UAE offers to extend Forces' stay in exchange for more Canadian flights
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except that EK does not bring NEW passengers to Canada. All those people and their relatives will fly regardless. The only difference is that instead of Mumbai-DXB-YYZ they will fly Mumbai-FRA-YYZ etc. If the come from one of the smaller centres they may have an extra stop above what EK would offer them.
Air Canada does not need protecting--EK wants to eat away at the income that other airlines currently have to the detriment of the Canadian economy.
The claim that they bring money into the economy - at least at the levels they claim - is plain false. It is just a redistribution of the money.
Air Canada does not need protecting--EK wants to eat away at the income that other airlines currently have to the detriment of the Canadian economy.
The claim that they bring money into the economy - at least at the levels they claim - is plain false. It is just a redistribution of the money.
Well, thanks for making a coherent and reasoned argument Trader, and I do take a lot of what you say onboard.
I think you over-state it when you assume that the availability of better, more direct services that EK can provide would not stimulate more traffic, with ecconomic gains all round. It assumes it is a zero-sum game, which virtualy no market is in reality.
I think you over-state it when you assume that the availability of better, more direct services that EK can provide would not stimulate more traffic, with ecconomic gains all round. It assumes it is a zero-sum game, which virtualy no market is in reality.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wiz,
What exactly WERE you trying to say with your reference to FTL's then? I'm glad we agree that crews are tired. Can we also agree that the trends of the past year or so are only exacerbating the problem, not mitigating it?
I also agree that no economic action operates as a zero-sum game. So how can it be argued that there would be no impact to Canada's own operators if Emirates expands, and then say that there is no such thing as a zero-sum game! Which is it? It is precisely for that reason I do not wish to see Emirates gain at the expense of a country with things like labour laws, human rights protections, a robust legal system, etc. Because Emirates unmistakably benefits from these "advantages", operating as they do in a unelected dictatorship.
As far as the subcontinent pax, my only point is that they represent a large majority of the traffic, but a small minority of Canadians. It is hardly the crisis of choice it's being made out to be for the vast majority of Canadians. Most Canadians don't know about or care about Dubai, other than they are starting to discover what a financial and environmental disaster it is.
The bottom line is, it is not the mandate of the Canadian government to protect the commercial interests of Emirates Airline.
Besides, the debate about protectionism or economic gain or loss hardly interests me. It's the extortionist tactics EK is using, basically trying to blackmail their way into getting what they want. We see it all the time in our own dealings as employees, the bullying. It's ingrained in the culture, so it would be nice to see someone stand up to them.
What exactly WERE you trying to say with your reference to FTL's then? I'm glad we agree that crews are tired. Can we also agree that the trends of the past year or so are only exacerbating the problem, not mitigating it?
I also agree that no economic action operates as a zero-sum game. So how can it be argued that there would be no impact to Canada's own operators if Emirates expands, and then say that there is no such thing as a zero-sum game! Which is it? It is precisely for that reason I do not wish to see Emirates gain at the expense of a country with things like labour laws, human rights protections, a robust legal system, etc. Because Emirates unmistakably benefits from these "advantages", operating as they do in a unelected dictatorship.
As far as the subcontinent pax, my only point is that they represent a large majority of the traffic, but a small minority of Canadians. It is hardly the crisis of choice it's being made out to be for the vast majority of Canadians. Most Canadians don't know about or care about Dubai, other than they are starting to discover what a financial and environmental disaster it is.
The bottom line is, it is not the mandate of the Canadian government to protect the commercial interests of Emirates Airline.
Besides, the debate about protectionism or economic gain or loss hardly interests me. It's the extortionist tactics EK is using, basically trying to blackmail their way into getting what they want. We see it all the time in our own dealings as employees, the bullying. It's ingrained in the culture, so it would be nice to see someone stand up to them.
Nolimit,
It was you who brought up fatigue, saying it was a reason Canada shouldn't increase EKs rights. My point was, if that was the case, they should ALSO not allow US regionals, or flights from many parts of Europe, as they have far worse FTLs than EK. I agree it's a non issue- but it's one you brought up!!
There was only ever going to be a small percentage of the Canadian population traveling on Emirates or any airline. Why should the fact that are largely of one ethnic grouping decrease the percieved advantage of giving them access to a better service? Would it be fair to curtail services to, say, Germany, because most of the Canadians utilising the service are of German origin? It is a service that benefits Canadians, so that is a plus for Canada.
