Legal advice

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

I have a friend who works for a very well known company based in the london area with a number of flying schools who was recently told and I quote "You can not fly any aircraft at any time unless you are A. a ticket holding passenger in a passenger cabin or B.flying on behalf of the said company."

This includes hiring of an aircraft unless it's from the same company or evan sitting at the controls of an aircraft with someone else flying,I would be very grateful as to anyone who might know what the law has to say about such a condition as the situation might well be heading in that direction.

regards CBS.

[charliegolf]

Human Rights Act

You don't have to tell your employer what you do when not on their time.

You'd have to crash for them to know- unless they're also your employer.

CG

[paco]

Has he signed a contract to that effect? If so, it might well be an unfair contract term, or even unenforceable - I bow to Charliegolf's superior knowledge about the Human Rights Act.

If not, tell them to stick it where the sun don't shine.


Phil

[Helinut]

Whilst having great sympathy for the general sentiments in the previous threads, there is a possible dimension that at least should be recognised.

The FTL rules for commerical pilots require all flying except for private flying in small aircraft to be reported to the operator and put on your FTL record. In some cases a pilot's roster uses up all of the permissible duty hours or is operated on a special scheme that prohibits additional non-private flying.

What would happen if your flying outside your employment prevented you from flying for your employer?

[paco]

A fair point - but for many operators, particularly in Canada, you can get fired for talking to other companies - certainly engineers helping out with O rings here and there have been grounds for dismissal - the original posted sounded like such a situation!

phil

[Droopystop]

I have signed the same sort of contract in the past (probably with the same company). I don't know the legality of that phrase within the contract. But as far as FTL, if the pilot in question is only instructor, then FTL are not applied. Again I don't know the legality of that either, but I believe that instruction is classed as aerial work rather than public transport, so FTL's are not applied.

I believe the reasoning behind it would be that the company is protecting its name should you have a mishap flying or even have anything to do with the flying of someone elses aircraft.

Perhaps the first step would be to have a word with the chief pilot before engaging the services of a lawyer.

[flyer43]

I think that Helinut's response is probably the closest reason and that the "said company" has worded its conditions very poorly.

CRAZYBROADSWORD, is there no "let out" clause in the terms and conditions which would permit the employee to fly elsewhere ONLY with the express permission of the employer? This would be more normal and would assist the employer to keep tabs on the actual flying hours the employee is achieving. After all, your employer should have first call on your services - any other activities should be performed legally and should not conflict with the terms of your employment.

[Robbo Jock]

Did the company sponsor the pilot for his/her training ? If they did, they could be trying to avoid their investment being used to profit another company. What the legalities are, I've no idea.

[flyer43]

The legalities would depend upon what the person actually signed for - i.e what the contract says.
If you don't like what a contract says, you should either try to get agreement for alternative wording or look for another employer......

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

The pilot in question is not flying on an FTL and any non company flying would be done in their own time on licences held before employment with the said company.and thanks for all the replys by the way.

[VeeAny]

Slightly off topic but after thinking about Droopystops earlier post.

FTLs do seem to apply if remunerated instruction is given by a commercial pilot who is subject to an FTL scheme either in house or elsewhere.

Para 1.4 of CAP 371 seems to spell it out.
CAP 371 Para 1.4 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF#page=10)

Aerial work it is but you should only omit it from FTLs if you are not paid (or otherwise recompensed). Or if you privately fly an a/c under 1600kg.

[Droopystop]

Veeany,

Thanks for that - I thought it strange that instructors seem to ignore FTLs. So I have to ask, how many CPL instructors abide by CAP 371 (FTL)? and how does it work if you have a JAR instructor with a CPL (and therefore abiding by FTLs) working alongside a CAA instructor on a PPL (grandfather rights) who would not have to adide by FTLs. Or have I misunderstood your post?

DS

[Max_Chat]

How do the FTL rules and notifying your company about other flying deal with TA flying during rest days or leave?

[212man]

Max Chat;
I think the ANO is quite clear on this point if you look at 2(a)(ii).

Article 71 states:

(2) For the purposes of this Order:

(a) ‘flight time’, in relation to any person, means all time spent by that person in:

(i) a civil aircraft whether or not registered in the United Kingdom (other than such an aircraft of which the maximum total weight authorised does not exceed 1600 kg and which is not flying for the purpose of public ransport
or aerial work); or

(ii) a military aircraft (other than such an aircraft of which the maximum total
weight authorised does not exceed 1600 kg and which is flying on a military
air experience flight),

while it is in flight and he is carried therein as a member of the crew thereof.

The following is from the introduction of CAP 371 and I think is fairly explicit too:

1.4 A flight crew member is required to inform anyone who employs his services as a flight crew member of all flight times and flying duty periods undertaken, whether professionally or privately, except for flying in aircraft not exceeding 1,600 kg maximum weight and not flying for the purpose of public transport or aerial work. Aerial work includes flying instruction for which the pilot is remunerated. It is also aerial work where valuable consideration is given specifically for flying instruction,
even if the pilot receives no reward.


So if you are subject to CAP 371, you would need to count your TA flying as part of the whole package. This means that flying in your days off could result in the scheme being contravened (ignoring the flying hours, just the days off). Unless your company is very generous with the number of days off it gives you!