In article et, "Mike
Rapoport" wrote:

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Probably driven by the
University's
insurance carrier.

since when do insurance carriers make "reasonable" policies wrt
flying?

They are basically saying that the University is not to have its
employees
traveling by air in a manner that has a vastly greater fatal accident
rate
(more than 10x) than commercial flying.

Given that the University will allow travel by car or train, both
of which also have a vastly greater fatal accident rate than
commercial flying, my question remains open.


Many institutions/companys flat out forbid travel by non-commercial
air.

which doesn't make this one reasonable.

See above.

ditto.


Another way to look at it: If commercial flying sets the standard,
than why is use of a car, bus, or train allowed but not non-commercial
flying? Is the University policy to use the lowest cost, most
expeditious (sp?), or safest method of travel?

--
Bob Noel