Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Airlines, Airports & Routes
Reload this Page >

EU / USA open skies negotiations

Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

EU / USA open skies negotiations

Old 13th Feb 2004, 02:02
  #1 (permalink)  

mostly harmless
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: axis of chocolate
Posts: 189
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EU / USA open skies negotiations

From the BA website:

British Airways has urged the European Commission to keep its sights high on the ‘open aviation area’ talks between and within the United States and Europe.

Speaking at the European Aviation Club in Brussels, Rod Eddington, chief executive of British Airways, said he was encouraged by the progress made in the first two rounds of negotiations.

However, he said, “The United States’ current proposal falls far short of Europe’s objective of achieving a truly liberal open aviation area.

“It is also essentially unbalanced and would provide unlimited 5th freedom rights* within the European Union for all American passenger and cargo airlines while providing no access at all to the US domestic market for Europe’s airlines.

“It removes operating restrictions between the European Union and the United States, but makes no progress towards achieving a truly liberalised market.”

Real progress could not be made until the United States unlocked its refusal to consider access to its domestic market, agreed cabotage rights* within the United States for Europe’s airlines and the removal of foreign ownership restrictions.

Opening up the Fly America programme*, guaranteeing code-share approvals and removing the restrictions on wet-leasing* were also key objectives for Europe’s airlines, he said.

Signing up to a phased arrangement that gives the United States its negotiating objectives with a promise of turning to Europe’s at a future date would be naïve, he continued.

“History teaches us that there would be no incentive for the US to come back to the table once they have got their model of open skies in place”.

He acknowledged that progress during an election year in America might be difficult and that more headway may be possible in the early term of the next administration when the United States’ economic recovery was more firmly established.

“If it proves to be that there is little prospect of progress in the immediate future on issues which justified giving the commission its mandate in the first place, the best path for the commission to keep its sights high and keep pressing its case,” he said.



worth discussing, I think.
answer=42 is online now  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 03:48
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Very much so, Answer=42.

There is supposed to be a new round of negotiations next week (on the 17th), at which the latest US proposals are to be discussed. The US has mentioned two major obstacles: firstly Heathrow and secondly, the Irish Shannon stopover - my personal area of interest.

Aer Lingus would like to add new routes to the US and given its success in expanding into Europe, their intentions - given the right authority - can't be doubted. However, the Irish government can't be seen to be giving too much away - unless its back is up against a wall - or it will face political difficulties from the powerful Shannon lobby.
akerosid is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 05:06
  #3 (permalink)  

mostly harmless
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: axis of chocolate
Posts: 189
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From the European Commission transport website:

Towards an Open Aviation Area with the United States

EU/US negotiations will seek to replace existing agreements between individual Member States and the US with a single comprehensive EU/US agreement, establishing an "Open Aviation Area" between the two territories.

The negotiations will therefore cover all the arrangements governing air transport between and within the EU and US. This will include the rules governing market access (routes, capacity, frequency), how air fares are set, how to ensure effective application of competition rules, and how to ensure maintenance of high standards of airline safety and aviation security.

The negotiations will also address opening up each side’s internal market to the airlines of the other side. A key element in this will be the removal of the special restrictions which currently apply to foreign ownership and control of airlines in the US and the EU.

An OAA will produce a more competitive market than today, generating greater choice of services and lower fares for travellers while taking into account the need to maintain the security and safety of air travel.

It will give EU and US airlines complete freedom to serve any pairs of airports in the EU and US – EU airlines are currently only able to operate between their own Member State and the US and between airports within the EU. Relaxing restrictions on ownership and control will also make it easier for EU and US airlines to enter into mergers and take-overs with each other.

A report by US consultants, the Brattle Group, has estimated that an EU/US Open Aviation Area would generate upwards of 17 million extra passengers a year, consumer benefits of at least $5billion a year, and would boost employment on both sides of the Atlantic.
answer=42 is online now  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 10:12
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Over the horizon
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I do not think, that there is much point in the US getting open skies and I do not think it will benefit the employees or american airlines.

I believe, there are a lot more passengers in the US, so obviously EU carriers would love unrestricted access, but what would the advantage be for the US?

