US Congress Moves to Block Norwegian Longhaul from US Expansion
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Congress Moves to Block Norwegian Longhaul from US Expansion
ALPA Lauds U.S. House Action to Block Federal Transportation Funds from Skewing Marketplace against U.S. Airlines
Would Block U.S. Foreign Air Carrier Permits for Flag-of-Convenience Models Such As NAI
WASHINGTON––The Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l (ALPA) commends an amendment passed unanimously by voice vote today by the U.S. House of Representatives that would help safeguard the U.S. airline industry’s ability to compete on a level playing field by making certain that federal transportation funds are not used to grant foreign airlines that violate U.S. law or the U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement access to U.S. markets.
“Thanks to the tremendous leadership of Rep. Westmoreland and Rep. DeFazio, this amendment specifically prohibits shopping for cheap labor and simply requires the Department of Transportation to follow the law and provisions agreed to in the U.S.-EU Transport Agreement,” said Capt. Lee Moak, ALPA’s president. “Congress has a responsibility to make sure that U.S. airlines do business in a fair marketplace and that the U.S. government’s transportation funds don’t hand an advantage to foreign airlines that try to cheat the system.”
Introduced by Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), the amendment to the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 (H.R. 4745) stipulates that none of the funds in the bill may be used to approve a foreign air carrier permit or application “where such approval would contravene United States law or Article 17 bis of the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement.”
The amendment passed today would prevent the Department of Transportation from approving Norwegian Air International’s (NAI) foreign air carrier permit application because the airline’s operations would contradict the U.S.–EU Air Transport Agreement, which specifically prohibits any efforts to undermine labor standards.
Despite the fact that Norwegian Air Shuttle, NAI’s parent company, has centered its operations in Norway and that NAI does not plan to fly to or from Ireland, the company has gained permission from Ireland to operate its long-haul flights as an Irish airline expressly to avoid Norway’s employment laws. With an Irish air operator certificate, NAI will outsource its flight crews through a Singapore employment company using individual contracts with wages well below those of the company’s Norway-based employees.
“By passing this amendment that blocks the Norwegian Air International scheme and any similar bid to contravene the U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement, the U.S. House has taken a strong stand for fair competition for U.S. airlines,” said Capt. Moak. “We urge the U.S. Senate to support the U.S. House position and send a clear signal that Congress is committed to ensuring U.S. airlines and their employees do business on a level playing field.”
Founded in 1931, ALPA is the world’s largest pilot union, representing more than 51,000 pilots at 32 airlines in the United States and Canada.
Would Block U.S. Foreign Air Carrier Permits for Flag-of-Convenience Models Such As NAI
WASHINGTON––The Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l (ALPA) commends an amendment passed unanimously by voice vote today by the U.S. House of Representatives that would help safeguard the U.S. airline industry’s ability to compete on a level playing field by making certain that federal transportation funds are not used to grant foreign airlines that violate U.S. law or the U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement access to U.S. markets.
“Thanks to the tremendous leadership of Rep. Westmoreland and Rep. DeFazio, this amendment specifically prohibits shopping for cheap labor and simply requires the Department of Transportation to follow the law and provisions agreed to in the U.S.-EU Transport Agreement,” said Capt. Lee Moak, ALPA’s president. “Congress has a responsibility to make sure that U.S. airlines do business in a fair marketplace and that the U.S. government’s transportation funds don’t hand an advantage to foreign airlines that try to cheat the system.”
Introduced by Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), the amendment to the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 (H.R. 4745) stipulates that none of the funds in the bill may be used to approve a foreign air carrier permit or application “where such approval would contravene United States law or Article 17 bis of the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement.”
The amendment passed today would prevent the Department of Transportation from approving Norwegian Air International’s (NAI) foreign air carrier permit application because the airline’s operations would contradict the U.S.–EU Air Transport Agreement, which specifically prohibits any efforts to undermine labor standards.
Despite the fact that Norwegian Air Shuttle, NAI’s parent company, has centered its operations in Norway and that NAI does not plan to fly to or from Ireland, the company has gained permission from Ireland to operate its long-haul flights as an Irish airline expressly to avoid Norway’s employment laws. With an Irish air operator certificate, NAI will outsource its flight crews through a Singapore employment company using individual contracts with wages well below those of the company’s Norway-based employees.
