If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
On 7 Nov 2006 05:34:37 -0800, "Steve - KDMW"
wrote: Question... I have to do a lot of regional travel for my company and, due to the work we do, most of my work is actually at airports. I've asked my company if I can use my personal aircraft for a lot of this travel and they denied my request due to what the company percieves as their liability in the matter. Is my company misguided or do they really have some liability if I use my airplane instead of my car for regional travel? What's the I worked for a large multi national chemical corporation. We had Two jets and a turboprop. When it came to flying on a business for themselves even the pilots were not allowed to serve as crew in any capacity. difference between me crashing my airplane into a school (their example) or plowing my car into the same school's bus stop? Company lawyers and insurance companies is the difference. Plus airplanes are a much higher profile than cars. We accept multi-car pileups as just the cost of doing business. The public would be and usually is, up in arms when a small plane hits the free way if there is an altercation between the plane and someone's car. Steve CP - ASEL/IA PA28-151 N43291 Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
There are MANY workers' compensation policies that specifically ban covered employees from flying in non-commercial aircraft. There are also many large companies whose life insurance policies DOUBLE the coverage while traveling on a "commercial conveyance" to conduct company business. Ironically, those same policies usually EXCLUDE coverage for accidental death while piloting an aircraft or acting as a required crew member. Your basic life insurance still holds up because these policies have no exclusions (except for suicide and possibly war). When you do the math, the mileage reimbursement does not even cover fuel in an airplane. If you claim the entire trip's mileage, are reimbursed, and use the reimbursement for fuel, have you just conducted a "commercial" flight under your aircraft insurance carrier's eyes? As I recall, fuel expenses must be shared by the occupants to avoid being a commercial flight under FAA rules. Mike |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
In article et,
Mike Spera wrote: If you claim the entire trip's mileage, are reimbursed, and use the reimbursement for fuel, have you just conducted a "commercial" flight under your aircraft insurance carrier's eyes? As I recall, fuel expenses must be shared by the occupants to avoid being a commercial flight under FAA rules. The FAR is this: 61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. [...] (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. Let's look at that carefully. "A private pilot may, for compensation": You can be compensated for your expenses (i.e. claim mileage, per-diem, or even your FBO's full hourly rental cost). "... or hire": You can even continue to draw your regular salary or wage. I get paid an annual salary. As far as the FAA is concerned, if I fly myself to Chicago, I'm perfectly OK marking down my time for that day as a normal work day. "The flight is only incidental to that business or employment": This is where most people start to get confused. Incidental means the flying is not an essential or required part of your job. Your boss says, "Be in Chicago on Tuesday to attend a meeting with our client". The reason for going to Chicago is because your boss needs you to meet with a client. You could have driven, bought a ticket on United, rode your bicycle, or stuck a bunch of stamps on your forehead and climbed into mailbox. The mode of travel wasn't the important thing; the getting there was. "The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire": This is another tricky one for many people. Note that it doesn't say you can't carry passengers or property. It just says you can't do those things for compensation or hire. So, when I fly myself to Chicago, if a co-worker, who also has to meet with the same client, comes with me, that's fine. One the other hand, if I say to my co-worker, "Hey, Joe, I'm happy to let you come with me, but the 47 cents/mile rate I'm getting on my travel expense report only covers half my real flying expenses. If both of us go, we can both claim 47 cents per mile and if you give me yours, I'll just about break even", now I'm in trouble. I'm carrying a passenger for compensation. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 08:53:07 -0500, Roy Smith wrote:
In article et, Mike Spera wrote: If you claim the entire trip's mileage, are reimbursed, and use the reimbursement for fuel, have you just conducted a "commercial" flight under your aircraft insurance carrier's eyes? As I recall, fuel expenses must be shared by the occupants to avoid being a commercial flight under FAA rules. The FAR is this: 61.113 Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command. [...] (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and (2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. Let's look at that carefully. "A private pilot may, for compensation": You can be compensated for your expenses (i.e. claim mileage, per-diem, or even your FBO's full hourly rental cost). "... or hire": You can even continue to draw your regular salary or wage. I get paid an annual salary. As far as the FAA is concerned, if I fly myself to Chicago, I'm perfectly OK marking down my time for that day as a normal work day. If you rent you can deduct the whole thing. If you own it's only so much per mile or was. If flying your own plane for your own business you can deduct the cost up to the equivelant of a non discount coach fare or (again) it was when I was working. "The flight is only incidental to that business or employment": This is where most people start to get confused. Incidental means the flying is not an essential or required part of your job. Your boss says, "Be in Chicago on Tuesday to attend a meeting with our client". The reason for going to Chicago is because your boss needs you to meet with a client. You could have driven, bought a ticket on United, rode your bicycle, or stuck a bunch of stamps on your forehead and climbed into mailbox. The mode of travel wasn't the important thing; the getting there was. "The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire": This is another tricky one for many people. Note that it doesn't say you can't carry passengers or property. It just says you can't do those things for compensation or hire. So, when I fly myself to Chicago, if a co-worker, who also has to meet with the same client, comes with me, that's fine. One the other hand, if I say to my co-worker, "Hey, Joe, I'm happy to let you come with me, but the 47 cents/mile rate I'm getting on my travel expense report only covers half my real flying expenses. If both of us go, we can both claim 47 cents per mile and if you give me yours, I'll just about break even", now I'm in trouble. I'm carrying a passenger for compensation. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
