Overly restrictive business flying requirements.

In article , "Dan Luke"
c172rgATbellsouthDOTnet wrote:

Given that the University will allow travel by car or train, both
of which also have a vastly greater fatal accident rate than
commercial flying, my question remains open.

There is no alternative, in many cases, to travel by car - it would be
impossible for the university to forbid it. That is not true for private
flying.

by "car" I was assuming the employee driving his own car.

--
Bob Noel

In article , "Tom S."
wrote:

A business exists to make money for its owners, not to accommadate the
hobbies and passions of its employees.

How that last relates to the subject I'll have to figure out.

How it could not be obvious eludes me.

--
Bob Noel

Interesting, I know that last week they sent out an email to reafirm
the standard policy that prohibited chartered flights.

There are multiple Toyota afilliated(support) companies this could one
of those and they might have a different policy.

"JerryK" wrote in message ...
That is suprising since Toyota bought the AirFlite FBO in Long Beach for
executive transport.

"RevDMV" wrote in message
m...
I agree with Rick, and others here, that is a most reasonable policy.
I do work for Toyota and GM, and you can't fly on GA, or chartered
aircraft. Only scheduled airline flights. I'm not sure if that will
change when when/if they decided to build GA aircraft.

Again the only real level of freedom is your own busines. With risk
comes reward.

I once had an employer who would not authorize me to fly business trips
because "I don't think single engine airplanes are safe." His point was he
was protecting me. Not much I could do about it. Quitting wasn't an option.
I needed the $$ more than time in the log book. It's all a matter of
priorities, isn't it?