Issa Darrel invited 150 business groups to express themselves regarding regulations, which cause unemployment. In his letter, he advises the correspondents to suggest reforms (Todd, 2011). The following are some of the views from the business groups.
The regulation is about the hours of service agricultural exemption in 1995. The word retail was dropped to clarify that the exemption not only refers to farmers and farm retailers, but also to all moves critical to planting and harvesting of crops. The reforms apply to agricultural products transported within a 100 air mile radius. This is an extension from 50 air mile radius. Section 345 stipulates that states should adopt the reforms and identify planting and harvesting seasons in order to designate the time of year when the exemption applies.
This regulation does not serve the interest of the public. It will be uneconomical for the business to operate without the exemption. Following the misinterpretation of the exemption in 2008, more trucks will be required to transport the farm products. There will be a need for additional drivers. With this increase in number of drivers, the probability of inexperienced drivers is bound to rise. This will in turn endanger the lives of the public due to an increased level of road carnage. There is also a likelihood of decreased food supply in the country
This regulation kills jobs. Most agricultural retailers will be jobless due to the high cost of operations. Truck drivers will work for more hours as the association tries to reduce the number of drivers to minimize costs.
The letter from private air carriers against the Department of Homeland Security is a complaint concerning a regulation by the Transportation Security administration (TSA). On November 17, 2009, TSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Aircraft Repair stations. This regulation requires that all repair stations certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to embrace the standard security program. This program aims at improving security of domestic and foreign aircraft repair stations. This is in accordance with the vision 100- century of Aviation Reauthorization act. Those who fall under the law should allow TSA and Department of homeland security officers to inspect and do testing of facilities in repair stations. Upon testing TSA should follow a procedure when informing repair stations of any deficiencies in the security program.
The sole aim of this regulation is to curb terrorists’ attacks. The series of terrorists’ attacks on September 11, 2001, were a red light. They prompted the congress to create regulations to prevent further damage of property and human suffering (Administration, 2012). The aircraft station act is one of them. The measures ensure that nobody tampers with aircrafts at the repair stations. There is a likelihood of repair station officers colluding or compromising with terrorists since they are in direct contact with the aircraft parts.
I believe this regulation serves the public interest. Every passenger is concerned with how secure the plane is. The regulation comes at a time when there was a pending Iraq attack that made passengers suspicious of aircrafts. The regulation has reduced the vulnerability of United States aircrafts to hijacking by terrorists. The rule prevents explosions and weapons from getting onboard.
This regulation could move the airplane repair shops to overseas. It is costly for the shops to operate since the introduction of the law. Most operators do not agree with weight threshold set by the TSA. They can use a better criterion such as operation type. The revocation of certificates belonging to those whose repair stations pose an immediate risk is controversial. Instead, existing procedures for revocation should guide the TSA.
This regulation kills jobs in the airline industry. Compliance to these guidelines is expensive. The security program entails adding measures as personnel identification system, access controls and security awareness training (Namowitz, 2012). The estimate of $344 million by NPRM is only half of the actual amount incurred. To control operational costs, most airlines are laying off personnel.
The regulation set by the Federal Aviation Administration requires the people serving as aircraft dispatchers and crewmembers to train using flight simulation devices. It also sets revised qualification requirements and evaluation basis. It also calls for standardization of training and experience required for dispatcher instructors and check dispatchers. The regulation also states that certificate holders in the aviation industry would be required to take part in a continuous analysis process to better their skill. The regulation aims at curbing the increasing number of accidents in the aviation sector resulting from human errors. It focuses on improving aviation employee performance. Another objective of the regulation is to simply, reorganize and re codify language used in training and qualification of flight crew (Federal Aviation Administration, 2009).
However, those against the regulations are of the view that the regulations are unnecessary. Many of the respondents from the industry argue that FAA did not fully consider the effects of training the aviation staff using an Advanced Qualification Program. In their responses, they also state that FAA did not correctly estimate the number of FSTD periods necessary for training and evaluation of flight staff (Federal Aviation Administration, 2010). To set the number of hours required to train one pilot, FAA divided the tasks done by the PIC and SIC. They then estimated how long it took to complete the tasks within a simulated session. After recurrent evaluation, FAA noted that it took 3 hours, and 29 minutes with a 12-minute break included to train the pilot on the required tasks (The PEW environment group, 2010).
The regulation does not adversely affect air flight staff trained using AQP programs. This is because safety improvements proposed by FAA are currently part of The AQP programs. However, AQP certificate holders are required to justify that their curriculum meets the level of safety requirements approved by FAA. Though the regulation aims at improving air travel safety, FAA does not address the main cause of airline accidents. The regulations target training of aircrew. It however fails to address corporate and general- aviation issues, which are the main causes of accidents. On this regard, the regulation does not serve the public interest (Nijsen, 2009).
The regulation encourages a high level of training and continuous evaluation of aircrew. For those who are already under employment in these positions, the regulation requires them work at advancing their skills on safety. Those joining the fields will be required to meet the new set standards. The regulation does not kill aircrew jobs.