1time CEO, DFO & Cabin Crew Director asked to step down
Está servira para distraerle.
The airline decides to go paperless.
The airline decides to use i Pads.
The airline has full time pilots.
The airline decides that the full time pilots are to pay 50% of the price of an i Pad which the pilots are required to use and which are essential, in the absence of an updated paper cockpit, for the safe operation of the company's scheduled flights.
i Pads have been approved by aircraft and systems manufacturer as appropriate, CAA etc and so forth and references to them appear as legally required in the MEL and Ops Manual?
Therefore the pilots have no option but to use i Pads in the course of their full time duties.
Therefore can the pilots claim their 50% mandatory charge as an income tax deductible.
Or.
Would (South African Revenue Service) SARS argue that, as possession and utilization of an i Pad was a requirement inherent in full time employment, then no deduction could be made, but that the company was responsible for 100% of the charge of the i Pad since it's implementation and use is essentially entirely a company requirement?
This falls away of course if it is only the difference between the minimum specification required for flight and any updated preference on the part of the pilot that is to be charged. If that is the case then a 50% contribution is generous on the part of the company.
The airline decides to use i Pads.
The airline has full time pilots.
The airline decides that the full time pilots are to pay 50% of the price of an i Pad which the pilots are required to use and which are essential, in the absence of an updated paper cockpit, for the safe operation of the company's scheduled flights.
i Pads have been approved by aircraft and systems manufacturer as appropriate, CAA etc and so forth and references to them appear as legally required in the MEL and Ops Manual?
Therefore the pilots have no option but to use i Pads in the course of their full time duties.
Therefore can the pilots claim their 50% mandatory charge as an income tax deductible.
Or.
Would (South African Revenue Service) SARS argue that, as possession and utilization of an i Pad was a requirement inherent in full time employment, then no deduction could be made, but that the company was responsible for 100% of the charge of the i Pad since it's implementation and use is essentially entirely a company requirement?
This falls away of course if it is only the difference between the minimum specification required for flight and any updated preference on the part of the pilot that is to be charged. If that is the case then a 50% contribution is generous on the part of the company.
Last edited by cavortingcheetah; 15th Aug 2011 at 10:40.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not to sure what you would and would not be able to claim i would imagine you would put in a standard IT claim. The company did decide to go paperless,however, how it would be done was put to the vote, majority of the pilots i am lead to believ voted to go this route.
Spongebathbob, i am most certainily not your ex-wife(or the dfo/chief pilot, as you suggested early on today)just an average line pilot.
Spongebathbob, i am most certainily not your ex-wife(or the dfo/chief pilot, as you suggested early on today)just an average line pilot.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a couple of things I dont understand........why
1. do so many people who obviously work for, or are associated with 1time, and are so obviously unhappy with the company, continue working for the company.......if its so bad move on go do something else and be happy.......or perhaps you are only happy when you are unhappy (the difference between a pilot and a PT6?.....)
2. why there are people, who are clearly not involved with the company who seem to have 2nd or 3rd hand opinions on the company they really have nothing to do with?
It seems to me the capt involved is planning on having his day in court, and he has a right to do that, but from my experience of courts in general and SA courts in particular he may just find this is a bit of a lottery at best........and a pretty expensive lottery at that?
I have been in aviation for 30 years and it always startles me that we somehow manage to spend so much time focussed on the negative......... and since this is an industry that most of us love I just dont understand that.
Move on guys......find something positive
Just a thought
1. do so many people who obviously work for, or are associated with 1time, and are so obviously unhappy with the company, continue working for the company.......if its so bad move on go do something else and be happy.......or perhaps you are only happy when you are unhappy (the difference between a pilot and a PT6?.....)
2. why there are people, who are clearly not involved with the company who seem to have 2nd or 3rd hand opinions on the company they really have nothing to do with?
It seems to me the capt involved is planning on having his day in court, and he has a right to do that, but from my experience of courts in general and SA courts in particular he may just find this is a bit of a lottery at best........and a pretty expensive lottery at that?
I have been in aviation for 30 years and it always startles me that we somehow manage to spend so much time focussed on the negative......... and since this is an industry that most of us love I just dont understand that.
Move on guys......find something positive
Just a thought
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
be fair
Aviation would be fantastic if it wasn't for us pilots, don't you think?
I think this thread has gone a tadd off topic (as so many do).
However, i do think that there is an inherent tendency for us pilots to considder other pilots 'unthankful', 'disloyal' and 'hating the job', just because we air our frustrations on a public forum. This is simply not true, and it's a really STUPID attitude.