For obvious reasons, I, as a US airline employee, is against it. It will further deterioate the employment landscape here, just compare VA pay to say DAL. Secondly, I am concerned that it will not stop there, but that cabotage, as in what has happened with freight carriers in ANC, will happen on the pax side on a much larger scale. Next ting we know, we will have mainland Chinese airlines flying around with $1000 a month Captains. Then we will see some serious degrading of US payscales. Now you may ask, how does EU-US open skies lead to this, simple, once you open the floodgates, it will happen really quickly.

From the supplied data, we see that on average, the US pilot pay is about 15 percent higher than the EU average. Compounding that disparity is the pay of accession countries such as the Czechs who pay a whopping 1/9 of SAS. Now, they do go on to say, that in the NEAR term, accession countries will not be able to supply many pilots. One must put extreme emphasis on Near Term, because long term they may be able to and then EU pilots as well, will see extreme downward wage pressure. We all know, the beancounters would love it and the pax, well at long as they get low fares, they really could not care.

BA serves IIRC about 12 or more destinations in the US, where as US carriers serves perhaps a dozen in the UK. Of course, US carriers will not gain acces to LHR on a larger scale.

So, I may be off the mark, but tell me again why I should support this?

Last edited by Diesel8; 13th Feb 2004 at 10:28.
Diesel8 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 10:58
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: washington, dc
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
However, there would seem to new intense pressure on the UK and BA with the approval of the KL/AF merger. When they add that to the mix with DL/CO/NW it will be an awesome alliance. It will not begin to compare to Oneworld. BA and LHR will start to lose even more transfer business at LHR to CDG and AMS.
If the UK and BA wait for years for this openskies to come, BA will be a monumental loser.There fore I am saying that maybe this negotiating session or the next one will see some limited progress in opening up LHR to more US airlines. In return BM will get their long sought approval to start some LHR-USA flights.
The stakes for BA, UK and LHR are just too high to wait any longer and they know it.
bjghi3 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 11:02
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Over the horizon
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, BA may need it, but I still fail to say the benefits to the US, that is other than lower wages and accountants being happy.
Agreements should not be reached, because it helps one side.

Love you guys across the pond, but will do whatever I can to discourage this.
Diesel8 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 12:09
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Since the Islands of Britain joined the EU, does their air transportation bilateral rules fall under the umbrella of the EU?
unmanned transport is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 12:50
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: washington, dc
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After years and years of negotiations between the Uk and US that went absolutely no where on the issue of more access to LHR for US carriers, the UK asked the EU to take over the negotiations ,which they have.
The irony now is that the terms of an offer BA had a few years ago to get US antitrust immunity and to really develop Oneworld into a powerful alliance,probably looks like a sweet deal now.BA passed on the offer and walked away from the table.
I am quite, quite sure they did not imagine that AF/KL would merge and from an alliance with DL/CO/NW in the US. That is an awesome, massive alliance.In the mean time BA sits years away from an openskies that they envision. In the meantime BA can do nothing but sit back and watch a systematic peeling away of their lucrative transatlanit business, mostly their transfer passengers to and from the US via LHR.
bjghi3 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 14:31
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I do not think it will benefit the employees or american airlines.
Diesel

More like it will destroy the European Airline industry, despite US pilots earning way more than us we (in the UK particularly) are crippled by the high costs of regulation. In the cargo world we are already being overrun by UPS and others operating N reg aircraft with a lower cost base on intra EU routes. Add to that the threat from the East of ex soviet countries whose airlines stagger from one banning to another yet always seem to pop up with a new name and AOC elsewhere and we bear the brunt. And ont get me started on the Iclandics , pop 300,000 yet 50 large jet transport aircraft able to operate freely throughout the EU.


Things should change but not without reform of the european civil aviation administration and a level regulatory field for all.
Daysleeper is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 15:23
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: US
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Let us not forget, however, that the EU is not a sovereign nation like the US. At best it is a loose conglomeration of trade partners, some of whom share the same currency. It is getting closer to single union sovereignity; and the combining of the ATC funtions and the regualtion of the skies is a step in the direction needed to be one nation.

Nonetheless, until you fire the Queens and Kings and become one sovereign nation. ALL having the same currency (Dump the Pound in favor of the Euro....YEAH that will happen) and laws; and ALL negotiate with ONE Federated voice, then true open skies will not happen.

