Cujo665

Interestingly enough, I worked at a small startup RJ operator way back when while they were transitioning from 121 on demand charter to 121 scheduled carrier.
They advertised, published schedules, and sold seats to a new city and then realized it had not yet been added to their OpSpecs.

They tried to get a few of us to operate under the 830 public charter rule to go do the flight. I and a several other captains refused the flight.
The pressure finally ended when we said, get us an email from the POI saying this was legal, and we'd go.
we never did those flights until the OpSpecs were updated.

It is different because were selling our own tickets; but I think what JSX is doing is just gamesmanship. This is not the marketing company telling JSX where to fly, it's JSX telling the marketing company where to sell tickets to/from.

SonicFlyer

American & Southwest Team Up With Local Congressmen In Plot To Destroy Small Rival JSX:


https://viewfromthewing.com/american...all-rival-jsx/

sailingfun

American & Southwest Team Up With Local Congressmen In Plot To force JSX to follow the same rules they do!

aeroengineer

I hope the taxpayers are the one's who have the final say. If the congressman actually asks his constituents at large what they think versus a couple companies with a vested economic interest then by all means.

captjns

Local Congressman looking for a retirement job as member of the Board of Directors?

JohnBurke

Just another uninformed piece by an unqualified author who disregards facts, to pen an opinion based on misinformation and bias, linkd by the mindless orange cartoon thumb, again.

Politics. Exactly what's not allowed here, but always the same conspiracy-minded posting agenda. Nothing new.

Nothing informative.

Always wrong.

But consistent.

cornerpocket

The best you got is some nobody blogger trying to generate clicks with controversial hot takes? YAWN. Next...

aeroengineer

Article may be a nothing burger but the bill looks real enough.

Congressman Nick Langworthy Introduces Bipartisan Safer Skies Act to Close Loopholes in Airport Security Congressman Nick Langworthy (house.gov)

Didn't the FAA receive a lot of comments on this issue mostly in support of JSX? I can't seem to locate the list but if anyone else can find them please post a link.

I'm no legal eagle but when Chevron took a hit it probably forced certain companies to the doorstep of Congress whether they wanted to or not. Put another way buying an unknown beaucrat or two in the FAA is far cheaper and low key than a Congressman but both are payed by taxpayers and should be accountable to the taxpaying public.

JohnBurke

Nothing in the Supreme ruling on Chevron deference took away from an agencies reglatory authority, and the FAA will continue to publish notices of proposed rule making, open them to public comment, and will continue to issue final rules in the course of it's congressional mandate to regulate aviation.

Even in the millenial (nee gen z, et al) age of "likes," public commentary on a rule will be considered, but is not now, nor ever will be a vote. Whether JSX gets "likes" in the comments or not, does not alter the spin of the world that much.

A bipartisan bill is not a congressman bought, particulalry if it gains traction among those who do have a say, in congress and the senate. That will take support on both sides of the aisle, and it's hard to argue that a congressman, in that case, is in the pocket of (pick a conspiracy theory and insert here).

Cujo665

I hope the congressmen realize that if they allow JSX to do scheduled flights under 830, then every other carrier will start doing it as well....