More on UK Pilot Imports

[Skibeagle1]

Get this, Air 2000 are taking a Canadian B757 aircraft on wet lease next year. Are you UK pilots going to let this happen ?

Air 2000 asked Canada 3000 to do this wet lease in March 2001. Get this, fourteen months notice for a wet lease !

If you let the CAA and Air 2000 white wash you into believing that "it is good for UK aviation" and "we didnt have time to prepare", then you deserve to see a C reg go over you on its way to Manchester while you're in the dole queue !

BRITISH PILOTS NEED TO DO SOMETHING !!!!!

[The Guvnor]

Hey Skibeagle1 - I see you're in the States. Well, there's one major difference between the States and Canada - British airlines can wetlease their aircraft to Canadian airlines; so there's no problem with Canadian airlines leasing theirs to UK airlines.

Reciprocity, you see?

Now, in the case of the US, foreign airlines are prohibited from wetleasing to US operators - but US operators can wetlease theirs to foreign operators. A tad unfair, don't you think?

And that's why sanctions should be imposed against US operators and crews until the US decides to play fair! As you rightly say - British pilots need to do something about it!

[Tom East]

If history is anything to go by, the CAA and our so called pilots reps, BALPA, will do nothing to prevent such a pilot incursion.

The UK is a very soft touch. We still have many committed, aspiring local pilots, at many different levels, trying to get noticed and maybe picked up by airlines. Air 2000 will say, like all the others, that there is a lack of experienced pilots and have no choice....catch 22 and tough for the wannabes.

A similar situation happened a few years ago with the prospect of US Air operating with its crews in the UK when BA were tied up with them. BALPA again took our money and did nothing. Then the IPA, an independant pilot union for the BALPA disaffected, highlighted the issue and for various reasons it didn't go ahead.

I have to admit being very sensitive to this issue. I was once directly effected by the influx of Australian pilots in the early 90s. Whilst I had sympathy with their plight, they took away any chance of an airline job for many years as they added to the aready crowded pool of qualified pilots swelled by Air Europe and Dan Air. Even then, there was no priority given to the UK pilots in the pool.

It took over 5 years to get an airline interview, during which time I was one of the lucky ones who just about found enough work in GA to keep going.

I now have a proper job but know that there are still quite a few pilots still looking for thier big break. They generally have a much harder time getting work overseas and have to rely on UK airlines. But, as we will no doubt see again and again, UK operators will be allowed to seek the cheaper options and import aircraft and labour from overseas. It is not just Air 2000. Virgin have Air Atlanta as well as other Gatwick based operators with their Icelandic registered imposters.

In the long term it effects us all. It will be allowed to happen again and again and we will just keep on whinging about it while our terms and conditions are eroded. We are our own worst enemies; too self interested and dis-united as a pilot work force to do anything about it. Like it or not, the US and other countries protect themselves much better than we do and we 'should' do the same.....sadly, I do not see how we will be able to do this and that makes me part of the problem.

[ 23 August 2001: Message edited by: Tom East ]

[JiveBomber]

Well, anybody got an idea what to do. We're all agreed Balpa won't say a word, so what should we as individuals do ? I'd love to see the same level of protection for UK pilots over here as other people receive in their countries.

[The Guvnor]

Jivebomber - as Tom East correctly says, the IPA is the only organisation to take a proactive stance against flagging out, so the simple answer is join the IPA!

I do, however, feel strongly that a distinction should be drawn between those countries that permit UK pilots to operate there (whether individually or on wet leases) and those that don't.

The latter category seems to be composed primarily of one country - the USA - and I would suggest that action initially be taken against US aircraft and crews on wet leases to EU companies.

If no technical or other assistance is provided to them - ie they are embargoed - then the managements of the companies that have leased in the aircraft will realise that it wasn't so good a deal for them in the first place; they then cancel the lease with the US operator and the US operator then hopefully puts pressure on the US government to make a level playing field.

