Obama administration and user fees

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Not sure what you're asking. I PFT'd when I was inexperienced and ignorant. While I was flying at GIA, I also got my CFI and started instructing, and then continued instructing after the industry collapsed following 9/11 until I got hired at Pinnacle. Thus "simultaneously and after."

 

[surreal1221]

We will never reach a consensus on user fees. I will state this though:

LifeGuard Flights, Angel Flight, Corporate Angel member companies with a patient on board the aircraft should be exempt from user fees.

I can agree with that. Any charitable organization that provides no-cost flights to those in need must be exempt.

But, if they're not. . .they'll continue to offer the services anyway. Just the way it works. At least I know the one I'll soon be taking part in will.

No matter the cost, the ones we help must get the care they need.

 

[MikeD]

Not sure what you're asking. I PFT'd when I was inexperienced and ignorant. While I was flying at GIA, I also got my CFI and started instructing, and then continued instructing after the industry collapsed following 9/11 until I got hired at Pinnacle. Thus "simultaneously and after."

Didn't know what you were referring to there, hence the "question-mark blue head". These short & sweet answers are sometimes hard to follow!

 

[Barty]

No but those municipalities (SFO, LAX) do take landing fees, yet they receive fed dollars. I also don't know but would bet the majority of 100LL tax goes to the state or local, with a small amount to the feds. To be honest I don't think either you or I can answer if a 135/121 operator lands at a towered airport, if that landing fee goes to the feds or the locals.

It is a few years old, but the last data I could find on the Federal tax on a gallon of 100LL is 19.4 cents per gallon. Still almost 5 times higher than the tax levied on a gallon of Jet-A sold for commercial purposes.

Even at locations without landing or ramp fees, you're still paying for it through the price of the fuel, or however much you pay for other services at that airport. I know that is fairly obvious, but it probably is worth pointing out to those who don't think GA doesn't carry its load. At some airports with sporadic air carrier service, don't think for a minute that one or two flights a day is what is keeping that airport open. It is all of the Part 91/135 operators, plus all of the leisure pilots, that keep that airport viable from day to day.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Solidarity is what scares management and convinces them to move on the contract. I suggest that you read "Confessions of a Union Buster" by Marty Levitt.

The only thing that seems to move management here is our new client. Even that has slowed to a crawl. I don't buy that having something that says "ALPA" by itself helps me out. I like shock and awe, like stickers for my flight bag.

LEC guys don't speak for national policy. They are one vote out of 200+ on the BOD.

Well it certainly soured me to hear this. There are some folks over here who are out of touch with the pilot group. This same person, I complained to that I couldn't believe certain members of our LEC wanted the 60 minute LOA to remain. I was told that this person was actually concerned about the company losing the contract.

Yes. Both are bad, but one is worse.

Though, if it's a union pilot, I wouldn't want to step on their toes, since they're truly the closest to becoming the next ALPA group (to use your association as an example). I still don't have the mindset, though, that pissing someone off is going to get them to do what I want them to do.