BA still using US pilots in preference to EU

[ILLUMINATI25]

Last year I posted news of how BA were using Atlas to fly it's freight in preference to GSS, thus denying pilot opportunites to Uk pilots and commands on 747-400 to GSS and BA f/o's. Despite BALPA and the IPF's protestations the CAA granted Atlas permission for 6 months which was of course extended to 1 year as everyone predicted. That year is now over and it would seem that BA are hoping to allow Atlas further extensions to deny british pilots some career progression at the expense of US pilots.
However this is not Atlas' fault and due to events at Polar a 400 was available which GSS tried to obtain to replace the Atlas classic currently doing BA work, thus expanding the GSS fleet to 4 on the BA contract, and giving promotional opportunities to both GSS and BA pilots.
It would seem it is BA who are procrastinating about whether to continue with atlas or allow GSS to obtain the a/c for it's work.
These 747-400 freighters tend not to become available very often. BA have already missed one opportunity and now risk losing another.
The Atlas contract was supposed to be temporary! Would this be allowed to happen in the US. It's time yet again for our unions to protest at EU work going to US companies, and for EU pilots to kick up a fuss.

[Boeingman]

BALPA did file an objection within the time limit.

[unmanned transport]

There are a lot of self appointed experts out there who appear to know more about American law, culture and industry than we do ourselves. For the benefit of those who actually read these posts I offer the following.

1, Bankruptcy in the US operates as a safe harbor that allows a financially strapped business to get temporary protection from their creditors while they reorganize, on the basis of the idea that more value for creditors, stockholders and employees can come out of a going business that's been reorganized than from one that's forced into dissolution. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt-like in TWA's case.

2. Bankruptcy is available to foreign carriers-it's as simple as filing incorporation papers in any state in the US....I will do that for you for $100 plus the filing fee. Quite a number of foreign companies have US based subsidiaries....so if you didn't move to take advantage of that and you needed it, whose fault is that? Why, it's your corporate lawyers, that's who.

3. Eddington is way off base. He makes an argument that is self interested and uninformed. The gist of his argument seems to be twofold: First that Chapter 11 keeps airlines in business that would otherwise be liquidated. That's wrong, but in the event that DL, UA, NW and whoever ARE unable to continue, they WILL be liquidated like TWA was.
Second, he argues that US airlines have "soaked up 15-20 billion in public subsidies and loan guarantees and they still can't make a profit." No basis is given for these assertions.

4. He argues that chapter 11 is used as a form of state aid that keeps unprofitable airlines around, bloating capacity and depressing prices on North Atlantic routes....which is, I suppose, what really gripes him. He wants to jack up fares but can't see his way through to doing it as long as zees devilish Americains are ******* everything up for him and his pals.

5. As a practical matter nothing Eddington says is going to change law and legislation here in the States. We've had bankruptcy law for a long time, and it works well in terms of returning the most value to creditors, employees and shareholders by salvaging a company that's having cash flow problems...dissolution of businesses that can be salvaged is not good public policy here or anywwhere else in the world.

And, in fact, speaking in the long term, anything that returns more value to the stakeholders than they'd get in a dissolution is good policy. You can always dissolve a company if it can't survive. You should try it.


So, you gotta ask why he's making with the big show?

Simply, because you can get a lot of mileage in the rest of the world, Europe in particular, by bitching about the Americans, particularly to a friendly audience.

[Captain Airclues]

unmanned transport

I think that you have posted your reply on the wrong thread. This thread is about the fact that BA Cargo have applied to extend the use of US aircraft and US crews to fly their services, even though a British airline is fully able to service the contract, providing employment to European (including BA) pilots.

Airclues

[mrsofty]

Getting back to the original discussion that Atlas air's current,short term contract with BA to operate 1 747-200 between Stansted , Hong kong and India is depriving EU pilots of work.I take entirely the opposite view,I think this argument is poorly informed. There are at the moment 69 pilots and flight engineers employed by Atlas air crew services limited,based in Stansted,the vast majority with UK or EU licences,along with a number of mainline Atlas pilots who hold EU passports. The number of aircraft that are wet leased to European companies does not justify the number of pilots that Atlas employs from europe, this excess of European pilots are used to fly work such as US military charters.
The IPA I believe need to take a positive line towards Atlas and try to pursuade them to employ more UK and European pilots,rather than protesting against a contract which is in the interest of european pilots.As for Balpa their protest have nothing but self interest in mind.

