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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
"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 difference between me crashing my airplane into a school (their example) or plowing my car into the same school's bus stop? The difference is probably that they're insured when you're in your car but not when you're in an airplane. Another difference is that they understand and are comfortable with the risks of you being in your car, but they don't understand the risks of you being in an airplane. They could gain an understanding of the risks. They could meet with their insurance carrier, and their lawyers, and look carefully at the issue to better understand exactly what their liability exposure is. This would take time and money, and be of no benefit to them. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
Steve - KDMW wrote:
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? I believe what they are worried about is if you crashed into a house or something that other people would sue your company. It happens all the time and what they don't realize is that they are also just as easily sued if you ran into someone with your car. In this day and age people sue other people at the drop of a hat. A plane crash is just more 'spectacular' for a lawyer because they can play many angles (generally ignorance and envy) and end up with a much bigger pot o'gold. If it were me I'd just fly anyway, screw 'em. I hate driving. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
"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 There are MANY workers' compensation policies that specifically ban covered employees from flying in non-commercial aircraft. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
Roy Smith wrote:
"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 difference between me crashing my airplane into a school (their example) or plowing my car into the same school's bus stop? The difference is probably that they're insured when you're in your car but not when you're in an airplane. Another difference is that they understand and are comfortable with the risks of you being in your car, but they don't understand the risks of you being in an airplane. They could gain an understanding of the risks. They could meet with their insurance carrier, and their lawyers, and look carefully at the issue to better understand exactly what their liability exposure is. This would take time and money, and be of no benefit to them. Actually I would argue that it is of tremendous benefit to the company because they can get a lot more work out of their worker if he does not spend time on the road butter rather doing what he is paid for. That's the argument I would use. PS It did not work for me |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
In article .com,
"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 difference between me crashing my airplane into a school (their example) or plowing my car into the same school's bus stop? Back in the late 1980's-early 1990's, (I think it was National Business Aircraft Association) had a packet available for just this purpose. It outlined how to approach your management and counter their arguements against allowing individuals to use personal aircraft. One of the items was to include the business as a named insured on the owners policy and also included some insurance guidelines. You might contact them and see if such a packet is still available. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
Dave Touretzky won this battle in an academic environment; I suspect you can find his writeup. -- A host is a host from coast to & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
If you work for a large company is probably going to be imposible
unless they already have a policy to allow it. For me, I could buy a $50 million dollar liability policy and it would still be no where near enough for my company. On the other hand, if you work for a very small company you should be able to just add the company to your policy and it may provide enough coverage for them. The more valuable the company, the more insurance they should ask for. Robert, CFII 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 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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
Gig 601XL Builder wrote: "Steve - KDMW" wrote in message There are MANY workers' compensation policies that specifically ban covered employees from flying in non-commercial aircraft. True, and Worker's Comp is just the begining. Try looking into general liability policies. If your company normally has $10 million in liability when you're driving the rental car, they'll need at least that for the plane. Now try to find that coverage for a C-172. -Robert |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Companies Allowing Employees to Fly
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 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 When I worked for Texas Instruments we had a specific policy AGAINST it. I had several occasions that would have been nice. When Raytheon bought the defense business of TI, I checked the policy and we COULD use personal aircraft. But, then again, Raytheon owns Beech. -- Regards, Ross C-172F 180HP KSWI |
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 |