Err- you may not quite understand the concept of "Zero-sum". In this context it means that the business Emirates attracts does not necessarily come from depleting Canadian operators of their current market as it will stimulate more customers. I'm not naieve enough to think it would have no imopact on Air Canada, but the suggestion was that ALL the trafic emirates would get would be at the expense of other operators (i.e a fixed amount of market- therefore zero sum)
As to "Extortionist tactics" well, firstly it's not EK but rather the UAE government that is putting the pressure on Canada. Trade agreements are very often linked to defense deals and no end of other political machinations.
But then, you're not interested in the economics- you'd just like to see it stuck to EK- Thus missing a chance to increase growth and profits, putting upward pressure on our pay and conditions and speeding promotion for the FOs.
That doesn't realy help, does it?
It was you who brought up fatigue, saying it was a reason Canada shouldn't increase EKs rights. My point was, if that was the case, they should ALSO not allow US regionals, or flights from many parts of Europe, as they have far worse FTLs than EK. I agree it's a non issue- but it's one you brought up!!
There was only ever going to be a small percentage of the Canadian population traveling on Emirates or any airline. Why should the fact that are largely of one ethnic grouping decrease the percieved advantage of giving them access to a better service? Would it be fair to curtail services to, say, Germany, because most of the Canadians utilising the service are of German origin? It is a service that benefits Canadians, so that is a plus for Canada.
Err- you may not quite understand the concept of "Zero-sum". In this context it means that the business Emirates attracts does not necessarily come from depleting Canadian operators of their current market as it will stimulate more customers. I'm not naieve enough to think it would have no imopact on Air Canada, but the suggestion was that ALL the trafic emirates would get would be at the expense of other operators (i.e a fixed amount of market- therefore zero sum)
As to "Extortionist tactics" well, firstly it's not EK but rather the UAE government that is putting the pressure on Canada. Trade agreements are very often linked to defense deals and no end of other political machinations.
But then, you're not interested in the economics- you'd just like to see it stuck to EK- Thus missing a chance to increase growth and profits, putting upward pressure on our pay and conditions and speeding promotion for the FOs.
That doesn't realy help, does it?
Interesting....
A spot check for flights from YYZ to BOM today on Amadeus.net shows, in price order, the following:
1. Etihad
2. British Airways
3. Lufthansa
4. Delta
5. Jet Airways
6. Air Canada
7. Air France
8. KLM
It's no surprise that Emirates gets no mention, as it is not flying from Toronto today.
There is quite a bit of competition on that one route and if you are on a budget, AC won't get a look in.
One the biggest hurdles is the Star Alliance. They would be fighting tooth and nail to keep EK out. I suspect that between them, the unions and AC, The middle east airlines don't stand a chance.
halas
A spot check for flights from YYZ to BOM today on Amadeus.net shows, in price order, the following:
1. Etihad
2. British Airways
3. Lufthansa
4. Delta
5. Jet Airways
6. Air Canada
7. Air France
8. KLM
It's no surprise that Emirates gets no mention, as it is not flying from Toronto today.
There is quite a bit of competition on that one route and if you are on a budget, AC won't get a look in.
One the biggest hurdles is the Star Alliance. They would be fighting tooth and nail to keep EK out. I suspect that between them, the unions and AC, The middle east airlines don't stand a chance.
halas
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiz--I agree and see that we're on the same page. It is not a zero-sum proposition but the arguement then stems around whether the increase in pax and the revenue they bring is higher than losses elsewhere. I certainly don't believe the EK numbers 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: dubai
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiz,
You mentioned that US regionals and flights from many parts of Europe have far worse FTL's than EK. That is utter BS.
Then you go on to state something about curtailing service to Germany, while trying to equate that to the sub-continent. Either of these might be a service that benefits a proportion of one ethnic group, but does it benefit Canada overall? Sometimes a benefit to a minority group is actually a detriment to a country.
Then you state that ''it's not EK but rather the UAE government that is putting pressure on Canada''. You obviously don't understand how the UAE, Emirates and the vast list of government controlled entities work in this country. That simple sentence on your part should adequately explain your predisposition regarding this topic.
THEN, you make the suggestion that NoLimit is only concerned about his up-grade possibilities and amazingly you have tried to connect his viewpoints to that assumption. That is a mind-boggling assumption on your part and indicates that perhaps YOU have the hidden agenda.
I have rarely talked to a Canuck who spoke highly of Air Canada and probably for good reason. By all accounts AC is not a great airline and they probably deserve to have EK infringe upon their domain, but there is no denying that this is extortion on the part of Emirates Airlines (aka, the UAE government).
Doesn't the UAE have a vested interest in what is going on in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran? If the UAE has a heartache with Canadian involvement in those arenas of conflict, then kick out the Canucks from their airbase. But instead they are using it as a bargaining tool because they realize the Canadian government is under some pressure from its allies.