“By passing this amendment that blocks the Norwegian Air International scheme and any similar bid to contravene the U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement, the U.S. House has taken a strong stand for fair competition for U.S. airlines,” said Capt. Moak. “We urge the U.S. Senate to support the U.S. House position and send a clear signal that Congress is committed to ensuring U.S. airlines and their employees do business on a level playing field.”
Founded in 1931, ALPA is the world’s largest pilot union, representing more than 51,000 pilots at 32 airlines in the United States and Canada.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
With an Irish air operator certificate, NAI will outsource its flight crews through a Singapore employment company using individual contracts with wages well below those of the company’s Norway-based employees.
Now, if we can just repatriate all those Norwegians flying in the U.S. Just kidding, TowerDog.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the US should be asking some severe questions from the Irish. If this action had been in UK then I expect a parliamentary committee would be putting the spotlight on the CAA & NAI. I wonder if any senate committee has the right to ask the IAA "what the hell it thinks it is doing approving such an arrangement in violation of the US-EU agreement."
The answer might be toe-curling and fun to watch.
The answer might be toe-curling and fun to watch.
Nope, me neither 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any regulator that attracts Italian, Baltic and Russian operators because their own regulators aren't pliant enough makes me suspicious.
Last edited by Aluminium shuffler; 10th Jun 2014 at 19:25.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done!
You can count me in on those who approve of NAI being denied access to US destinations. I hope they will also be denied access to Europe for the same reasons, but I doubt it - our spineless regulators are bullies. They play hard until you push them - then they give in. But the reality is, if you want a European airline then you have to have European employment contracts (Mikey the Pikey take note - not sub-contractors!) for all of your employees. NAI's only connection with Norway is money and name. Everything else is Asian. But what really grips me is that the Irish allowed this! Shame on them!
Aluminium shuffler
You should be carefull what you write about the IAA ...after I criticised them last year I recieved a letter from the revenue investigation branch....
I wouldn't dare say anything else even when I read an aaiu reprt that talked about wind over the wing ;-(
I wouldn't dare say anything else even when I read an aaiu reprt that talked about wind over the wing ;-(
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully support and applaud the US House of Representatives in this action. The business plan for this blatant " flag-of-convenience " airline , NAI is nothing but predatory , unfair , unjust and would result in permanently changing the airline industry for the worse. Hopefully soon it will be illegal. Shame on the Irish CAA.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If NLH decides to pull back, makes you wonder if Ryanair would step into the clearly successful market NLH has tapped. I have heard load factors are very high on the vast majority of NLH flights to the States - clearly a market exists. And nobody could stop Ryanair from that expansion because it would be legal - they just need the airplanes and the landing slots (depending upon which airports they would select)...
NLH might have been a good test case for Ryanair's future entry.
NLH might have been a good test case for Ryanair's future entry.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 outcomes
1) the Americans grant route licence
2) the Irish revoke NAI AOC
3) Fudge NAI give the Americans assurance over crew nationalities/contracts
Either way it won't stop NAI flying from Scandinavia to the USA
2) the Irish revoke NAI AOC
3) Fudge NAI give the Americans assurance over crew nationalities/contracts
Either way it won't stop NAI flying from Scandinavia to the USA
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iver:
The US has thousands of airports typical of Ryan stops in the EU. Just might have to pave some of 'em.
And nobody could stop Ryanair from that expansion because it would be legal - they just need the airplanes and the landing slots (depending upon which airports they would select)...
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I agree with the sentiment of this thread, it makes me chuckle that the good old USA cry anti competition.
Chapter 11
FEDEX in Europe?
. “Congress has a responsibility to make sure that U.S. airlines do business in a fair marketplace and that the U.S. government’s transportation funds don’t hand an advantage to foreign airlines that try to cheat the system.”/QUOTE]
Oh please!!!
Chapter 11
FEDEX in Europe?
. “Congress has a responsibility to make sure that U.S. airlines do business in a fair marketplace and that the U.S. government’s transportation funds don’t hand an advantage to foreign airlines that try to cheat the system.”/QUOTE]
Oh please!!!
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: 30 West
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FedEx in Europe is not Americas doing and has nothing to do with Norwegian. America are well within their rights to block "unique" set ups as is Europe. If Europe cannot be bothered that is there problem. I also suspect FedEx use American or European contracts not Asian?
How do these Far East crews manage to get work visas for the EU? Have Norwegian provided evidence that they cannot recruit suitably qualified staff from within the EU?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Back of Beyond
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Groundloop, evidently they sadly can't.
At least, for the peanuts that they're willing to pay. The race to the bottom continues...
Stand by for some smoking holes in the ground...
