PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   Hard times for Norwegian (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/625175-hard-times-norwegian.html)

ObadiahDogberry 13th Mar 2020 07:00


Originally Posted by SaulGoodman (Post 10712105)
What do they mean with “their workforce”? Is it 50% of the direct employed or are contractors also in this figure?

Nobody knows at this point. No specifics have been provided.

uncle-traveling-matt 13th Mar 2020 07:18


Originally Posted by SaulGoodman (Post 10712105)
What do they mean with “their workforce”? Is it 50% of the direct employed or are contractors also in this figure?


All employees are employed locally, and enjoy local terms and conditions according to the country where they are based. I made more money in my last year as a FO, than some of BA’s first-second-third year captains.
Cut the yankee propaganda, its getting very tiredsome.
Thanks for the support in here and to all the haters :Norwegian will prevail, more news to follow later today.

deathray 13th Mar 2020 07:27

I worked for Norwegian and was one of the crew terminated due to the demise of the Max . The process was handled decently and the folks in NAI are a great bunch of people . I hope Norwegian pull through this crisis . Its grim times for everyone in this industry with the possible exception of the Freight Dogs .

Max Tow 13th Mar 2020 08:15

From the press release above in respect of EU/U.S. cancellations:
"Our goal is to reroute as many of our customers as possible through London"

Hopefully this just means U.S. citizens otherwise it's a 2 week transit in London?




Meester proach 13th Mar 2020 15:32


Originally Posted by Max Tow (Post 10712194)
From the press release above in respect of EU/U.S. cancellations:
"Our goal is to reroute as many of our customers as possible through London"

Hopefully this just means U.S. citizens otherwise it's a 2 week transit in London?

Yes, they don’t mean those from banned countries

ManaAdaSystem 13th Mar 2020 21:05


Originally Posted by uncle-traveling-matt (Post 10712151)
All employees are employed locally, and enjoy local terms and conditions according to the country where they are based. I made more money in my last year as a FO, than some of BA’s first-second-third year captains.
Cut the yankee propaganda, its getting very tiredsome.
Thanks for the support in here and to all the haters :Norwegian will prevail, more news to follow later today.

Everybody loves an optimist, but the package today will not keep them in the air.
CEO says it will be a matter of weeks before the airline fails unless the Norwegian government extends them a huge credit.
The way they set up this company, mainly to avoid taxes to the very country they now turn to for help, may be a big obstacle.




golfyankeesierra 15th Mar 2020 07:05


Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem (Post 10713021)
Everybody loves an optimist, but the package today will not keep them in the air.
CEO says it will be a matter of weeks before the airline fails unless the Norwegian government extends them a huge credit.
The way they set up this company, mainly to avoid taxes to the very country they now turn to for help, may be a big obstacle.

It sure is hypocritical to turn to Norwegian government for help.
From Wikipedia


Labour relations

Between 2011 and 2013, Norwegian Air Shuttle (NAS) received criticism regarding its treatment of employees.

The media first reported NAS's announced intention to open a base in Helsinki, from where it hired pilots on short-term contracts in Estonia rather than as employees within the company. The Norwegian tax-office authorities reportedly suspected in August 2012 that many Norwegian citizens were working for NAS on these contracts and not paying Norwegian taxes, despite operating on flights originating from Norway.]The Norwegian Pilot's Union (NPU) brought NAS to court over the short-term contracts. Then-CEO Bjørn Kjos appeared to inflame matters when he declared that NAS would no longer hire employees on Norwegian terms.

In 2012, NAS started to use contract-employed pilots on routes within Scandinavia, considered by the NPU to be an abrogation of labor terms regarding non-Scandinavian pilots on routes within Scandinavia. The NPU soon after sued NAS.

In October 2013, the NPU announced its intention to strike because NAS had forced its pilots to face dismissal or transfer to Norwegian Air Norway or Norwegian Air Resources AB, both subsidiaries of NAS; the respective subsidiary would then hire the pilots back to NAS. The NPU and its Swedish counterpart SPF accused NAS of using this ploy to break the solidarity and organisation of the pilots, with the eventual goal of coercing pilots to convert their jobs to contract positions.