Canada is a heartbeat away from being raped and pillaged by Emirates airline, similar to the outcome of Australia. Damn, I want to fly to Vancouver and Calgary as much an anyone, but for the sake of Canada, I hope they tell the UAE to go #*&%^# themselves.
ps. If I had predicted which country would have allowed such abuses, I would have chosen Canada and not Australia. It still amazes me to this day how EK has been allowed to take advantage of OZ to such an extent.
You mentioned that US regionals and flights from many parts of Europe have far worse FTL's than EK. That is utter BS.
Then you go on to state something about curtailing service to Germany, while trying to equate that to the sub-continent. Either of these might be a service that benefits a proportion of one ethnic group, but does it benefit Canada overall? Sometimes a benefit to a minority group is actually a detriment to a country.
Then you state that ''it's not EK but rather the UAE government that is putting pressure on Canada''. You obviously don't understand how the UAE, Emirates and the vast list of government controlled entities work in this country. That simple sentence on your part should adequately explain your predisposition regarding this topic.
THEN, you make the suggestion that NoLimit is only concerned about his up-grade possibilities and amazingly you have tried to connect his viewpoints to that assumption. That is a mind-boggling assumption on your part and indicates that perhaps YOU have the hidden agenda.
I have rarely talked to a Canuck who spoke highly of Air Canada and probably for good reason. By all accounts AC is not a great airline and they probably deserve to have EK infringe upon their domain, but there is no denying that this is extortion on the part of Emirates Airlines (aka, the UAE government).
Doesn't the UAE have a vested interest in what is going on in Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran? If the UAE has a heartache with Canadian involvement in those arenas of conflict, then kick out the Canucks from their airbase. But instead they are using it as a bargaining tool because they realize the Canadian government is under some pressure from its allies.
Canada is a heartbeat away from being raped and pillaged by Emirates airline, similar to the outcome of Australia. Damn, I want to fly to Vancouver and Calgary as much an anyone, but for the sake of Canada, I hope they tell the UAE to go #*&%^# themselves.
ps. If I had predicted which country would have allowed such abuses, I would have chosen Canada and not Australia. It still amazes me to this day how EK has been allowed to take advantage of OZ to such an extent.
Mensa
No, it isn't. A two-man crew can be scheduled for a 16hr, multi-sector duty day after an 8hr rest period under FAA part 121. Look it up. Cap 271 is one of the most restrictive FTLs in Europe.
Quite right. It is of course a matter of weighing total benefit. Allowing a portion of your population access to a service they want is a benefit. If that causes and ecconomic hardship to others, that is a detriment. It is a matter of weghing the pro with the cons.
Umm...I would expect someone claiming MENSA intelligence to have better reading comprehension. I have no idea if Nolimit is a Captain or an FO, and made no suggestion regarding HIS upgrade. I said that growth and profit by the company speeds EVERY F/Os upgrade. Amazingly you have been able to read a sentence and completely invert its clear meaning. Perhaps some remedial english should be on YOUR agenda, hidden or otherwise!!
Yes, probably. But no more so than China making threats against the US unless they drop Tire tarriffs. International trade is very often robust to the point of nastyness. I hope your next job is in some Utopia where that isn't the case.
Australia? You mean the place with a stable, growing ecconomy that never went into recestion, a rising standard of living and proffitable airline and tourist sectors? Yes, Canad better be carful not to fall into THAT trap!
Perth citizens can get on an EK aircraft and, with one stop, be virtually anywhere in Europe, the sub-continebt or Africa. They just HATE being taken advantage of like that...
You mentioned that US regionals and flights from many parts of Europe have far worse FTL's than EK. That is utter BS.
Either of these might be a service that benefits a proportion of one ethnic group, but does it benefit Canada overall? Sometimes a benefit to a minority group is actually a detriment to a country.
THEN, you make the suggestion that NoLimit is only concerned about his up-grade possibilities and amazingly you have tried to connect his viewpoints to that assumption. That is a mind-boggling assumption on your part and indicates that perhaps YOU have the hidden agenda.
I have rarely talked to a Canuck who spoke highly of Air Canada and probably for good reason. By all accounts AC is not a great airline and they probably deserve to have EK infringe upon their domain, but there is no denying that this is extortion on the part of Emirates Airlines (aka, the UAE government).
Canada is a heartbeat away from being raped and pillaged by Emirates airline, similar to the outcome of Australia.
It still amazes me to this day how EK has been allowed to take advantage of OZ to such an extent.