Why can't we simply listen to the things that are upsetting one another, and try to help or support? The stock standard answer of, 'well if, if you hate it so much, why don't you just piss-off' is exactly what i am talking about.
Are we still so old-SAAF brainwashed that people who are frustrated by certain things within their companies deserve that comment? If you've ever made a comment like that (not only that one, but anything to do with the immediate shoot-down of the opinion voiced) ...i'm sorry, but i have to put you into that category and find anything posted by such people hard to hang merit to.
On the other hand (and i have found myself guilty of this personally more than once), when we do air our views, maybe taking a breath and being fair towards the company that provides your bread and butter (or meat and potatoes?) is a good idea? Think the post through first a bit. Read it once or twice. I certainly havn't in the past and just blasted off into orbit because i was upset about ONE thing...but certainly not HATING my job!
I truly don't think that anyone who has a gripe leveled against any company are in a state of HATE or all out WARFARE against the company, they merely are trying to say that somethings, sometimes, just gets up their noses...not?
What's so wrong about wanting things to be better, or fair, or safe? Honestly,what?
I think this thread has gone a tadd off topic (as so many do).
However, i do think that there is an inherent tendency for us pilots to considder other pilots 'unthankful', 'disloyal' and 'hating the job', just because we air our frustrations on a public forum. This is simply not true, and it's a really STUPID attitude.
Why can't we simply listen to the things that are upsetting one another, and try to help or support? The stock standard answer of, 'well if, if you hate it so much, why don't you just piss-off' is exactly what i am talking about.
Are we still so old-SAAF brainwashed that people who are frustrated by certain things within their companies deserve that comment? If you've ever made a comment like that (not only that one, but anything to do with the immediate shoot-down of the opinion voiced) ...i'm sorry, but i have to put you into that category and find anything posted by such people hard to hang merit to.
On the other hand (and i have found myself guilty of this personally more than once), when we do air our views, maybe taking a breath and being fair towards the company that provides your bread and butter (or meat and potatoes?) is a good idea? Think the post through first a bit. Read it once or twice. I certainly havn't in the past and just blasted off into orbit because i was upset about ONE thing...but certainly not HATING my job!
I truly don't think that anyone who has a gripe leveled against any company are in a state of HATE or all out WARFARE against the company, they merely are trying to say that somethings, sometimes, just gets up their noses...not?
What's so wrong about wanting things to be better, or fair, or safe? Honestly,what?
Last edited by Foo-Fighter; 18th Aug 2011 at 05:10. Reason: can't spell
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foo-F
Noithing wrong with expressing your displeasure, or frustrations.......just a matter of where you express them.
For those involved with the company (and I am not), considering this is a public forum I would say that given the tone and content of a number of the posts there are several people who are incredibly dissloyal. If you have an issue go deal with it with the people concerned instead of belittling them annonomously in a public forum........and if you are going to belittle them in a public forum then at least have the balls to put your name to it......
For those not involved in the company this just amount to good old fashioned skinner.
Shame on you both
Falaff,
I know jobs are short, but if someone is going to be dissloyal and run down their employers in public they dont deserve their jobs in the first place.
The point of my post was simply....... if you are that unhappy that you would be prepared to demean yourself in this manner then change what you are doing.......if as you say this is just lettling off steam then either go and sort it out or shut up.
Every time one of us does this we harm the company that pays us and therby indirectly harm each one of the people who work for the company.
Noithing wrong with expressing your displeasure, or frustrations.......just a matter of where you express them.
For those involved with the company (and I am not), considering this is a public forum I would say that given the tone and content of a number of the posts there are several people who are incredibly dissloyal. If you have an issue go deal with it with the people concerned instead of belittling them annonomously in a public forum........and if you are going to belittle them in a public forum then at least have the balls to put your name to it......
For those not involved in the company this just amount to good old fashioned skinner.
Shame on you both
Falaff,
I know jobs are short, but if someone is going to be dissloyal and run down their employers in public they dont deserve their jobs in the first place.
The point of my post was simply....... if you are that unhappy that you would be prepared to demean yourself in this manner then change what you are doing.......if as you say this is just lettling off steam then either go and sort it out or shut up.
Every time one of us does this we harm the company that pays us and therby indirectly harm each one of the people who work for the company.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: HKG
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I allowed to love flying but have a pathological hatred for the industry?
Except I don't hate the industry as much as I hate the scum that runs it.
Modern management 'principles' has ruined not just aviation but most of our civilization with its double-think* and (never admitted) greed.
* see George Orwell-1984
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: FL370
Age: 61
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USSA...
Location: "USA" - Whatever...
