banner
banner

04 May 2025, 09:56 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Garmin International (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 24 Jun 2013, 17:48 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 02/23/08
Posts: 6404
Post Likes: +9547
Company: Schulte Booth, P.C.
Location: Easton, MD (KESN)
Aircraft: 1958 Bonanza 35
FWIW, I worked as counsel for a very large, but here nameless aviation company. They too would not let me use my own a/c for business purposes.

That decision was driven by the workers' compensation insurer, not the company itself.

The insurer did not concern itself with the irony.

_________________
- As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.

Robert D. Schulte
http://www.schultebooth.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 24 Jun 2013, 18:01 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/28/09
Posts: 87
Post Likes: +8
Username Protected wrote:
It is probably an insurance thing that is driving a company police. I know the company I work for has a strict travel policy in many aspects. Particular to aviation is the fact that it only allows travel on airlines and in some cases some part 135 with specific pre approval after vetting of the 135 company safety policy. This is all driven by the corporate insurance.

I also have a friend who is a CEO of a company he built. Specific to his insurance policy it says the any airplane he is in must have 2 commercial pilots, he cannot even go for a ride with me on a pleasure trip.


If I were the CEO it would be a cold day in hell before I let someone else tell me what I can and can't do. Again it's what's wrong with the country. To many wussies listening to insurance company lawers. Puke. Hence why I work for myself.


Exactly what I was thinking.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 24 Jun 2013, 21:04 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/21/09
Posts: 12192
Post Likes: +16361
Location: Albany, TX
Aircraft: Prior SR22T,V35B,182
Quote:

That decision was driven by the workers' compensation insurer, not the company itself.


The decision was driven by the company itself. They chose to use that insurance instead of one that would accommodate GA.

My workers comp has the option to add individuals to the GA coverage, so I don't pay for ones that won't fly with me. However, it's quite inexpensive.

Their premium might go up, but it's the company's choice.

The greater risk is liability above insurance. For that, get smooth and get large.

My company. My plane. My premiums. Worth it.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 24 Jun 2013, 22:40 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 02/10/12
Posts: 1321
Post Likes: +213
Location: Albuquerque,NM KAEG
Aircraft: 1991 AA F33A 550R
Username Protected wrote:
The company that makes light bulbs uses kerosene lanterns to light the home.

:lol: :lol:


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 25 Jun 2013, 13:45 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/08
Posts: 474
Post Likes: +183
Aircraft: PA28-161
A few years back I worked for a company that instituted a similar policy after my hire. I got around it for my frequent 100-200 mile trips on the clock by submitting a mileage reimbursement claim using Mapquest mileage. On the line where I was supposed to put the license no I just inserted the N number. Worked like a charm for about two years until I left the job. I almost worked out equal to my A/C rental and was sure well worth it for the time and hassle of driving.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 25 Jun 2013, 14:01 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/29/09
Posts: 4744
Post Likes: +2463
Company: retired corporate mostly
Location: Chico,California KCIC/CL56
Aircraft: 1956 Champion 7EC
I thought there were discrimination laws against this.....

Oh! Anti G A .....(never mind)

_________________
Jeff

soloed in a land of Superhomers/1959 Cessna 150, retired with Proline 21/ CJ4.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 25 Jun 2013, 15:28 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/16/10
Posts: 9004
Post Likes: +2064
I wouldn't say they are anti GA.
But how much more are you wanting to pay to have the tech come for a service call to you in a jet, with a pilot also?

I'm sure it could be arranged, don't they do charters?

_________________
Education cuts, don't heal.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 21:47 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/09/11
Posts: 120
Post Likes: +39
Company: Elkins Aviation. ACSD
Location: Andersonville TN
Aircraft: B-35 7-AC Aztec
I remember when Max Grogan's engine locked up and he dead sticked it into Powell a Continental representative drove up to take a look. We asked him since they only go to airports why not fly? The rep.said they use to but now company policy does not allow it.

Just don't seem right being made to drive to airports all the time. I am very thankful to live on a airport and work at an airport. Since we only work on Bonanzas I think it is fitting and proper to fly my Bonanza to work every day. Shows you believe in your product. :D


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 21:51 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 12129
Post Likes: +3030
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
I remember when Max Grogan's engine locked up and he dead sticked it into Powell a Continental representative drove up to take a look. We asked him since they only go to airports why not fly? The rep.said they use to but now company policy does not allow it.

Just don't seem right being made to drive to airports all the time. I am very thankful to live on a airport and work at an airport. Since we only work on Bonanzas I think it is fitting and proper to fly my Bonanza to work every day. Shows you believe in your product. :D


Quentin,

You are one of the few pilot and mechanics out there. The price for the Cessna mechanic would go through the roof if I also had to pay for the plane and the pilot. I think I will pass.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 22:35 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/02/10
Posts: 3483
Post Likes: +212
Company: T303, T210, Citabria
Location: Houston, TX
Aircraft: 1968 Bonanza E33
Username Protected wrote:
Nothing to do with anti-GA policy. The sales staff and some engineers/managers get to use company planes. Everyone else, nope. It is simple math.
-- The mechanics time, if not on a warranty call is paid by the customer
-- The mechanics time, if on warranty the time savings does not come close to the cost of the plane.
-- The associated liability costs and PR management if the mechanic crashes the plane are not even close to the potential benefits,

If I was running Cessna, I would make the same call.