As for other (especially Icelandic) operators - that's a slightly more thorny issue and one which is going to get thornier with the EU expanding to incorporate a number of Eastern European countries. There, you have people like the Czechs who are good pilots but who are prepared to work hard for a pittance - as Ryanair discovered to their delight. Of course, one of the benefits of EU membership is free movement of labour.

Air Atlanta of course employs a large proportion of Americans because the Icelandic aviation authority accepts FAA licences unlike most other JAA countries.

This time, I suggest that some action is taken regarding this issue rather than just talking about it - what do you say, people?

[Ficky]

This is pathetic. If the legislation allows it then go talk to your MP about getting the legislation changed! It has nothing to do with BALPA, and naturally the knockers of BALPA have got in and volunteered their time to do something about that as well haven't they? Not. In the meantime how about inviting the Canadian's around for a beer?

Tom East

I was once directly affected by the influx of Australian pilots in the early 90s. Whilst I had sympathy with their plight, they took away any chance of an airline job for many years

I wonder why they were in the UK Tom? Anything to do with UK passport holders in Australia having a "paid holiday in the summer of 89" perhaps?

I seem to recall that this river has been crossed before as well. Everybody at Britannia complained about Air NZ pilots coming over to fly a summer until it was pointed out that Britannia had just been down under for a couple of seasons on a wet lease to Air NZ.

Doesn't seem unreasonable to me given the historical precedence and legislation.

[ 23 August 2001: Message edited by: Timber ]

[flugpants]

Just a quick pennys-worth to throw in the pot.......I think that it would be true to say that most UK charter airlines send a number of aircraft away in the winter on wet lease to Canada, South America, Far East, etc etc etc. This is just about the only way that any sizeable charter airline can survive the UK winter. Are we saying that this is a one way street - and that we should only push everyone to take our capacity in the Winter and that we should not entertain the idea of them helping us out in the Summer??
If we could dry lease the aircraft in the Summer without paying the extortionate reg/dereg costs plus any mandatory mods perhaps we could crew them with UK crews - fact is that the Campaign Against Aviation (UK Branch) makes it just about impossible to do this!
Now I am not saying it should be ok to bring any tom, dick & harry in with their ageing equipment, but rather when a 767 operator is bringing in another 767 etc etc - surely this is common sense.....not the piracy or conspiracy that you chaps are reckoning on!
(Stepping off soap-box....and running for cover!) :rolleyes:

[Boeingman]

BALPA has been working extremely hard on the issue of flagging out as readers of Airwaves will know.

As Timber has alluded to, the problem is two pieces of legislation.

The first is section 8 of the 1971 Immigration Act which BALPA tried to get amended when the recent Asylum Bill passed through Parliament. Now the OLS has been transferred to the Home Office, we hope that further lobbying will produce results.

The second is EC 2407/92 which covers wet leasing in the EEA and its interpretation. BALPA has been active in Brussels with the ECA in getting the commission to review the regulation and tighten up the wording. This will have to be done soon with the expansion of the common aviation area in Europe.

BALPA is doing the work.

[The Guvnor]

Timber and Flugpants you're both right - that's why I said that we need to make a distinction between those countries such as New Zealand, Australia, Canada, points in South America etc where we can freely send our aircraft and crews to cover their peak seasons and in return we get theirs to help cover our peaks - and those such as the United States for whom it's a one way street.

However, in terms of legislation, this is one of the bargaining chips being used by the British government as part of the Bermuda II talks. Rather more direct action needs to be taken in the meantime, in my opinion.

Next, when it comes to BALPA it's a fact that they have done very little on the flagging out issue. Could this be because BA have told them to wind their necks in as they are using the ATLAS 747s?? :D :D :D And yes, Timber, unlike BALPA the IPA has done something about it!!

Finally, Flugpants - it's not so much the registration costs (£100 for your average airliner); it's the certification/C of A costs that are the expensive bit! I seem to remember that Air 2000/Canada 3000 used to swap 757s back and forth every year on the UK and Canadian registers without problem, though.

I should add that if anyone wants to see who is operating foreign aircraft in the UK; or using foreign aircraft on charters from the UK, you just have to look in the CAA's Official Record Series 2 which is available here: Official Record Series 2 (http://www.atol.org.uk/airlinelic/or2.htm)
and go to Part 5. Note that it's updated on a wekly basis.

