NetJets filed a complaint for defamation and violations of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act in the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County against the NetJets Association of Shared Aircraft Pilots (NJASAP). The lawsuit seeks relief because of the union’s “repeated and false publications” calling into question NetJets pilots’ experience and capabilities, its pilot training and safety programs, safety culture, new flight planning system and processes, and the company’s “longstanding commitment to safety.”
The central issue of the complaint is that NJASAP’s public outreach contains “materially false statements of fact.” This outreach includes contact with “existing and potential customers, via website postings, social media, press releases, and even advertisements in the Wall Street Journal,” according to the complaint. NetJets explained that its pilot hiring, training, safety culture, and new flight planning system are industry-leading, unrivaled, and beneficial for safety.
For its part, NJASAP, which recently voted to ratify a new tentative agreement with NetJets that included significant pay increases and other improvements, believes that safety, maintenance, and pilot training issues are escalating. “NJASAP stands by the concerns we have raised about pilot training and the safety and maintenance cultures—concerns that have only increased in intensity in recent months," NJASAP president Pedro Leroux said in response to the complaint.
Asked to provide information about specific instances that led to these concerns, NJASAP responded to AIN that it “cannot comment on some of the details which are the subject of pending litigation.” However, the union said that it would welcome the opportunity “to immediately engage in a dialogue about these pressing matters with NetJets decision-makers. NJASAP seeks productive discussion and positive change to address the legitimate safety concerns we have raised."
“As you know, NetJets contends in its lawsuit that certain statements made in public communications regarding safety concerns were in some way defamatory to NetJets,” NJASAP added. “We profoundly disagree. Every published statement we have made about our concerns has been based on factual, documented information, and it has been legally vetted. To that end, we unreservedly believe every statement we have made to be true, and we will demonstrate to the court that NetJets’ claims are utterly without merit. Beyond that, as noted above, we cannot comment at this point on specific allegations.”
One example of the dispute revolves around pilot hiring. NetJets employs more than 4,500 pilots—3,300 in the U.S., the company noted in its complaint—and it has hired 1,700 pilots since 2020. It also pointed out that, until November 2022, NJASAP volunteers aided in the recruiting and hiring process but then “the union decided it would no longer participate.”
According to NetJets, “Among these more than 1,700 new hires, the average flight time per pilot is 3,079 hours, which exceeds industry standards. And only approximately 16% of these new hires had prior flight hours derived primarily from flight instruction or from a background that was focused on flying small aircraft.”
NJASAP ran an advertisement in the Wall Street Journal on June 16, 2023, that stated: “Today, new hire classes [at NetJets] are predominately comprised of pilots who have built hours through flight instruction or flying small aircraft.”
“This defamatory statement was false,” NetJets said in the complaint, “inasmuch as only approximately 16% of NetJets' new pilot hires from 2020 to date have flight hours derived from flight instruction or from flying small aircraft. No matter how one slices it, 16% is not ‘predominant.’ The union clearly knew the falsity of this statement, or was reckless in not discovering the same.”
With regard to this particular issue, NJASAP provided this statement to AIN: “As communicated to our members in a Nov. 17, 2022, communication about the New Employee Introduction Committee’s withdrawal from the hiring process, the decision to take a step back from that particular safety-focused role was not made in haste, but only after months of extensive discussion focused on the collision course between the extraordinary pressures of the ongoing pilot shortage and management’s growth goals. The parties had very different philosophical views on the best way to address this matter, necessitating NJASAP’s decision at that time.”
In another Wall Street Journal advertisement in January, NJASAP wrote, “What if you looked out the window and saw a panel of your plane?” According to NetJets, the ad was referring to the Alaska Airlines door panel failure caused by missing bolts that should have been installed during the manufacturing process.
The ad “falsely suggested that a similar type of accident is imminent at NetJets,” according to the complaint. “The foregoing statement, which is clearly intended to alarm NetJets' customers, pilots, and the traveling public, is false and defamatory. NJASAP has no basis to suggest that an accident similar to the one that occurred on the Alaska Airlines flight is likely or possible to occur on a NetJets flight.”
AIN asked NJASAP, "What was the specific purpose of this advertisement? What does the improper manufacturing process at Boeing have to do with NetJets?” NJASAP declined to respond to this question.
NetJets clearly is letting its complaint address the issues raised and provided this statement to AIN: “We will not comment on legal matters between NetJets and NJASAP, as our focus is on providing the exceptional safety and service our owners expect and deserve.”