In mid-December 2013, NAS demanded that its Swedish non-contract flight attendants transfer to Proffice Aviation, an external staffing company, or face dismissal. According to the Swedish cabin-crew union, Unionen, it managed to save the jobs of 53 NAS employees, but it was dissatisfied with the direction NAS had taken. The situation led to the leader for the Swedish Left Party, Jonas Sjöstedt, to state that stricter regulation was needed for the use of staffing-companies in Sweden.

Lionel Lion 15th Mar 2020 11:40

Not a bail out. Increases liquidity in the short term to continue to operate in these circumstances. every company will likely need this

RTO 15th Mar 2020 12:13


Originally Posted by golfyankeesierra (Post 10714475)
It sure is hypocritical to turn to Norwegian government for help.
From Wikipedia

Not really as the fragmentation and union busting tactics was the work of the old management. The new CEO seems to be more of a Kelleher kind of guy that seeks to reverse most of these wrongdoings.

beardy 15th Mar 2020 15:21


Originally Posted by Lionel Lion (Post 10714737)
Not a bail out. Increases liquidity in the short term to continue to operate in these circumstances. every company will likely need this

The 'liquidity' much vaunted by senior management is best viewed as a flow of money, like a stream, coming in from clients and going out to suppliers with the difference pooling in the pockets of investors in the form of dividends and increased share value. Time to release the cash from the investors is now, if they really believe in their investments then now is the time for them to step up and back them properly rather than just harvesting profit.

uncle-traveling-matt 15th Mar 2020 19:42

Can we get the thread back on track, please. Yes, I realize that most people who were rejoicing of the (perceived) thought of Norwegians demise, are probably in deep poo themselves right now, but just sharing great news from Norway.

Norway will offer companies at least 100 billion Norwegian crowns ($9.7 billion) in funding in the form of guarantees for loans and bond issues to support the economy during the coronavirus outbreak, the government said on Sunday.

“The government will do what’s needed and spend the necessary funds to secure the Norwegian economy and support Norwegian businesses, big and small,” Prime Minister Erna Solberg told a news conference.

The Nordic country invoked emergency powers on Thursday to close a wide range of public and private institutions, including schools and restaurants, in a bid to combat the spread of coronavirus.

The business support package was divided into loan guarantees of 50 billion crowns to small and medium sized companies seeking bank loans, and the same amount in the form of government guarantees to large firms issuing corporate bonds.

In addition, payments of payroll taxes will be postponed, the government added.

Further measures for industries that have been particularly hard hit will also be presented at a later time, Finance Minister Jan Tore Sanner said.



Halfwayback 15th Mar 2020 20:39

Let's stick to the topic which is Norwegian Airlines!

Speedbrakes Up 15th Mar 2020 23:07

Great news from Norway, I hope other governments react rather quickly in the same way.

Nice to see the Norwegian bases in Norway will be protected.

sarah737 16th Mar 2020 00:14


Originally Posted by uncle-traveling-matt (Post 10715203)
“The government will do what’s needed and spend the necessary funds to secure the Norwegian economy and support Norwegian businesses, big and small,” Prime Minister Erna Solberg told a news conference.


She also added that, despite state aid, some bankruptcies are probably unavoidable.

ManaAdaSystem 16th Mar 2020 14:29

7300 staff on furlough, 85% of flights grounded.

Airbubba 16th Mar 2020 14:46

'However, I want to emphasize that this is temporary...'


Norwegian to cancel 85 percent of its flights and temporarily layoff approximately 7,300 colleagues

Press release • Mar 16, 2020 13:21 GMT

The COVID-19 situation is escalating by the hour and due to stagnating demand and enforced travel restrictions by authorities worldwide, Norwegian will gradually cancel most of its flights and temporarily lay off a major share of its workforce.

“What our industry is now facing is unprecedented and critical as we are approaching a scenario where most of our airplanes will be temporarily grounded. Several governments in Europe have already said that they will do everything they can to ensure that their airlines can continue to fly when society returns to normalcy. We appreciate that the authorities of Norway have communicated that they will implement all necessary measures to protect aviation in Norway, consequently securing crucial infrastructure and jobs,” said CEO Jacob Schram of Norwegian.

Norwegian has already discontinued a significant number of its flights and the main priority this week is to maintain as many scheduled flights as possible to ensure that customers are able to immediately return to their home destinations. The company will also work closely with the authorities to arrange flights for the benefit of stranded passengers, if necessary. Customers who are directly affected by route changes and cancellations will be contacted by Norwegian via text message or e-mail.

