Overly restrictive business flying requirements.

Hello.
I thought I'd bounce these off the group and see what people
think. These are the UniRegs at the University of Wyoming for flying
your own or rented plane on University business. I feel, as a
low-time private pilot that they are overly restrictive, but I thought
I'd see what the sage pelicans here thought.

WW

UniReg 177-12d:

(d) When approved in advance by the President, or designee, travel by
privately owned, rented, trade-out, or loaned aircraft may be
authorized, subject to the following requirements:

1) When a University employee wishes to utilize a privately owned,
rented, trade-out, or loaned aircraft for official University travel
(either with or without passengers), the pilot must, as a minimum
requirement:

i. Possess a current private pilot license issued in accordance with
Federal Aviation Administration regulations (FAR's), appropriate to
the craft to be flown, and must be in compliance with the currency
requirements of said FAR's with respect to flight time, biennial
flight review, and other requirements as appropriate to the ratings
held;

ii. Have logged a minimum of 500 hours of total flight time;

iii. Have an instrument rating, issued in accordance with the FAR's,
and must be current for flight in instrument conditions, as defined by
the FAR's;

iv. For night or actual instrument conditions, have logged a minimum
of 100 hours of instrument time, either actual or simulated; and

v. Not withstanding the requirements in paragraph iv.), no
authorization will be granted for single engine aircraft night or
actual instrument conditions.

2) Whenever travel is approved under this policy, the employee shall
verify to the approving University officer that the pilot possesses a
medical certificate issued by a FAA designated medical examiner and a
biennial flight review within the preceding 2 years. The pilot will
show proof of instrument currency, as defined by current FAR's (See,
for example, FAR 61.57).

3) Employees wishing to use personally owned aircraft for travel on
official business must obtain liability insurance coverage in an
amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, and must include the
University of Wyoming as an "Additional Insured" on such policy. A
copy of an endorsement to the employee's policy reflecting the above
coverage, and a certificate of insurance issued to the University
shall be filed with the University's Risk Management Office and, by
reference, included on all purchase orders (Note: agent binder letters
are not acceptable).

4) Employees wishing to use leased, rented, borrowed, trade-out, or
other non-owned aircraft for official University travel must obtain
liability insurance coverage as described in paragraph 3) above, must
name the University as an "Additional Insured" on such policy, must
obtain adequate hull damage insurance to cover any possible loss of
the aircraft, and must provide documentation of such coverage as
required above.

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

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

Bob Gardner

"Wily Wapiti" wrote in message
om...
Hello.
I thought I'd bounce these off the group and see what people
think. These are the UniRegs at the University of Wyoming for flying
your own or rented plane on University business. I feel, as a
low-time private pilot that they are overly restrictive, but I thought
I'd see what the sage pelicans here thought.

WW

UniReg 177-12d:

(d) When approved in advance by the President, or designee, travel by
privately owned, rented, trade-out, or loaned aircraft may be
authorized, subject to the following requirements:

1) When a University employee wishes to utilize a privately owned,
rented, trade-out, or loaned aircraft for official University travel
(either with or without passengers), the pilot must, as a minimum
requirement:

i. Possess a current private pilot license issued in accordance with
Federal Aviation Administration regulations (FAR's), appropriate to
the craft to be flown, and must be in compliance with the currency
requirements of said FAR's with respect to flight time, biennial
flight review, and other requirements as appropriate to the ratings
held;

ii. Have logged a minimum of 500 hours of total flight time;

iii. Have an instrument rating, issued in accordance with the FAR's,
and must be current for flight in instrument conditions, as defined by
the FAR's;

iv. For night or actual instrument conditions, have logged a minimum
of 100 hours of instrument time, either actual or simulated; and

v. Not withstanding the requirements in paragraph iv.), no
authorization will be granted for single engine aircraft night or
actual instrument conditions.

2) Whenever travel is approved under this policy, the employee shall
verify to the approving University officer that the pilot possesses a
medical certificate issued by a FAA designated medical examiner and a
biennial flight review within the preceding 2 years. The pilot will
show proof of instrument currency, as defined by current FAR's (See,
for example, FAR 61.57).

3) Employees wishing to use personally owned aircraft for travel on
official business must obtain liability insurance coverage in an
amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, and must include the
University of Wyoming as an "Additional Insured" on such policy. A
copy of an endorsement to the employee's policy reflecting the above
coverage, and a certificate of insurance issued to the University
shall be filed with the University's Risk Management Office and, by
reference, included on all purchase orders (Note: agent binder letters
are not acceptable).