The US should not open their borders to cabatoge unless and until Southwest or Jetblue is allowed to fly point to point in France, or point to point in Italy, or point to point in the UK.

The EU is NOT a sovereign nation. Flying between France and England is no different than flying between Montreal and Minneapolis. It is a different set of rules, freedoms, and treaties when you fly country to country.

My experience is that most Europeans don't understand the way the US is set up. They seem to think that flying between Florida and New York is the same as flying between Germany and England. This is not the case. The US is one sovereign Federated nation made up of many states but all of them governed by the Federal government.

So as soon as France and England can agree to let Spanish leaders make all of their National rules and regulations, as soon as the Queen of England abdicates in favor of....(whos running the EU now....is it Ireland?), and as soon as the Brits dump the Pound in favor of the Euro; then maybe we can negotiate an open skies agreement. Then it would be time to buy stock in Jet Blue and Southwest.

Last edited by Beaver Driver; 13th Feb 2004 at 15:52.
Beaver Driver is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 16:23
  #11 (permalink)  
Transparency International
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Denmark
Posts: 745
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Beaver Driver, the wake-up bell rang nov. 5, 2002, when the ECJ passed its verdict in case C-466/98 ( press release ). Your "federation-mantra" will not help you any more.
dusk2dawn is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 19:40
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Montreal is in Canada, which IS a sovreign nation.
Rosbif is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 22:02
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is the head of state in Canada still the Queen (of England,Scotland Wales (UK))?

So I guess this means that Europe (or the EC actually because Switzerland is in Europe but isn't a member) is one entity from a international aviation point of view. Since this is so the EC should get one vote at ICAO but yet they keep showing up pretending they are separate countries. Make up your mind. That ought to take 50 years or so.
Iron City is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 23:00
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Beaver Driver

"The US should not open their borders to cabatoge unless and until Southwest or Jetblue is allowed to fly point to point in France, or point to point in Italy, or point to point in the UK."

The whole point of an open skies agreement is just that - a US or EU airline could fly between any city pair in the EU, the US or EU to US. Southwest could set up a route network in England, and Easyjet a network based in say, Florida. In practice I think what is being considered is more on the lines of code share and cross ownership.

"The EU is NOT a sovereign nation. Flying between France and England is no different than flying between Montreal and Minneapolis. It is a different set of rules, freedoms, and treaties when you fly country to country."

That is no longer totally correct. There are common airworthiness standards, licencing etc. More importantly the individual states of the EU have agreed a common policy on cabotage.

Whilst individual airlines may see benefits to an open skies agreement the main driver for the EU will be the consumer - will there be cheaper and better air services?

How would this affect industry staff? A more competitive environment would obviously produce changes. However it worth pointing out that salaries in Easyjet, Southwest etc are not knwn for being particularly low.
Budgie69 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2004, 23:33
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: dallas,tx,usa
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The US has nothing to gain from the opening up of EU "internal" passenger traffic.

Why would SWA go to the trouble of setting up a parallel EU operation when EZ and Rhino are already entrenched?

Granted, more capacity could lower pricing BUT the trade off would be gridlock, which would benefit no-one (like LGA a couple of years ago, but much worse), and a race to the bottom for the airlines that could offer the cheapest (below profitable) cost.

I can see Leery Micky, Stavros and the big Sir Dick claiming that EU-US open skies would be a win-win.

Kinda like the British auto/motorcycle industry did regarding export, until the Japanese (and others) figured out how to bury it.

History teaches us, be careful what you ask for.

Cheers,dd
dallas dude is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2004, 00:45
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Over the horizon
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Daysleeper,

Great, then we agree. You stay on your side and I stay on mine. Deal?

Lets celebrate over a pint
Diesel8 is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2004, 03:10
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lets celebrate over a pint
sounds great, though it has to be REAL beer , not that yellow pretend beer you guys have over there.


sorry couldn't resist it.
Daysleeper is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2004, 03:25
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Over The Hills And Far Away
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angel

One word - Protectionism
Techman is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2004, 07:20
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Over the horizon
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Protectionism, is that a new british beer? Never heard of it, but okay, make mine a Protectionism.
Diesel8 is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2004, 09:19
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Over The Hills And Far Away
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angel

Jesus Kristus, du har vist været på den forkerte side af dammen for længe.
Techman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.