“We understand that this extraordinary situation is stressful for our customers, but I want to assure everyone that we are working around the clock to ensure that everyone is taken care of in the best way possible at this time,” said Schram.

As a result of most of the company’s planes being parked, Norwegian unfortunately has to temporarily lay off more than 7,300 colleagues in total which equates to approximately 90 per cent of its workforce, which includes pilots, cabin crew, maintenance and administrative staff. The layoff procedures vary from country to country and Norwegian’s team is already in constructive dialogues with union and HSE representatives at all its locations across the network.

“It is indeed with a heavy heart we have to temporarily lay off more than 7,300 of our colleagues, but we unfortunately have no choice. However, I want to emphasize that this is temporary, because when the world returns to normalcy my goal is to keep as many of our dedicated colleagues as possible,” said Schram.

uncle-traveling-matt 19th Mar 2020 22:34

Terms apply yes, but this comes after several meetings between government officials, and Norwegians management. They wouldn't come up with these specific terms, if they knew Norwegian couldn't abide with them. This will cover them until june, if they need more money, they will get more. CEO looked very confident in his press conference after the governments announcement , and said "Norwegian will emerge from this, stronger than ever"
Im sure a restructured Norwegian will rise from the ashes of this corona nightmare.

tprop 20th Mar 2020 08:12

Financial newspapers in Norway beg to differ. They think it unlikely Norwegian will be able to fulfill the requirements for the aid package.
Circuit breaker just popped on NAS on the stock exchange.

ObadiahDogberry 20th Mar 2020 09:05

Same thing happened a few years ago when IAG bought some stock in Norwegian. Trading was suspended for a period.

uncle-traveling-matt 20th Mar 2020 16:35


Originally Posted by tprop (Post 10721262)
Financial newspapers in Norway beg to differ. They think it unlikely Norwegian will be able to fulfill the requirements for the aid package.
Circuit breaker just popped on NAS on the stock exchange.

Because the Norwegian stock rose 28 percent and trade was stopped for 45 min. It ended at bit down for the day however the ONE newspaper you are referring to recently had an editoral pleading the Norwegian government not to support NAS, talk about being biased.

aircowboy 20th Mar 2020 17:35

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-with-strings

Maybe not only ONE newspaper

Ancient Mariner 20th Mar 2020 17:39


Originally Posted by uncle-traveling-matt (Post 10721799)
Because the Norwegian stock rose 28 percent and trade was stopped for 45 min. It ended at bit down for the day however the ONE newspaper you are referring to recently had an editoral pleading the Norwegian government not to support NAS, talk about being biased.

Why not read the government's requirements for support to NAS? Then you don't have to rely on the media.

uncle-traveling-matt 20th Mar 2020 18:32


Originally Posted by aircowboy (Post 10721871)

No, but certainly quoting the same analyst.

dcoded 24th Mar 2020 14:46

What's going on in Fornebu HQ? :sad:





Reluctant Bus Driver 24th Mar 2020 19:55

It would appear that essentially every airline on the planet will receive some sort of state aid as unpalatable for tax payers as that may be. The old privatized profits socialized losses argument..
Not sure if it has been covered but why would the Norwegian government agree, if indeed they have, to bail out Norwegian Air International that is based in Ireland with likely few if any Norwegian staff? I'm only guessing, but structurally there is probably not much daylight between Norwegian Air Shuttle and Norwegian Air International. The same goes for SAS. Are they really sending Swedish/ Danish tax money to SAS SAIL? An airline set up solely to get out from under tough Scandinavian labor laws. If true we have truly entered a surreal universe and if I were a tax payer in those countries I would surely raise holy hell..

c52 24th Mar 2020 19:59

I agree.

If a company is registered for tax purposes in the Cayman Islands, let it appeal to that government for funds.

(not that I am suggesting Norwegian is)

november.sierra 24th Mar 2020 20:53

Norwegian is NOT an Irish company so about time someone put a stop to the persistent rumour that Norwegian has its head office in Dublin and flies in Europe with Thai crews employed on the cheap! The Norwegian group is headquartered in Norway and operates on Norwegian, Swedish, Irish and British AOC's with offices in each of these countries, and employs crews locally, that's it! No different from easyJet, Ryanair, the Lufthansa group etc...