Wiz--I agree and see that we're on the same page. It is not a zero-sum proposition but the arguement then stems around whether the increase in pax and the revenue they bring is higher than losses elsewhere. I certainly don't believe the EK numbers
Of course both sides are going to puh their own barrow, but as a principle, free trade usually produces more positive results than protectionism.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wiz,
my goodness how you do twist words. I didn't mention fatigue specifically as a reason to exclude EK flights from Canada, I only included the "exhausted crew and and pilots" as a description of any given EK flight these days. I do stand by that description.
And you do seem to talk out of both sides of your mouth. My whole point about a MINORITY benefitting from increase access it that generally, democratic principle has majority interests taking higher priority than that of a small minority. It is being painted as a major issue to Canadians - it is not, to most!
Do I want to "stick it" to EK? Hardly. But I do disagree with your statement that increased profits will put upward pressure on conditions. We made a paltry few hundred million profit last year, how much was your cheque again? As far as the upgrades, it doesn't apply to me personally but those goalposts are moved on a whim as well, so hardly motivation to cheer EK on to greater profits for that either. Quite frankly after seeing the employees bullied endlessly, I'm not sure why you would defend their same tactics in the international arena. Different set of values I suppose, whatever.
Oh and trying to link Australia's economic success with EK's expansion there is laughable. Try a resource-based economy and a voracious neighbour China next door for starters.
Anyway I give up. You seem determined to be a relentless cheerleader for EK no matter what the issue, so not much point in discussing further.
my goodness how you do twist words. I didn't mention fatigue specifically as a reason to exclude EK flights from Canada, I only included the "exhausted crew and and pilots" as a description of any given EK flight these days. I do stand by that description.
And you do seem to talk out of both sides of your mouth. My whole point about a MINORITY benefitting from increase access it that generally, democratic principle has majority interests taking higher priority than that of a small minority. It is being painted as a major issue to Canadians - it is not, to most!
Do I want to "stick it" to EK? Hardly. But I do disagree with your statement that increased profits will put upward pressure on conditions. We made a paltry few hundred million profit last year, how much was your cheque again? As far as the upgrades, it doesn't apply to me personally but those goalposts are moved on a whim as well, so hardly motivation to cheer EK on to greater profits for that either. Quite frankly after seeing the employees bullied endlessly, I'm not sure why you would defend their same tactics in the international arena. Different set of values I suppose, whatever.
Oh and trying to link Australia's economic success with EK's expansion there is laughable. Try a resource-based economy and a voracious neighbour China next door for starters.
Anyway I give up. You seem determined to be a relentless cheerleader for EK no matter what the issue, so not much point in discussing further.
Nolimit,
Sorry you feel that way.
I agreed with you that fatique is an issue at EK, and a non issue in this particular argument. I saimply pointed out that you mentioned tired crews as a part of your position, and wanted to point out that is by no means restricted to Emirates.
I also agree that governments should do the best by their Citizens. A minority of Canadians work for AC. Depriving the entire population of access to desired services in order to protect one company does not achieve that. Certainly the overall benefits of a more liberal Aviation policy should be weighed against the ecconomic impact. Most places with liberalised markets have shown a net benefit to the majority as a result.
You like to employ logical fallacies in your arguments. The good old false analogy- because I agree with EK gaining access to the Canadian market I must be a relentless sycophant for EK.
A lot of what EK has done in the last two years has been reprehensible, immoral, and ultimatley counter-productive. That doesn't mean that the companies continues success will not be ultimatley more beneficial to it's employees than its failure.
I did not say Australias success was because of EK (Another strawman there). But it DOES have a lot to do with liberalised markets. EKs access to Australia is an example of that, and the companies investment in Australia has been substantial as a result.
Now square these two statements:-
and
They seeem contradictory to me....
Sorry you feel that way.
I agreed with you that fatique is an issue at EK, and a non issue in this particular argument. I saimply pointed out that you mentioned tired crews as a part of your position, and wanted to point out that is by no means restricted to Emirates.
I also agree that governments should do the best by their Citizens. A minority of Canadians work for AC. Depriving the entire population of access to desired services in order to protect one company does not achieve that. Certainly the overall benefits of a more liberal Aviation policy should be weighed against the ecconomic impact. Most places with liberalised markets have shown a net benefit to the majority as a result.
You like to employ logical fallacies in your arguments. The good old false analogy- because I agree with EK gaining access to the Canadian market I must be a relentless sycophant for EK.
A lot of what EK has done in the last two years has been reprehensible, immoral, and ultimatley counter-productive. That doesn't mean that the companies continues success will not be ultimatley more beneficial to it's employees than its failure.
I did not say Australias success was because of EK (Another strawman there). But it DOES have a lot to do with liberalised markets. EKs access to Australia is an example of that, and the companies investment in Australia has been substantial as a result.