[ 23 August 2001: Message edited by: The Guvnor ]

[fast cruiser]

Over the last year or so I have seen an airtours A320 in MME with a C registration
and it is Canadian flight crew judgeing by their accents over the RT, so what the hells going in especially for the wannabies!!!!

[OzDude]

Air 2000 have been bringing in wet leased Canadian a/c for years. They have been doing so because the law allows it and they also had an interest in the companies they leased the a/c from. They were also allowed to send their a/c to Canada for the quiet winter season although only for one of these years was the a/c allowed to go as a 'wet' lease with flight crew.

It never ceases to suprise me how many gullible types suddenly become all hgh and mighty as soon as they hear about wet leases. For those of you who may not be au fait with the links between Air 2000 and Canada 3000, they used to have identical livery as Air 2000s owners, First Choice, used to have large share in Signature Vacations, the Canadian company that was linked with Canada 3000.

Due to the cyclical nature of the IT industry here in the UK it has always been necessary to find extra work for the a/c during the quieter winter season. The companies have to strike a balance between having just enough a/c to cover the busy summer schedules and not to have a/c sitting idly during the winter. Air 2000 have always wet leased a/c during the summer period, mainly from Canada 3000 until a few years ago and then from Royal and also from an Egyptian company that First Choice own. They also wet lease a/c from bmi althought he record with their A321's have been a bit disappointing with many delays due to the poor level of dispatch reliability this year.

Watch out for people like the Guvnor who suddenly have another opinion on another pilot matter such as unions. Although only a wannabe airline executive, he absolutely loathes the idea of any pilots he dreams about employing belonging to BALPA which is why is so ready to advise everyone to join the IPA. A classic 'divide and rule' tactic used by management these days.

Any pilot with a reasonable level of intelligence knows that the IPA are not a union and have absolutely nowhere near the level of influence that BALPA has, both as an association of airline pilots and behind the scenes with the many organisations and lobbying to government. Unfortunately for BALPA, they do not blow their own trumpet in the right places because the tremendous amount of work that goes on behind the scenes is what is the real power of this union.

The IPA are not a union and do not have the influence but they certainly know how to make themselves known. What they are reknown for though is an excellent newsletter and advice for those seeking employment, but a union? Nowhere near that yet. I would be very worried as an IPA member if someone like the Guvnor, who is not even an airline pilot, was recommending the IPA.

Back to the topic though, whilst we all want to see less wet leasing of foreign a/c there is no way that for Air 2000 and many of the other UK IT operators it is used to avoid employing more pilots. It comes down to trying to balance the work available for the a/c on the register and the cyclical, seasonal nature of the industry. Air 2000 have been employing 40-50 pilots a year without any advertising and are also actively recruiting cadet pilots on a partial sponsorship scheme.

For the last few years and this coming winter too, Air 2000 will have at least one a/c if not more BASED in the US operating on behalf of a US holiday company WITH UK pilots so there is another little nugget that the Guvnor has not got quite right! They will also have three a/c kitted out in all first class operating round the world air cruises as well as a/c based in Argentina and possibly Canada with crews for the winter.

During the summer when the reqirement is for more a/c they will continue to wet lease foreign a/c if they can't get UK or European ones. The pilots are not too happy about this either but they realise that the company has to operate and make an overall profit and this seasonal transfer of a/c and crews one way or another is a fact of life in this industry.

As quoted above in an earlier post, the UK law has some giant loopholes in it and the Campaign Against Aviation have not the faintest idea how to deal with it except to bend to the demands of their real paymasters, the airlines themselves. At least Air 2000 have reciprocal agreements in place unlike some other airlines that only bring in wet leased a/c from the likes of Air Atlanta purely as a way of avoiding the investment in training enough of their own crews and using older, second rate a/c.

[The Guvnor]

You obviously haven't been taking your daily PPRuNe, OzDude or you'd know that the IPA has set up an offshoot which is a union - the IPF. (see IPA Post 1 (http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=015066) for more information and contact numbers.