4) Employees wishing to use leased, rented, borrowed, trade-out, or
other non-owned aircraft for official University travel must obtain
liability insurance coverage as described in paragraph 3) above, must
name the University as an "Additional Insured" on such policy, must
obtain adequate hull damage insurance to cover any possible loss of
the aircraft, and must provide documentation of such coverage as
required above.

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:mNd1b.170452$Oz4.43720@rwcrnsc54...
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Probably driven by the University's
insurance carrier.

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

What does that mean? Does it mean they fire you if you fly yourself to
a business meeting, or just that they won't reimburse for it?

John

John Harper wrote:

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

What does that mean? Does it mean they fire you if you fly yourself to
a business meeting, or just that they won't reimburse for it?

It can go either way. My former employer simply wouldn't pay for it.

George Patterson
Brute force has an elegance all its own.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


John Harper wrote:

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

What does that mean? Does it mean they fire you if you fly yourself to
a business meeting, or just that they won't reimburse for it?

It can go either way. My former employer simply wouldn't pay for it.

My present employer "demands" it...matter of fact, he's in the left seat.
:~)

There is no comprehensive answer to your question because it is determined
by each company on a case-by-case basis. I'm pretty sure that if they had an
unequivocal statement in their employment contracts that travel would be
only by car or commercial carrier, flying in a light aircraft would be
grounds for dismissal. A less stringent sanction would be refusal to
compensate, as you suggest, or compensate at the automobile rate. I'm
neither a lawyer nor an insurance agent.

Back in the 60s I owned a 175, and my employer was delighted at the way I
covered my territory and reimbursed me at the automobile rate. It took only
one trip, with a fellow employee on board, that ran into severe weather
problems and caused delays, to have my employer pull the plug on using my
own airplane. I wasn't there much longer.

Bob Gardner

"John Harper" wrote in message
news:1061514219.442569@sj-nntpcache-3...

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:mNd1b.170452$Oz4.43720@rwcrnsc54...
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Probably driven by the University's
insurance carrier.

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

What does that mean? Does it mean they fire you if you fly yourself to
a business meeting, or just that they won't reimburse for it?

John

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message news:ncf1b.220551$Ho3.28819@sccrnsc03...

Back in the 60s I owned a 175, and my employer was delighted at the way I
covered my territory and reimbursed me at the automobile rate. It took only
one trip, with a fellow employee on board, that ran into severe weather
problems and caused delays, to have my employer pull the plug on using my
own airplane. I wasn't there much longer.

The Army would reimburse private airtravel at the POV (automotive) rates provided
we got our division chief to sign off on it being "more advantageous to the government"
than other modes of travel. Actually, you needed the same sign off to drive your
car on government business. Of course, it wasn't hard to prove that personal car
travel was more advantageous as the alternative was to go out and rent a car
instead (We used to do this).

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

The Army would reimburse private airtravel at the POV (automotive) rates
provided
we got our division chief to sign off on it being "more advantageous to
the government"
than other modes of travel. Actually, you needed the same sign off to
drive your
car on government business. Of course, it wasn't hard to prove that
personal car
travel was more advantageous as the alternative was to go out and rent a
car
instead (We used to do this).

The AF was the same way -- If you were flying *your* airplane. Problem was
that the TDY mileage rate wouldn't come close to covering your true
expenses. OTOH, if you rented a plane (typically from the aero club), they
considered it a "hired vehicle" and paid the full amount of the rental,
tiedowns, etc. up to the cost of the commercial airline ticket. And you
could use all travelers in your cost justification, so with two traveling
you could almost always cover the entire cost of the rental.

"John Harper" wrote in message news:1061514219.442569@sj-nntpcache-3...

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:mNd1b.170452$Oz4.43720@rwcrnsc54...
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Probably driven by the University's
insurance carrier.

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

What does that mean? Does it mean they fire you if you fly yourself to
a business meeting, or just that they won't reimburse for it?

It means that they don't authorize it and may take some sanction against you
if you do. They are at risk, just as they are if you walk or drive on company
business. I had it out with my former companies managment over issues with
car insurance. Again, it had nothing to do with real risk and or legal liability
issues but some putz's idea of how he could insert the company in the personal
business of their employees (told him it was none of his freaking business about
what insurance I carried on my car, if I was travelling on business they'd better
insure the company interests).

In article mNd1b.170452$Oz4.43720@rwcrnsc54, "Bob Gardner"
wrote:

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

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


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

which doesn't make this one reasonable.

--
Bob Noel