Now square these two statements:-
Besides, the debate about protectionism or economic gain or loss hardly interests me. It's the extortionist tactics EK is using, basically trying to blackmail their way into getting what they want. We see it all the time in our own dealings as employees, the bullying. It's ingrained in the culture, so it would be nice to see someone stand up to them.
Do I want to "stick it" to EK? Hardly.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Canada
Age: 54
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I give Stephen Harper credit on this issue. Finally someone had some balls to stand up and back Canadian aviation. Screw fairness sometimes. He is looking after Canadian's(Air Canada) for a change. Good on you Stephen Harper!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UAE
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything that will hasten the demise of Air Canada is good in my books. They have been protected by the Canadian government since their inception. Its about time they went away.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Canada would do well to look at what has happened in Australia (as mentioned earlier in the thread). Canada is an "end of the line" market, as is Oz. Although there is some 'destination' traffic (pure tourists), the vast majority of international pax are citizens heading out for tourism and returning, or VFRs.
In oz, there are two distinct groups who won/lost. There is no doubt that the appearance of ME carriers has given ozzies much more choice, more direct flight options (or at least less stops), and put pricing pressure on fares. There can be no doubt that there ARE MORE PEOPLE FLYING because of their appearance. Even though QF has remained profitable, it is a shadow of it's former self. It certainly has not GROWN- ie the pie has gotten bigger, but QF's share is smaller. But the prospects for a young person to get a flying a job? The T&Cs of pilots across the industry? Allowing open slather has ramifications for those IN THE INDUSTRY, and how that affects the COUNTRY as a whole, is IMHO, yet to be seen (fully). It really is globalisation in action.
It would certainly have been interesting to see what would've happened if QF had've aggressively tried to retain market share against the likes of EK with it's superior network, cost base (due to many things already mentioned; it would be a very interesting analysis if the people at AC put forward their own study which quantified the competitive advantaged gained when a foreign carrier does not have the same minimum wages/FTLs/unionised workforce {with all the inherent advantages/disadvantages/costs that brings}) etc. etc.
Very interesting indeed.
In oz, there are two distinct groups who won/lost. There is no doubt that the appearance of ME carriers has given ozzies much more choice, more direct flight options (or at least less stops), and put pricing pressure on fares. There can be no doubt that there ARE MORE PEOPLE FLYING because of their appearance. Even though QF has remained profitable, it is a shadow of it's former self. It certainly has not GROWN- ie the pie has gotten bigger, but QF's share is smaller. But the prospects for a young person to get a flying a job? The T&Cs of pilots across the industry? Allowing open slather has ramifications for those IN THE INDUSTRY, and how that affects the COUNTRY as a whole, is IMHO, yet to be seen (fully). It really is globalisation in action.
It would certainly have been interesting to see what would've happened if QF had've aggressively tried to retain market share against the likes of EK with it's superior network, cost base (due to many things already mentioned; it would be a very interesting analysis if the people at AC put forward their own study which quantified the competitive advantaged gained when a foreign carrier does not have the same minimum wages/FTLs/unionised workforce {with all the inherent advantages/disadvantages/costs that brings}) etc. etc.
Very interesting indeed.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: out there somewhere...
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To TOGALK
So if you get your wish and AC fails? What or who would you propose to replace them with? Lower the bar even further why don't we? Let's put thousands out of work, in Canada and elsewhere, then screw over those who would actually want to work for the company, and allow a complete destruction of what's left of the industry by those who would try to fill the void...not defending AC by the way, but curious to know how much knowledge you might have of how various governments negotiate (key word) for the rights to their airspace? So back to my initial question...does Canada let their flag carrier lose out because some other airline wants more access? I think you know the answer.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: gutter
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would Canada give away the upper hand? EK has been itching for these routes for awhile and all they have to back it with is a self sponsored financial coloring book.
UAE is not going to renew a lease on an airbase? Good, f(*k yourself and they can use Doha and then give Qatar the routes....See how it works?!
UAE has SFA to offer Canada, I think they need the money more than Canada needs the base.
Heres a Canadian counter offer:
Rename that little swamp the "Canadian Gulf" and maybe I'll entertain talking to you, now F^&k off...the hockey game is on.
UAE is not going to renew a lease on an airbase? Good, f(*k yourself and they can use Doha and then give Qatar the routes....See how it works?!
UAE has SFA to offer Canada, I think they need the money more than Canada needs the base.
Heres a Canadian counter offer:
Rename that little swamp the "Canadian Gulf" and maybe I'll entertain talking to you, now F^&k off...the hockey game is on.
