside. He was straight up told no with no explanation. If he is entirely responsible for FAR117, etc. Why should Delta be able to park him and not compensate him for his potential loss of income from acting as a CFI? I told him he should send Delta a bill for his lost income.(Tongue in cheek)