Forget legal, how about moral?
Irrespective of the legalities, a couple of recent conversations with some flying buddies have given me pause to reflect on the moral obligations an operator has to provide its drivers with safe equipment, appropriate to the task.
To be more specific: In six years of flying IFR, I have been fortunate to only have a close encounter of the third kind with thunderstorms on two occasions. In my opinion, it was two times too many, and I feel for anyone stuck at the controls of a light, piston-engine aeroplane, having to contend with such miserable conditions. On the other hand, it may be ice - for which I've had a lot more experience in this regard. However I'm lucky that I have now moved on to a position in the industry where I no longer have to sit at the lower levels and put up with this crap.
Nevertheless... Whatever the weather may be, every day (and especially at night) pilots all over the country are being sent out in appalling conditions - in aircraft that have barely legal IFR instrumentation, and certainly nothing in the way of a stormscope, radar, or de-icing equipment to provide some additional measure of protection. One mate of mine recently told me a story where he was doing a night-freight run. The ARFOR looked ugly enough, but the view out the front window was even worse, with heavy rain and lightning activity along most of his planned track. Needless to say, he had none of the aforementioned equipment onboard the aircraft to offer him any consolation, and yet he knew that to cancel the run would likely result in him being out of a job the following day.
In just about any other industry, employers would be raked over hot coals for not providing their employees with safe equipment and a safe working environment. Yet this is clearly not the case in the aviation industry - certainly not in GA.
Anyone care to offer their two-cents?