Tim

Then you should sell your aircraft, and drive an MPV with a gazillion airbags at or below 35 mph, which is the only safe speed if conditions allow, otherwise it is 25. You are putting yourself & your family in mortal danger every time you touch that yoke!

_________________
無為而治 世界大同
individual sovereignty universal harmony


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 22:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/02/10
Posts: 3483
Post Likes: +212
Company: T303, T210, Citabria
Location: Houston, TX
Aircraft: 1968 Bonanza E33
Username Protected wrote:
Just had a visit from Cessna last week and we mentioned the same thing. Apparently a guy crashed back in 86 and corporate put the kybash on reps flying GA. Too much liability.

And how many employees died in car accidents since then?

_________________
無為而治 世界大同
individual sovereignty universal harmony


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 22:46 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/02/10
Posts: 3483
Post Likes: +212
Company: T303, T210, Citabria
Location: Houston, TX
Aircraft: 1968 Bonanza E33
Username Protected wrote:
It is probably an insurance thing that is driving a company police. I know the company I work for has a strict travel policy in many aspects. Particular to aviation is the fact that it only allows travel on airlines and in some cases some part 135 with specific pre approval after vetting of the 135 company safety policy. This is all driven by the corporate insurance.

I also have a friend who is a CEO of a company he built. Specific to his insurance policy it says the any airplane he is in must have 2 commercial pilots, he cannot even go for a ride with me on a pleasure trip.

"Insurance" is just another word for communism: spreading your personal risk and risk affecting decisions on "society". So the same things happens as in the political equivalent: More and more restrictive rules, and total loss of freedom of choice. They even have their own secret police. Where has the "pursuit of happiness", that was supposed to be a founding principle of this Union, gone? If I look at the average facial expression outside the pilot community, far far away.

_________________
無為而治 世界大同
individual sovereignty universal harmony


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 22:56 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 07/12/12
Posts: 566
Post Likes: +31
Company: CBE Company
Location: Acworth, GA / Santa Rosa Beach, FL
Aircraft: Sold Everything
Username Protected wrote:
Just had a visit from Cessna last week and we mentioned the same thing. Apparently a guy crashed back in 86 and corporate put the kybash on reps flying GA. Too much liability.

And how many employees died in car accidents since then?


Good question Robert... Lets also include Cessna employees driving all over this country involved in car accidents that resulted in insurance payments for injuries.

When I posted this comment I didn't expect Cessna employees to be cruising around in jets, simply, if the tech owned a 182 or similar he could use it and get reimbursed at a flat rate permissible by IRS quidelines. This isn't a PR ploy. All your customers are located at small to large airports all across the country, your employer manufactures aircraft for business and personal use and you don't permit your employees to use aircraft, sounds like a joke. It's terrible PR to NOT let them.
_________________
Flyings not a hobby, it's a way of life.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 23:21 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/02/10
Posts: 3483
Post Likes: +212
Company: T303, T210, Citabria
Location: Houston, TX
Aircraft: 1968 Bonanza E33
Username Protected wrote:
And how many employees died in car accidents since then?


Good question Robert... Lets also include Cessna employees driving all over this country involved in car accidents that resulted in insurance payments for injuries.

When I posted this comment I didn't expect Cessna employees to be cruising around in jets, simply, if the tech owned a 182 or similar he could use it and get reimbursed at a flat rate permissible by IRS quidelines. This isn't a PR ploy. All your customers are located at small to large airports all across the country, your employer manufactures aircraft for business and personal use and you don't permit your employees to use aircraft, sounds like a joke. It's terrible PR to NOT let them.

You are absolutely right, Chris. I worked for a major oil company for instance, and there was a GA friendly VP. So you were allowed to use our planes, but got reimbursed for time & cost of airline. Needless to say, you often spend a lot more time with your family! Currently we are introducing safety policies modelled on aviation. So if somebody who should know better is anti GA, he gets my "attention"....
_________________
無為而治 世界大同
individual sovereignty universal harmony


Top

 Post subject: Re: Cessna's Anti-GA Policy
PostPosted: 26 Jun 2013, 23:28 
Offline



 Profile




Joined: 06/07/10
Posts: 8215
Post Likes: +7278
Location: Boise, ID (S78)
Aircraft: 1964 Bonanza S35
Username Protected wrote:
It is probably an insurance thing that is driving a company police. I know the company I work for has a strict travel policy in many aspects. Particular to aviation is the fact that it only allows travel on airlines and in some cases some part 135 with specific pre approval after vetting of the 135 company safety policy. This is all driven by the corporate insurance.

I also have a friend who is a CEO of a company he built. Specific to his insurance policy it says the any airplane he is in must have 2 commercial pilots, he cannot even go for a ride with me on a pleasure trip.

"Insurance" is just another word for communism: spreading your personal risk and risk affecting decisions on "society". So the same things happens as in the political equivalent: More and more restrictive rules, and total loss of freedom of choice. They even have their own secret police. Where has the "pursuit of happiness", that was supposed to be a founding principle of this Union, gone? If I look at the average facial expression outside the pilot community, far far away.

Insurance companies get blamed for a lot of things, but I know several who's employees fly company or employee-owned airplanes for business transportation. Virtually all of the aviation insurance companies do it.

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next



Aviation Fabricators (Bottom Banner)

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025

.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.dbm.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.tempest.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.Latitude.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.