Things that went wrong in the past were down to the previous regime which was unceremoniously booted out by some of the larger financial institutions investing in Norwegian, and yes, the previous regime did have delusions of grandeur of turning the aviation industry into a copy of the shipping industry concerning crewing, but this has been firmly laid to rest. The new regime is intent on making these things right and will do so given half a chance.

Icanseeclearly 24th Mar 2020 21:30

November Sierra.

you raise some interesting points regarding airlines Europe wide.

As you say Norwegian are HQd in Norway but have AOCs in various countries.

Should the UK government give state aid to a Norwegian company just because they have an AOC in the Uk? To see the money flow out of the UK.

The same can be said for the majority of airline groups within Europe, can of worms all around.

Paul737 24th Mar 2020 21:45

Denying Norwegian Air Shuttle opened an Irish AOC to get rid of the norwegian labour law is deny what is obvious. Even the Scandinavian passengers know that.

Why are so many aircraft registered on EI and not having all of them on LN?

Then you cannot pretend norwegian tax payers to save your company. What would be logic is to save NAS and NSE. Nothing else

What interest should Norway have in routes like Malaga-Munich, Gran Canaria-Madrid or Alicante-Hamburg?

vikingivesterled 24th Mar 2020 23:33


Originally Posted by november.sierra (Post 10726896)
Things that went wrong in the past were down to the previous regime which was unceremoniously booted out by some of the larger financial institutions investing in Norwegian, and yes, the previous regime did have delusions of grandeur of turning the aviation industry into a copy of the shipping industry concerning crewing, but this has been firmly laid to rest. The new regime is intent on making these things right and will do so given half a chance.

There is a paywalled article on e24.no today that according to its headline speculates in that the old regime could be making a comeback. They do after all still own nearly 10%.

NEDude 25th Mar 2020 09:16


Originally Posted by Paul737 (Post 10726964)
Denying Norwegian Air Shuttle opened an Irish AOC to get rid of the norwegian labour law is deny what is obvious. Even the Scandinavian passengers know that.

Why are so many aircraft registered on EI and not having all of them on LN?

Then you cannot pretend norwegian tax payers to save your company. What would be logic is to save NAS and NSE. Nothing else

What interest should Norway have in routes like Malaga-Munich, Gran Canaria-Madrid or Alicante-Hamburg?

It was not labor law they were trying to get around. The labor laws within the EU are quite complex, and the applicable laws are based on where the employee is based, not the location of the AOC. For example NAI crews based in LGW are employed under UK labor laws, not Irish labor laws. NAI crews based in MAD are employed under Spanish labor laws, not Irish. NAS crews based in CPH are employed under Danish law, not Norwegian. Same with the SAS Ireland crews based in LHR, they are employed under UK labor laws, not Irish. So the location of the AOC does not do much, if anything, to the labor laws.

NAI existed for three very specific reasons, and labor was not one of them. 1) Ireland has a very favorable environment for aircraft leases and corporate taxes. 2) It was an EU country that was a member of the Cape Town Treaty. 3) While having an EU AOC made no difference with regards to traffic right within Europe, or to the United States, as Norway was covered under those applicable treaties, having an AOC based within the EU did potentially open other traffic rights that Norway might not have been covered by, and Norwegian had the right to open other AOCs in EU countries due to being a member of the EEA. At the time NAI was formed, neither Denmark or Sweden had ascended to the Cape Town treaty, which would have made aircraft leases significantly more expensive, which is why Norwegian did not open AOCs in those countries despite the precedent for that having been set years ago by SAS. Since Sweden has ascended to the Cape Town treaty, Norwegian has opened the Swedish AOC and begun to move more aircraft to that AOC and away from NAI.

(Edit - While the European Union did ascend to the Aircraft Protocol of the Cape Town Treaty in 2009, there has been some debate about the applicability to EU members who have not individually ratify the treaty. Most EU countries have not individually ratified the treaty. Ireland was one of the original countries to ratify the Aircraft Protocol, even before the EU ascended to the treaty. At the time the NAI AOC was issued in 2014, the only EU countries to have ratified the treaty were Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Since then, Denmark, Sweden, and Spain have ratified the treaty. The UK also ratified the treaty, but as we are all well aware, has also since left the EU. None of the other EU countries have individually ratified the treaty to date.)

Paul737 25th Mar 2020 10:42

Nice speech. And basically you are answering: “Ireland has a very favorable environment for aircraft leases and corporate taxes” 👍👍👍. Then again:

Why Norway should save Norwegian if they have been avoiding taxes in Norway?