You talk about "disloyalty", what a joke! As the old saying goes, if you want loyalty, get a dog. The management of this company do not deserve even the most minute bit of loyalty (or respect, for that matter). The absolute incompetence and corporate greed exhibited, are worthy only of the level of respect (none whatsoever) which is accorded them by their aircrew. In my opinion, 1Time management has never shown anything even approaching what could be described as "loyalty" to, or respect for any crewmember. I personally don't expect loyalty from a company, but I sure as hell will not give loyalty to a company like this. My "loyalty" does not come at the going rate.
As long as the current clowns are running the circus, the organisation will, unfortunately, always be a joke.
Location: "USA" - Whatever...
You talk about "disloyalty", what a joke! As the old saying goes, if you want loyalty, get a dog. The management of this company do not deserve even the most minute bit of loyalty (or respect, for that matter). The absolute incompetence and corporate greed exhibited, are worthy only of the level of respect (none whatsoever) which is accorded them by their aircrew. In my opinion, 1Time management has never shown anything even approaching what could be described as "loyalty" to, or respect for any crewmember. I personally don't expect loyalty from a company, but I sure as hell will not give loyalty to a company like this. My "loyalty" does not come at the going rate.
As long as the current clowns are running the circus, the organisation will, unfortunately, always be a joke.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Everywhere Else
Age: 49
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe life for our 1time collegues will improve with the arrival of the new airbus fleet. Speaking of which, any news on their arrival? Shoul be plenty available with recession looming and lower oil price
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: F370
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Airbus topic at 1time went very quite! Do not think the guys will see the airbus soon as the MD's are behaving the last few months. Accourding to the bean counters still the cheapest aircraft to operate, so do not see a fleet change soon in the near furture. But the Ipads will be issued to the guys in the next week or so.
Está servira para distraerle.
A little earlier in the thread there was talk of iPad implementation in the cockpit. This caught the eyeball from today's British press and here it is for you.
United Airlines replaces flight manuals with iPads - Telegraph
United Airlines replaces flight manuals with iPads - Telegraph
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Everywhere Else
Age: 49
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt whether the MD is still the cheapest aircraft to operate. Those jt8's are thirsty. Even a 734 burns almost 500kgs per hour less with 160 pax. Not to mention 738 with 180 pax in LCC config. Seems like beancounter spin at best, unless the majority of carriers just got it wrong and are wasting resources on NG aircraft. Ipad will make life easier but won't make up for old tech aircraft.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding operating costs of aircraft I suspect that 1time are factoring in the cost of finance which in todays climate may well make any new aircraft far more expensive to operate than the venerable MD. 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: F370
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus had their presentation at 1time a few months ago and they showed the figures that 1Time will make $300000 per aircraft p/m more profit than the MD80's on A319 with 156 pax or it will cost 1time $300000 per aircraft less to operate than a MD80! Do the maths, 10 aircraft X $300000 per month extra profit?
So I also can not see how can the MD80 still be the cheapest aircraft to operate, just wonder why airlines in America parking their MD's and ordered 200 Boeings and 200 Airbuses.
So I also can not see how can the MD80 still be the cheapest aircraft to operate, just wonder why airlines in America parking their MD's and ordered 200 Boeings and 200 Airbuses.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: south africa
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok first do the Math.
Ok first do the Math.
Cost of a second hand MD80 type aircraft.
Around $2.000.000.00 and spares are cheep
Cost of a second hand A319 lease rate around $250,000.00 per month plus reserves ( I am sure they will have to lease them.)
Then look at the Hull rate for Insurance. Based on the value of the aircraft.
Yes the revenues will increase but so will your overall cash payments.
For 1Time at this moments the MD is the right choice.
Only the Big boys are ordering these planes.
Cost of a second hand MD80 type aircraft.
Around $2.000.000.00 and spares are cheep
Cost of a second hand A319 lease rate around $250,000.00 per month plus reserves ( I am sure they will have to lease them.)
Then look at the Hull rate for Insurance. Based on the value of the aircraft.
Yes the revenues will increase but so will your overall cash payments.
For 1Time at this moments the MD is the right choice.
Only the Big boys are ordering these planes.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: in the bunk
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 Jock
I think you are correct and Rodney James was quoted a while back in the local press as saying something along the lines of Airbus or new generation aircraft purchases being irresponsible to the shareholders.
The MD's are still successfully plying the airways for the smaller airlines (and some majors) on every continent. I suspect we'll see them in 1time livery for some time to come.
The MD's are still successfully plying the airways for the smaller airlines (and some majors) on every continent. I suspect we'll see them in 1time livery for some time to come.