Why do I support them? Simple. They actually seem to be doing something for pilots that don't work for BA - unlike the British Airways Line Pilots Association.

The aircraft that Air 2000 will have based in the US this winter will only be able to operate to destinations outside the USA; and all of the crew members are required to have US citizenship or green cards. Right? :D :rolleyes: :D

The problem with the IT market is this - do you equip yourself for the peak of peak season - which only spans a period of three months - in order not to have to lease in aircraft but which will leave you with a vast amount of excess capacity in the troughs; or do you equip for the troughs which means that you'll always be fully utilised but you'll see most of your peak season profits disappear into someone else's pockets as you have to wet lease in to cover the demand. Most airlines go for the middle ground.

[checkhauler]

Hey Guv!

Are you still aiming for April -02 as a start date for your airline? Let me know if you need a resume..

[alterego]

Hate to sound negative about someone who gets my money but BALPA are not doing as much as they should. I read both The Log and Skypointer and the IPA are much more vocal about flagging out than BALPA. Lets see if they change after the IPF is formed?

[ 23 August 2001: Message edited by: alterego ]

[Mert]

Me too Guv.
Hell if I might even find a couple of others out this way that would pitch in with me on an L1011 or two and wet lease them to you so's ya can get that airline of yours started.


Whatcha think cuz? :p

[wassup]

The Guvnor it is correct that the Icelandic aviation authority accepts FAA licences for Air Atlanta, but only because Air Atlanta pays(B****S) for it and for the ICAA to look in the other direction of a variety of other operational matters!!!
In other cases the ICAA does not accept FAA licences :mad:
Seeya :D :D :D

[The Guvnor]

Checkhauler, Mert - you're probably better off sending them to 411A as the CAA isn't too keen on FAA licences, unfortunately.

[faq]

fast cruiser,

It's been up in MME for the last 5 summers that I know of. There is also one at LBA. Some of the pilots are qualified to fly their Airbus 330 that arrived in MAN last winter (and returns this), so are resident in the UK year round.

Next summer two additional C reg A320's arrive in NCL, displacing the NCL based Airtours A320 pilots, who will now spend next summer in the back of taxi's covering other bases.

Since Roots, a schedule airline based in Canada that is an affiliate company to Skyservice who own the A320 you saw in MME, is no longer in operation, they now have 3 x A320, 2 x A330 and 1 x B727 surplus to their requirements.

Expect to see more C reg in the UK in future.

[Slick]

Ok, I will try this again because it matters, at Excel we are taking US pilots from Miami Air by the truckload (relatively speaking). We have one of their A/C this summer and they will have at least two of ours to cover their winter. Fine, that makes sense for everyone in the company, and other UK charter companys in the SHORT term, providing previous issues raised on this thread are resolved.

However, we were told earlier this year that we would be allowed to go to the US this winter. Things have gone awfully quiet since then, and I get the feeling that this promise (I use the term loosely) will not materialise. Various rumors are circulating about possible problems like immigration and training costs.

Why is it that a US pilot (and guys I have absolutely nothing against you) are issued a validation to fly in the UK, and yet this is not the case in the US for a Brit. I was told the other day that in order to fly for Miami Air this winter we would have to undergo a full B37 course, and the cost could be too high to justify sending pilots out to the US.

I have been told that immigration will not be a problem as the routes are international. However, the training costs are still a mystery to me. Can anyone enlighten me as to why a full course is required by the FAA ?.

Best rgds

[The Guvnor]

Yes, Slick - it's one of the (many) ways in which the US government through the FAA tries to deter foreign airlines from leasing aircraft to US carriers.

As you rightly say, the CAA hands out validations to FAA licence holders like sweeties (as long as they are flying US registered aircraft - its a different story if they want to fly UK ones) - whereas the FAA seemingly makes the process as hard as it can.

Dig around here FAA Website (http://www.faa.gov/aviation.htm) and I'm sure you can find all you need to know - along with all the answers to their exams!! :eek: :D :eek:

[Chutney]

I am an Air 2000 pilot born and bred in England with only a British passport and I can tell you that the guv does not know what he is talking about because I spent quite some time operating Air 2000 757s out of Detroit and other US locations last winter. The planes were Air 2000 and on the British register and we did not have to have green cards or special visas or FAA atpls.

