Pay To Fly threads (Merged)

[fly_antonov]

I think that the principle of paying to assume responsibility and liability can not exist. I' m not a lawyer nor a judge but this defies any logic.
It is a moral and ethical issue.

Boeing MEL, let me respond to your points.

1. I did not suggest that the 2 are connected. I commented on the thread starter about the minimum wage status, which does not apply everywhere.
I added that even anyone working for free under approved status must usually be protected for on the job accidents.

2. I think that a large percentage of P2F represent an imminent danger. There have been numerous reports on this. I question their judgement and decision-making skills unless they can easily afford it and they' re good pilots. Even then, I wouldn' t question their great spirit of selflessness.

I mentionned the CAA' s because they usually cover all aspects related to civil aviation regulations, not only safety (though that is their major activity)

3. Just because you sign a contract doesn' t make it legal. A court can rule the content of the contract illegal if it does not respect laws and rights. Bonding is a legal practice since the company receives no monetary compensation, only guarrantees.

4. If the P2F is a candidate-sponsored selection process, then it should take place on non-revenue flights.


Ronand, I believe that most airlines will not hide it until one of them gets a big fine or loses big on a lawsuit. I believe that they are thinking that it' s legal and until they' re proven wrong, no one will stop them.

I think that we should split the two legal cases of the self-employed P2F and the employee P2F.

I believe that the labour laws we' re discussing here is "rights to pay", one of the basic employment rights. Even in countries where there is no minimum wage regulations, any salary must be paid out.
Salary sacrifice schemes must usually be precisely pre-approved programs.
Illegal deductions like paying for company training is not allowed.

If you' re self-employed, like Ronan says, it should be legal because all the labour and employment rights don' t apply and I believe that that is how Ryanair are covering their *ss.
I would add that there is a condition: your tax office or whoever delivers you the permit to practice self-employment need to allow you to start your practice on an insolvent balance sheet or low/negative net-worth (unless rich enough to pay the P2F cash). In some EU countries, this is not possible.

It would be nice to get some law-people to join the discussion.