Self -Employed status
 

Is there any truth to the rumour that the EU is going to prohibit self - employed status for pilots?

That sounds too sensible to be true... :}

They would if they could....

What if I want to work for several companies or do part-time flying?

Does any pilot anywhere work for several companies at the same time ? And part time is not hindered by not being self employed.

I would suggest the following reference:


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDat...)580915_EN.pdf

Am not aware of any follow up to the above or any developments since the above briefing paper.

Yes .

How can you be a self employed pilot that is not possible?

Sure is, all you need is to own the equipment. Just like those little outfits flying King Airs and an assortment of machinery, including tiny little Cubs with floats and skis, in places like Canada, South Africa, the US, South America and Australia, to name but a few. The boss in the main is, CP, TRE and in some instances the maintenance engineer. Add to that all the many training schools, you will find the world is full of self employed pilots, looking up at the contrails of the airline machines and breathing a sigh of relief that they are where they are down below and not up there ticking off the days to retirement.

In France, self-employed pilot status has been unlawful for a while :ok:

From the doc posted by Chronus: ECA maintains that in reality 'self-employed' pilots are forced to accept this status, while working for only one airline. They reportedly have no control over their remuneration, working time or places of work.

Cobblers. Well, qualified cobblers...

Sure, I'm sure that if we think long and hard we might be able to think of an operator or two that take the piss by the use of various schemes but that's no reason to ban outright a way of working that serves many of us on both sides of the contract very well indeed.

Having been happily self-employed and freelance (usually for three AOC operators at any given time plus some private work) for 20+ years, in the same circumstances I'd choose it again in a heartbeat over being tied full-time to just one operator. Would I always choose self-employment? No - but the salary, roster and conditions would have to at least match the income and lifestyle that being freelance has made possible - which are both far better than anything anyone has previously managed to set on the table.

You're not discussing apples & apples. Genuine self-employed operations is fine. Been there done that. You are in charge of yourself and what you accept where & when. Being so-called self employed but shackled to one customer who has you by the balls in every sense is not the same thing. Been there; they tried that & I F/O'd.

I completely agree, RAT 5, and I apologise if that was not clear in what I wrote.

The two are completely different and the practice you describe is despicable even if it is technically legal - but the quoted paper makes no distinction. If the EU (or anyone else for that matter) takes the content as gospel and seeks to ban the one, you can bet your bum they won't spend any time or effort avoiding killing the other along with it.

Where did this "Rumour" originate? ! Ref please..

As far as I am aware,
In EASA countries, you can not work for more than one AOC holder at the same time. Everytime you want to commercially operate an aircraft on another AOC, you are obliged to do an Operators Conversion Course. You CAN NOT mix and match at will.

Be very careful, some "self employed" guys are in breach of EASA regulations and can get in serious trouble, as well as the companies they fly for.

20/04/2017 Part-145 employment status

The UK CAA has published an Information Notice, IN-2017/015 relating to Zero-hour contracts and the employment status of the affected staff when relating this to EASA Part-145 regulation 145.A.30(d).

The CAA states that the use of zero hour contracts in the UK has grown substantially over the last few years. The Authority see it as a useful employment method by Part-145 organisations to fill shortfalls in manning levels and thus reduce the need for full-time employees. However, they continue to say that the Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) material for Part-145 does not consider the status of workers engaged on zero hours contracts. AMC to 145.A.30 (d) explains the need for an organisation to directly employ at least half of its staff to ensure organisational stability. It uses the terms employed and contracted to distinguish between staff directly employed by the organisation and staff who are engaged through other means, possibly on a temporary basis.

This notice provides guidance on the status of zero hours contracts and is intended to enable Part-145 organisations to establish the employment status of staff engaged on a zero hours contract. The staff members’ employment status is then used to determine if they are employed or contracted for Part-145.A30 (d) manpower planning purposes.

We recommend all UK based Part-145 approved organisations to review their staff employment status in line with the information supplied by the UK CAA.

Provided you do not exceed the maximum hours and comply with FTL legislation you can work for as many companies as you wish. An OCC course is required when undertaking work and also the companies recurrent training. In practical terms, working for more than one operator would mean spending half your life in the sim or ground training!