Goes to to show you how some people brag about knowing everything but in reality are just enthusiastic amateurs with grandiose ideas about their own importance. I would also advise anyone sending their cv to the guv to do some digging into his background, including recent enquiries into his credit problems with regard to Amex and the Clydesdale bank. Also check into a pre adoptive name used by him to register as a company secretary whilst using his current name as MD of the same company. Too many fishy things here to trust this jack of all trades.

[Slick]

Chutney that sounds very positive, who were you operating for and what routes were you flying ?. Our A/C will be dry leased and obviously on the US register, I am still however at a loss as to why it apears to be a problem for Excel to get guys out there and not A2K/JMC + others. I understand that JMC pilots are flying 320's on the US register out of Boston this winter for Ryan. Anyone from JMC or know anyone from JMC please enlighten me as to what was realy required, so I can get my facts straight. I believe a few of our guys hold US ATPL's does this make any difference ?.

Best rgds

[Bof]

OzDude. 'Any pilot with a reasonable level of intelligence' DOES know that the IPA/IPF is now a union and has been campaigning very actively on the flagging out issue for several years in harness with BALPA. They have swamped MPs, John Prescott and the DETR
with a barrage of letters and objections, but it seems to be a case of 'why you no rissen'. Thanks for the plug Guvnor!

[basil fawlty]

Looking thru this thread it seems that the old hypocricies are coming out again. There is a lot of discussion here regarding specific aircraft lease arrangements, registration, etc. etc, but lets face it, all anyone is really interested in is the jobs flying said aircraft, wherever they be and whatever registration they are!! There are a number of CAA licenced pilots whinging about the fact that aircraft that are being wet leased in are being flown by non CAA licenced crew (God forbid!!), and are, as a result taking jobs that are "rightfully" theirs. Perhaps then, leaving the leasing issue aside for a few moments,it would be fair if all the foreign carriers that employ expatriate British flightcrew (and there are still many employing a considerable number of Brits out there)should revolk their validations and work permits and employ only homegrown or other foreign national talent instead, with all the said expats flocking home to take up jobs here?? Do I smell a double standard? As long as aircraft tech state and crew competance are acceptable then I see no problem with short term leasing in. It only becomes a problem if airlines start to become "virtual" companies, leasing in their entire fleet. Also, before anyone says it, lets not play the "foreign operators aren't as safe" card. Many foreign operators work to standards as high, and sometimes higher than CAA, (and have better accident/incident stats). Lastly, in case you are wondering, I have no axe to grind. I hold CAA & FAA licences, and have worked for both UK and overseas companies.

[batty_boy]

All well and good , but can i have my noney back for my uk atpl, cos i just didnt need it after all.
What i want to know is : Have all these foreign pilots ever done touch and goes in a 172 on the isle of white with an anal retentive RAF hasbeen for their gft , 'cos if they havent they shouldnt be going to corfu.
and while im at it the correct word for the number 0 is zero not "oh".Until they stop this abuse of our airwaves they should be grounded, and not allowed to bring in any more nylons or chocolate, or date our women while i'm out fighting the hun in the hold at some random greek island, and er........ad nauseum

[ 23 August 2001: Message edited by: batty_boy ]

[FREDA]

Everyone seems to want to knock Air Atlanta but I don't see any British companies willing or able to do what they do.

Air Atlanta Icelandic was started by a pilot who had the guts and vision to put his own money where his mouth was and go out and chase business wherever it may be. Most of the work they do in the UK market is seasonal. You fail to acknowledge that no company in the UK is willing or able to chase this competition. If you lot want the jobs, then try to do something positive about it rather than whinging.