At least, for the peanuts that they're willing to pay. The race to the bottom continues...
Stand by for some smoking holes in the ground...
Last edited by Flying Clog; 12th Jun 2014 at 12:09.
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
Now, if we can just repatriate all those Norwegians flying in the U.S. Just kidding, TowerDog.
Have grown used to the lazy Amercian lifestyle, working 8 days/40 hrs per month and goofing off for the remainder.
They may be flying the Flag, but really a scam with outsourcing and shaky "contracts" put together by lawyers laying awake at night trying to think of the next loophole.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ticket prices with norwegian from bangkok to oslo, or stockholm, started around 170 euro last time I checked (one way, including taxes and fees, but no meals, no seat reservation, no checked-in luggage, just taxes and the mandatory credit card fee). It's obvious that at a starting price of 170 euro for long-haul from asia to europe they might not offer the best employment conditions. A shiny 787, but...they gotta save somewhere.
Last edited by deptrai; 12th Jun 2014 at 14:14.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Philippines and UK
Age: 77
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possible Fourth option
LNIDA
Hinted at above,
Surely a "paper exercise" between M. O' L and Norwegian - "Ryanair Long Haul" subbing in Norwegian to operate the flights, bit of blue and yellow paint etc or some other superficial arrangement and the US would have to allow, or face serious and costly repercussions.
Hinted at above,
Surely a "paper exercise" between M. O' L and Norwegian - "Ryanair Long Haul" subbing in Norwegian to operate the flights, bit of blue and yellow paint etc or some other superficial arrangement and the US would have to allow, or face serious and costly repercussions.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well bank angle i have learnt never to say never, but can't see it, more likely is MOL snapping up EK unwanted A350XWB's
I have no idea how the law stands on this one, the US/EU open skies allows any airline of either state to fly between any city pairs, at least that's the idea, it thought that this would encourage more airlines to fly more services, improve choice and result in lower fares, the result was the opposite, most US carriers still provide shoddy customer service and charge way to much compared with similar track mileages within the US
To be fair BA stand out as one airline who have not joined the anti Norwegian band wagon and that's probably because they know Norwegian are a bigger threat to US carries than BA who provide a far better service than the US airlines.
With 3 weeks to go until services start from LGW with 10's of thousands of tickets sold & 1000's of connecting tickets sold, plus all the accommodation pre booked i can't see this not happening, if the US were going to block this on valid legal or safety grounds they would have done so by now.
For those in the US reading this, you are right to have concerns over Norwegian's expansion into the US market, but for the wrong reasons, this is a very safety conscious airline that has won award after award throughout Europe for customer service, satisfaction and innovation.
Flying clog
Smoking holes? daft comment, if you think this is cowboy outfit i'd suggest you fly with them,most come away impressed and despite Spanish,Thai Eastern European, English crews it retains that Norwegian/Scandinavian culture....0-10%+ market share at LGW in under 2 years says it all.
I still go with a fudge "the US DoT has secured undertakings that flights between the US and Europe will be operated by crews meeting the spirit of the open skies agreement in respect of labour contracts blah blah"
I have no idea how the law stands on this one, the US/EU open skies allows any airline of either state to fly between any city pairs, at least that's the idea, it thought that this would encourage more airlines to fly more services, improve choice and result in lower fares, the result was the opposite, most US carriers still provide shoddy customer service and charge way to much compared with similar track mileages within the US
To be fair BA stand out as one airline who have not joined the anti Norwegian band wagon and that's probably because they know Norwegian are a bigger threat to US carries than BA who provide a far better service than the US airlines.
With 3 weeks to go until services start from LGW with 10's of thousands of tickets sold & 1000's of connecting tickets sold, plus all the accommodation pre booked i can't see this not happening, if the US were going to block this on valid legal or safety grounds they would have done so by now.
For those in the US reading this, you are right to have concerns over Norwegian's expansion into the US market, but for the wrong reasons, this is a very safety conscious airline that has won award after award throughout Europe for customer service, satisfaction and innovation.
Flying clog
Smoking holes? daft comment, if you think this is cowboy outfit i'd suggest you fly with them,most come away impressed and despite Spanish,Thai Eastern European, English crews it retains that Norwegian/Scandinavian culture....0-10%+ market share at LGW in under 2 years says it all.
I still go with a fudge "the US DoT has secured undertakings that flights between the US and Europe will be operated by crews meeting the spirit of the open skies agreement in respect of labour contracts blah blah"