Who manages your flight department, pilots, your aircraft and are they incorporating the use of EU-ETS - SMS - IS-BAO? Do the rules they follow make passengers safe or simply create jobs? Politicians say rules create jobs. Actually the private sector generally creates jobs.
Aviation has been a magnet and dumping ground for excess rule making in the name of safety and political jabberwocky. Here is an example; "And when the final gleek was flort, Just two remained to zorch and vame, Which makes no diff'rence anyhow, 'Cause each one sounds the same!" by Alfred E. Neuman, Sounds regulatory to me.
Bottom line, any outside group that impacts business aviation operations via regulatory (FAA), best safety practices (SMS, IS-BAO) or best green practices (EU-ETS) increases cost to aviation department operations. The increase in cost is derived by adding man hours and creating taxation schemes to comply with burdensome policies and regulatory enhancements. These man hour increases may be with existing personnel, sub-contracted with vendors or the need to hire additional personnel.
To staff business aircraft a minimum of two (2) pilots are required. With the onslaught of ETS - SMS –IS-BAO - Air Safety Rule enhancements, many aviation departments have or are considering dissolving, hiring a management company or perhaps joining a charter certificate holder.
Historical aircraft accident statistics and evolutionary improvement of aircraft engine performance design and pilot training it appears a natural parallel improvement of safety and reliability has occurred organically without adding the burdensome acronyms.
EU-ETS has come home to roost within your aviation department by taxing engine carbine emissions. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has recommended that all aviation authorities implement a path to an SMS structure. IS-BAO would like to audit your aviation department. All three increase cost and reduces aviation job growth and future employment in the name of safe operating practices.
All three require participants pay to play. Pay to play is the latest Obama plan to tax all business flights and other turbine-powered planes that use the U.S. air-traffic system an additional $100 per flight. Is this tax for increase services provided, an increase in operating expense, a fee for future investment or perhaps past misspending? Does the tax provide an immediate or future benefit to anyone? This tax will be an impediment to aviation job growth.
When one evaluates the severity of regulatory oversight in aviation, a pilot's time management of safety verses outside influences appears to be 75% outside the cockpit and 25% inside the cockpit. Whereas in past years time management of safety was emphasized to be in the cockpit and the safety percentage was 75% inside the cockpit and 25% outside the cockpit.
One must ask are pilots and passengers better off now than in years past? This past decade aviation has become another we gotcha job do to the plethora of alphabet acronym intrusions.