[Dirty Harry]

This thread makes interesting reading, some of you have no problems with foreign pilots flying in the UK, some of you do, and some simply sit on the fence. It would horrify some of you to know the actual figures involved of foreign aircrew and foreign registrations operating in the UK this summer. Something else is that some of the crews are not just here for the summer, but are here on an ongoing basis. There is an advert looking for 767 crews in flight this week, and although the company concerned is not a US carrier they are still insistent upon either US citizenship, or residency, is this fair? FACT: I hold a UK ATPL, and 3 other professional licences including FAA, B737 TRI, with thousands of hours on type. The FAA has told me that in order to validate the B737 I need to do the following:

UK Licence to FAA

MEET THE REQUIRED EXPERIENCE.
FULL US ATPL GROUND SCHOOL (part 121)
FULL B737 GROUND SCHOOL COURSE.
B737 FLIGHT SIMULATOR AS REQUIRED.
FAA CHECK RIDE.
And if I wish to validate my TRI rating
FULL INSTRUCTOR GROUND SCHOOL.
FLIGHT TRAINING WITH A CFI.
CHECK RIDE.
B737 INSTRUCTOR CHECK RIDE.
NO TRE EXAMINER PRIVILAGES POSSIBLE.

After all this I can then fly a B737, and instruct in the simulator. (Assuming I can work there of course) By comparison this is my understanding of what a US pilot is required to do with similar qualifications.

USA Licence to UK validation

MEET THE REQUIRED EXPERIENCE.
SIT AN ABRIDGED AIR LAW EXAM.
PASS AN LPC.

Whilst I accept that the FAA licence is a little more practical based than the UK licence, and is a little faster to obtain, I ask you, is this a level playing field?

A previous contributor said that he had been flying in the US without going through the whole process. This is the case when flying UK registered aircraft, not so when it is US registered, crazy I know but that’s my understanding. Also not so when foreign pilots wish to fly UK registered aircraft. This will escalate to a point of no return if we do not collectively act on this very real problem now. Without any support from the government this will be difficult. The IPA deserves some serious support and recognition for their tremendous effort.
null

[The Guvnor]

Freda - actually, it was his wife's money! :D :D :D

Dirty Harry - don't forget that this doesn't just affect airlines ... there are also a sizeable number of US registered bizjets based in the UK and elsewhere in Europe.

On top of that, there are a few carriers - such as MK Airlines which are to all intents and purposes UK based but which continue to fly off of third world flags of convenience with poor maintenance and safety oversight that allow them to undercut EU cargo operators (such as CargoLion), putting them out of business.

[FREDA]

Well Guv, the man actually managed to operate his L1011s and made money at it. You of all people should appreciate the difficulty in accomplishing that.

[Mert]

Dirty Harry,
Let's look at it this way, a Pilot from Airline A has a B 757/767 type rating on their FAA ATP certificate and is a check airman with thousands of hours as pilot in command of both at his/or her current FAA certificated part 121 carrier in the US. Now this person decides to take a Pilot position with another FAA certificated part 121 carrier in the US, do they just sign on? No they don't, they must sith through training for the company they are going to work for, aircraft ground school, flight training, check ride, etc, etc, etc... as you listed. It could take anywhere from a month, to a couple or more months to complete this process for anyone US citizen or not, regardless of if they are currently doing the same job for another carrier or not. It would be nice if we could have one worldwide system and set standards accepted by all, but we all know it just is politically possible at this time.

[The Guvnor]

FREDA - absolutely! Of course it does help when funding comes from family rather than having to source it from outside. Incidentally, I set up their offshore crew management operation - which was subequently taken over by ACE when I moved to Africa - so I know the modus operandi there pretty well.

[Dirty Harry]

MERT –

Thank you for your valid comments and of course your statement regarding full training on joining an airline is correct. However, my post referred solely to obtaining a US licence and B737 type rating none of which involved any company check rides or training at all. Upon completion of the FAA requirements, the company requirements would then follow, assuming I could get employment in the first place, which seemed extremely unlikely. In the end I could see no benefit to obtaining a US ATP without the possibilities of being able to work with it.

[Wino]

Dirty harry,

You are correct, but what is the point of what you are saying because the required courses at all US airlines are the full ATP and Type rating given under the company umbrella, so you would still have to do the same amount of work.