On 9-Nov-2006, Mike Spera wrote: When you do the math, the mileage reimbursement does not even cover fuel in an airplane. Maybe if you're flying a turbine powered airplane, but a piston single looks a whole lot better. In my Arrow, in an hour's cruise I cover a distance that would typically entail about 180 highway miles (Roads rarely run in a straight line between origin and destination.) If I am compensated $0.40 per highway mile, that would come out to $72.00/hr, which is well above the direct operating costs (i.e. fuel, oil, other consumables, and reserves for engine and prop OHs.) -Elliott Drucker |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
"Roy Smith" wrote in message ... One the other hand, if I say to my co-worker, "Hey, Joe, I'm happy to let you come with me, but the 47 cents/mile rate I'm getting on my travel expense report only covers half my real flying expenses. If both of us go, we can both claim 47 cents per mile and if you give me yours, I'll just about break even", now I'm in trouble. I'm carrying a passenger for compensation. But if he uses that to pay the flying expenses without the money going through you it's not compensation. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
My company does allow employees to use personal or rented
aircraft on company business. The requirements a - $2 million smooth insurance policy - Employer named as additional insured - Must file annual pilot documentation & history forms - Must get VP approval for each trip - Cost may not exceed that of an airline ticket or car trip. When I first started, the $2 million smooth insurance was not enforced. They would accept $1M with $100K sub-limits. After our corporate insurance policy was renegociated, they begin enforcing the $2M smooth requirements. They also required the company to pay a $7500 rider if an company employee flew. I had a number of occasions to fly my Aztec on company business before the change. After the $2M smooth requirements, I was not able to get that insurance coverage for the Aztec. I could get it for my 172, but at $2200 versus $750 for the premium. It no longer made economic sense, so the net results is that it put an end to flying yourself on company business. Ronnie "Steve - KDMW" wrote in message oups.com... Question... I have to do a lot of regional travel for my company and, due to the work we do, most of my work is actually at airports. I've asked my company if I can use my personal aircraft for a lot of this travel and they denied my request due to what the company percieves as their liability in the matter. Is my company misguided or do they really have some liability if I use my airplane instead of my car for regional travel? What's the difference between me crashing my airplane into a school (their example) or plowing my car into the same school's bus stop? Steve CP - ASEL/IA PA28-151 N43291 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
Long ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away...when I worked for Boeing (and it
really wasn't that long ago) we had to take 15 employees (2 managers and the rest engineers) on a trip to meet customers. Our in-house travel agency couldn't figure out what was going on, since we had to change the dates repeatedly over the 2 month period. I finally took over all the planning (logistics - no big deal, I ran it as if it was an engineering project!) On a lark, I called Seattle and asked about "borrowing" one of the jets that the Executives use. Turns out that yes, we could make arrangements and use it at the same billed cost as the execs. The overall cost would have been 50% *cheaper* than flying commercial. Why? Because due to the changing schedule, we had to pay full-fare in order to mitigate changing the flights. For some strange reason, my boss was *not* surprised I did this, but would not take it to our director (just under the VP level). Bummer. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
"Blanche" wrote in message ... : Long ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away...when I worked for Boeing (and it : really wasn't that long ago) we had to take 15 employees (2 managers and : the rest engineers) on a trip to meet customers. Our in-house travel : agency couldn't figure out what was going on, since we had to change : the dates repeatedly over the 2 month period. I finally took over : all the planning (logistics - no big deal, I ran it as if it was an : engineering project!) : : On a lark, I called Seattle and asked about "borrowing" one of the : jets that the Executives use. Turns out that yes, we could make : arrangements and use it at the same billed cost as the execs. The : overall cost would have been 50% *cheaper* than flying commercial. : Why? Because due to the changing schedule, we had to pay full-fare in : order to mitigate changing the flights. : : For some strange reason, my boss was *not* surprised I did this, but : would not take it to our director (just under the VP level). : : Bummer. Any employee in our company can try to book a flight on the company jets. There is even a rudimentary reservation system. The catch is that there has to be enough demand locally and the planes need to be passing by. Sounds good until you actually try to use it. Imagine, the CEO is on board, but we are going to stop by Kalamazoo to pick up a design engineer that needs to go to Cleveland... |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
..Blueskies. wrote:
"Blanche" wrote in message ... : Long ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away...when I worked for Boeing (and it : really wasn't that long ago) we had to take 15 employees (2 managers and : the rest engineers) on a trip to meet customers. Our in-house travel : agency couldn't figure out what was going on, since we had to change : the dates repeatedly over the 2 month period. I finally took over : all the planning (logistics - no big deal, I ran it as if it was an : engineering project!) : : On a lark, I called Seattle and asked about "borrowing" one of the : jets that the Executives use. Turns out that yes, we could make : arrangements and use it at the same billed cost as the execs. The : overall cost would have been 50% *cheaper* than flying commercial. : Why? Because due to the changing schedule, we had to pay full-fare in : order to mitigate changing the flights. : : For some strange reason, my boss was *not* surprised I did this, but : would not take it to our director (just under the VP level). : : Bummer. Any employee in our company can try to book a flight on the company jets. There is even a rudimentary reservation system. The catch is that there has to be enough demand locally and the planes need to be passing by. Sounds good until you actually try to use it. Imagine, the CEO is on board, but we are going to stop by Kalamazoo to pick up a design engineer that needs to go to Cleveland... I used to work for General Dynamics and when there was a group of 10 or so who had to go from San Diego to LA for a evening meeting of a Tech Society we were able to use a corporate aircraft for it. This was long before I started flying and I did not know the benefits of GA but it a no brainer for this flight as we all worked a full day, flew up for the meeting and returned that night. All we had to do was submit the request and have the various sign offs but it worked well for us. This was in the 80s so who knows what the process would be now. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
From the Jim Campbell, Captain Zoom archives (all of 6 years ago) | Mick | Home Built | 49 | February 3rd 06 03:27 PM |
Aviation Conspiracy: FAA Calls Controller Whistleblowers "Rogue Employees!!! | Bill Mulcahy | General Aviation | 0 | March 31st 05 04:29 AM |