[DingerX]

...of course in order to plug most things into those sockets, you need to jam a screwdriver into the ground, thus teaching kids it's okay to do so. Combine this with 240 volts, instead of a God Fearing, Amurrican-flag wavin' 110, and you've got a lot of fried kids on your hands. Fortunately, you have top-notch state medical care for them.


Oh yeah, the topic.
Sure, it happens all the time in the US, just not necessarily for pilots and aircraft (after all, if it is economically advantageous to use US crews and equipment, why would a US company hire Europeans one) -- maintenance, for example, can be economically farmed out to less wealthier countries (wasn't someone bitching about Jetblue just the other day?)
One of the central principles of the EU seems to be breaking down "barriers to commerce" within the 25 states and without. Either way, it effectively means giving the owners/shareholders access to cheaper sources of skilled and unskilled labor, and equalizing the currently rather disparate conditions among such labor. Another EU principle seems to be soaking up money to pay for another layer of bureaucracy in Brussels.

Oh yeah, another advantage of having US employees in your overseas cargo company is taxes: if they work overseas, and on paper they stay overseas for 330 of the 365 days in the year, they can exclude their first $80,000 USD of income from taxes in the US, regardless of whether they are residents of that overseas country. Combine that with a highly mobile workforce, whose location and payment (in the US by a US company) is hard to trace, and the possibilities abound for increasing one's take-home pay by ignoring bothersome in-country taxes and work requirements: The company's overhead per employee drops, and the employee's take-home pay is more competitive than the salary figures would suggest. Does this happen? Of course not, never.
[/talking out of apu -- just wanted to say something inflammatory to justify the off-topic remark about power sockets]

[mrsofty]

wotsyors, you are 100% wrong about the Euro fo´s employed 5 years ago, most of them are now captains with Atlas. It is true that no more Euro FO´s are being employed without the right also to work in the US.

[West Coast]

So, just who are you pissed at?
A company that happens to be foreign that takes on a contract or a your government/airlines/unions for allowing it/not barring it?

[Willie Everlearn]

Sorry.
A bit of trouble with this one, lads.

Let's see...
Atlas, (an American Company) leases a 744 to operate (wherever it's OC allows) signs an agreement with a foreign company (BA) to haul wicker baskets over a given period of time between A and B and it's a ***kin "issue"?

Atlas has a bit of a head-to-head with its pilot union and realize all it has to do is base the aircraft in some far away place, say EGSS, crew it with a few right-of-abode Wallys holding FAA licences, and it's an "issue"?

Atlas are then asked by BA to paint the A/C in its' colours and that's an "issue" as well? (nothing to do with the arrogance of Yankee marketing or BA S&M types?)

How would BA effectively go about changing the N-registration of a leased aircraft with an American company as the leaseholder???? (Serious trouble with that one)

This surely can't be an "issue" for anyone in the UK or EU. What with the number of Aussies, Indians and other Colonials taking away pilot jobs from european pilots at BA (and others). Surely to goodness, that number is far greater than the number of FAA licenced Europeans and Americans at some relatively small, even in number, quite often commuting to work types at Atlas UK?
:confused:
Do come along!
:sad:

[teedub]

18 years ago shot down by the speedbird boys......5 airlines 3 furloughs and 2 bankruptcies later I find myself flying the speedbird in an a/c I never dreamt I'd fly (let alone for ba)...and here's the kicker my friends...18 years from now what ,where and whose a/c I'll have flown and which call sign I'll have used will have very little to do with me.....I must say that whilst I appreciate job protection and earning potential issues the expereince and good times I have had flying with all breeds and brawns under the atlas/ba deal has enriched my fyling repetoire to no end.....although I do appreciate that it probably irks some folk to hear "speedbird" in a thick us brawl....then again ever heard the radio in the us northeast....pretty peppered with all and sundry....and that just the us commuters....

[zerozero]

TeeDub--And that's the truth.

Ten years as a paid pilot and I've worked with (in no particular order) Finns, Norweigians, Swedes, Irish, English, Jordanian, French, Italian, Iranian, Japanese, Korean, Greek...

...I could go on...

All US ATPs; all US taxpayers.

And most of them were (are) senior to me.