Another professional integrity scenario....

flyinguitar

flyinguitar

Well-Known Member
So I'm checked out to rent at a local FBO. They know that I have my commercial and CFI. This past week, I got a call from them asking if I wanted to help ferry a customer's plane. They were not planning on paying me, but they figured the "free" flight time would be compensation enough.

I was way to busy to even consider it, but I consider it to be a no-brainer that I should get paid for the flight, and the customer should foot the bill. Let me know if you disagree.

The point I am unsure about is the following: my medical is currently only valid for private pilot privileges (it's a 2-year-old first class and I'm under 40), so I would not be able to receive compensation for such a flight. Since I can't do the flight and get paid, does that transform the scenario into one where it's now OK for me to do it for free?

That would be nice, because in all honesty I would jump at any and all flying opportunities that come my way given how little I fly nowadays (and that I have to pay for it out of my own pocket). However, I also want to maintain the professional integrity that is so often discussed on this forum.

Thanks for your input!
 
Stomp16 said:
...the FAA considers flight time as compensation.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the heads-up on this. It makes sense and I hadn't thought about it before. Do you know of rulings or precedents where the FAA explicitly stated this? When I get some more time, I'll try to research more myself.
 
mshunter said:
Screw them! Find another place to rent.
Click to expand...
I've had a good experience renting from them so far, actually, after leaving a club in my area that I had major problems with. I think it was a well-intentioned but naive CFI who proposed this, thinking he was doing me a favor. But it's not necessarily a shady business all-around. At least I hope not.
 
Don't do it on a third class medical. The FAA WILL nab you if they find out. Although I think you could fight them on it if you had to. The department of labor does not consider flight time to be compensation.
 
Is the new owner on board? If so, then it could be flight instruction in which case only a 3rd class medical is required. Instructing is the only case in which you can be paid to fly while holding a 3rd class medical.
 
flyinguitar said:
Thanks for the heads-up on this. It makes sense and I hadn't thought about it before. Do you know of rulings or precedents where the FAA explicitly stated this? When I get some more time, I'll try to research more myself.
Click to expand...

The Kirwan letter has a paragraph laying out the FAA's view on compensation (spoiler alert: the FAA considers compensation to be anything of value)

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...2005/kirwan - (2005) legal interpretation.pdf

Bigger picture... it sounds like some folks involved didn't know you only hold a third class medical.
 
hook_dupin said:
The Kirwan letter has a paragraph laying out the FAA's view on compensation (spoiler alert: the FAA considers compensation to be anything of value)

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2005/kirwan - (2005) legal interpretation.pdf

Bigger picture... it sounds like some folks involved didn't know you only hold a third class medical.
Click to expand...
Or they didn't know the rules themselves. In any case, that ruling is crystal clear. I'm glad I posted this. I guess that answers my question. Thanks!

(And technically, I hold a first class medical that is only valid for private pilot privileges at this point. An academic point, but I believe that's the accurate way to understand it: medical certificates become valid for progressively lower eschelons of privilege as time goes by, but they don't magically change classes.)
 
Pay2 said:
Is the new owner on board? If so, then it could be flight instruction in which case only a 3rd class medical is required. Instructing is the only case in which you can be paid to fly while holding a 3rd class medical.
Click to expand...

This^^

But make sure it is the owner. Any other person and the aircraft would require a 100 hour with the annual.

Otherwise, doing it with that medical would only exercise private pilot privileges. In which case, you would have to pay your "pro rated" costs for the flight.
 
Pay2 said:
Is the new owner on board? If so, then it could be flight instruction in which case only a 3rd class medical is required. Instructing is the only case in which you can be paid to fly while holding a 3rd class medical.
Click to expand...
Not 100% sure if the owner was going to be coming along, but I don't think so.
 
flyinguitar said:
Thanks for the heads-up on this. It makes sense and I hadn't thought about it before. Do you know of rulings or precedents where the FAA explicitly stated this? When I get some more time, I'll try to research more myself.
Click to expand...

Letter of Interpretation from 1990

"The second prong of §61.118 says that a private pilot may not, "for compensation or hire, act as pilot
in command of an aircraft". There is no question that the pilot of the tow plane is acting as pilot in
command of an aircraft. The issue is whether he is so acting "for compensation or hire”. With
regard to this second prong of §61.118, the agency has repeatedly taken the position that building
up flight time is considered compensatory in nature when the pilot does not have to pay the costs of
operating the aircraft and would, therefore, be deemed a form of "compensation" to the private pilot
under §61.118."

Letter of Interpretation from 1997

"In determining what is considered compensation,it has been the FAA's long-standing policy to define
compensation in very broad terms. For example, any reimbursement of expenses (fuel, oil, transportation, lodging,
meals,etc.), if conditioned upon the pilot operating the aircraft, would constitute compensation. In addition, the
building up of flight time may be compensatory in nature if the pilot does not have to pay the costs of operating
the aircraft. While it could be argued that the accumulation of flight time is not always of value to the pilot
involved, the FAA does not consider it appropriate to enter into a case-by-case analysis to determine whether
the logging of time is of value to a particular pilot, or what the pilot's motives or intentions are on each flight."

Letter of Interpretation from 1992

"The FAA has historically taken the position that building-up flight time is a form of receiving compensation when
the pilot does not have to pay the cost, or pays a reduced cost, of operation."

Letter of Interpretation from 2013

"Additionally, the logging of flight time is compensation if the pilot does not have to pay the costs of operating the aircraft."

There are many more pages of examples if you want to look, but I think the above examples make it clear that the FAA considers the building of flight time as compensation.

LINK to search page.
 
Last edited:
comfortablynumb said:
are you describing a flight instructor
Click to expand...

No... a flight school. If the airplane is inside of 100 hours from the last annual (and most privately-owned aircraft are), then it's completely legal to get the owner to sign a lease contract, then get some other customer (likely, a commercial student looking to build time) to lease the airplane and have them ferry it. At the end of the ferry, you terminate the lease contract. Why pay to have an airplane moved when someone will pay to do it?

Shady and degrading to the profession? Yes. Legal? Yes.

Ajax said:
Flight time as compensation is total bs. I hate that we see hours flying as payment.
Click to expand...

Here's the interesting thing: "Flight time is compensation" is just the FAA's view. I don't think its been challenged. It was also the FAA's view that the pilots remote controlled aircraft should be certificated by the FAA even though the aircraft themselves were not... that one got blasted out of the water. The thing is, I don't think there are many young pilots who want to go toe-to-toe with the FAA to challenge this... the career impact to losing is too great.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top