After the Eastern Strike and the hiring of unqualified replacements in "short courses" there are NO SHORT COURSES ANYWHERE IN THE US. IF I get out of the cockpit of a 737 for airline x, I must still go through the ENTIRE program for airline y as a US citizen flying for a US airline. What you are asking for is a shortcut simply because you are a foreigner, that is not available to any US citizen. The license is really irrelevant because you cannot use it without completing the company courses unless you are looking to again exchange it with another country that doesn't take your British License. That is a practice that is also decried.

Cheers
Wino

[Slick]

Wino I think the point is this. If a UK airline has a tie-in with a US airline like us, then surley I or any of my colleuges should be able to go over to the US and fly for that airline with a minimum amount of fuss, just the same way as my US friends come over to us and fly.

I don't want to work for any old US airline this winter, just the one we are tied in with. At the moment cost and time look like this might be an impossibility. I don't think its an accident current regs are still in force.

Best rgds

[ 24 August 2001: Message edited by: Slick ]

[Wino]

Okay, I see what you are saying, and in the case of JMC at Ryan for example it is becoming increasingly possible.

The first step down the road was to harmonize the procedures and checkrides so that they are virtually identical between the two airlines. Airworld and Ryan were doing that but when those arrogant tossers at Flying Colours stuck their noses in they screwed it up for 2 more years. They are just finally unscrewing what that lot or morons did.

Anyway, then you cross qualify the checkairmen (which is currently going on) or else you have 2 checkairmen sit on one ride. Then you get 2 pieces of paper (One UK and one USA) and snap you are done.

The license is a seperate one time hurdle faced by both sides but once done, you are there, and it is very easily done as a newhire.

Incidentally there are NO visa requirements for operating in and out of the USA, even from a USA base. The only time a visa would be required would be for domestic services, unlike in the UK where we all had to get A.L.E's (handled by the company so transparent to the pilot).

But it requires planning and giving your overseas partner a voice in how you operate your aircraft.

Incidentally, you can run newhires through the simultaneous program as well, just makesure all boxes are ticked.

That lot down in Miami are a bunch of scabs and have multiple problems. One is the mentality, two is everyone knows about the mentality. Therefore nothing will move quickly for them, and the normal pace of the FAA/CAA is glacial at best.

Cheers
Wino

[Dirty Harry]

WINO - Perhaps you could expand on your comment: Incidentally there are NO visa requirements for operating in and out of the USA, even from a USA base. This is not consistent with the recent flight advertisement, (refer to my earlier post), in which despite the carrier being non US, and not operating as far as I am aware domestic services, it is only open to US citizens or green card holders to apply. Not quite a level playing field I would suggest .

[Slick]

Wino thanks, I guess if all you say is true (and I have no reason to doubt), that has put the final nail in the coffin as far as this winters concerned; and at the rate we appear to be 'harmonizing', next as well.

Would appriciate an e-mail from you to explain your comments on Miami Air. Don't really want to go into a public airline trashing session.

All the best

[The Guvnor]

Slick - what he means is that Miami Air was set up by former Eastern pilots that ignored the IAM picket lines and tried to keep their company in business.

Unfortunately, due to arrogance and pigheadedness on the part of both management and the unions, they failed.

[Wino]

Dirty Harry,

It is called a D visa and it is automatically issued to airline crews that are operating in and out but not in and in for America

It is the same visa that every single JMC pilot used. But it is not a visa that requires any sort of application or whatnot. Just showing up is all that it takes.

However, if you operate 1 leg inside the US, the picks up AND drops off passangers then you need the green card. You could pick up pax in LAX, go to JFK and pick up more pax (as long as no revenue pax get off, change of crew is okay) and then continue on to Europe. No Green card/work permit required.

A D visa is NOT the same as a green card or work permit. But neither is required in the above situation.

If they are restricting it to Green card and work permits only and they are only flying international service, then that is simply the choice of the company involved and not a matter of regulation. It would seam that they are doing what you would want to demand that the British carriers do. Maybe they just got more character, or a better supply of warm bodies.

Cheers
Wino