What interest have Norway in routes like Barcelona - Tel Aviv, Gran Canaria - Madrid or Alicante - Hamburg? That could be called unfair conpetition if helped by the government.

What would you think if Vueling starts operating between Oslo and Stockholm, selling tickets at a very low price causing loses and then waiting for the Spanish government help to continue doing the same?

ManaAdaSystem 25th Mar 2020 12:39


Originally Posted by NEDude (Post 10727475)
It was not labor law they were trying to get around. The labor laws within the EU are quite complex, and the applicable laws are based on where the employee is based, not the location of the AOC. For example NAI crews based in LGW are employed under UK labor laws, not Irish labor laws. NAI crews based in MAD are employed under Spanish labor laws, not Irish. NAS crews based in CPH are employed under Danish law, not Norwegian. Same with the SAS Ireland crews based in LHR, they are employed under UK labor laws, not Irish. So the location of the AOC does not do much, if anything, to the labor laws.

NAI existed for three very specific reasons, and labor was not one of them. 1) Ireland has a very favorable environment for aircraft leases and corporate taxes. 2) It was an EU country that was a member of the Cape Town Treaty. 3) While having an EU AOC made no difference with regards to traffic right within Europe, or to the United States, as Norway was covered under those applicable treaties, having an AOC based within the EU did potentially open other traffic rights that Norway might not have been covered by, and Norwegian had the right to open other AOCs in EU countries due to being a member of the EEA. At the time NAI was formed, neither Denmark or Sweden had ascended to the Cape Town treaty, which would have made aircraft leases significantly more expensive, which is why Norwegian did not open AOCs in those countries despite the precedent for that having been set years ago by SAS. Since Sweden has ascended to the Cape Town treaty, Norwegian has opened the Swedish AOC and begun to move more aircraft to that AOC and away from NAI.

(Edit - While the European Union did ascend to the Aircraft Protocol of the Cape Town Treaty in 2009, there has been some debate about the applicability to EU members who have not individually ratify the treaty. Most EU countries have not individually ratified the treaty. Ireland was one of the original countries to ratify the Aircraft Protocol, even before the EU ascended to the treaty. At the time the NAI AOC was issued in 2014, the only EU countries to have ratified the treaty were Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Since then, Denmark, Sweden, and Spain have ratified the treaty. The UK also ratified the treaty, but as we are all well aware, has also since left the EU. None of the other EU countries have individually ratified the treaty to date.)


Labor COST is way higher in Scandinavia, and that was one of the reasons Kjos said he would never hire a Norwegian employee again. One of the main reasons why he created all these companies.The employees of these companies have paid no taxes to Norway.
The Norwegian Government wants to protect aviation in Norway, why should they pay for Thai staff, UK staff, Spanish staff, American staff, French staff, etc, and flights outside Norway? The best reason the new CEO came up with was: We fly the word "Norwegian" all over the world.
The same goes for the SAS Irland part, but that company is still a very small part of SAS.
You can also add union busting into this picture.




NEDude 25th Mar 2020 13:10


Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem (Post 10727723)
Labor COST is way higher in Scandinavia, and that was one of the reasons Kjos said he would never hire a Norwegian employee again. One of the main reasons why he created all these companies.The employees of these companies have paid no taxes to Norway.
The Norwegian Government wants to protect aviation in Norway, why should they pay for Thai staff, UK staff, Spanish staff, American staff, French staff, etc, and flights outside Norway? The best reason the new CEO came up with was: We fly the word "Norwegian" all over the world.
The same goes for the SAS Irland part, but that company is still a very small part of SAS.
You can also add union busting into this picture.

The CPH LH pilot's are the lowest cost long haul pilots in the company, even lower cost than the BCN and FCO pilots.

The question as to why the Norwegian government should pay money is moot, as they have already decided to fund up to 3 Billion NOK. You can speculate as to why, or the logic behind it, but the decision has been made, and it was made in the affirmative.

Every Norwegian base is unionized, so the union busting wasn't too successful was it?

What's funny is you guys are speculating so much about NAI being about labor costs, with zero hard evidence to back it up, but are ignoring the incredibly obvious and verifiable reasons why a company would want to have a division in Ireland. There is a reason why Ireland was called the "Celtic Tiger", there is a reason why so many corporations base their companies in Ireland, and labor costs have little to nothing to do with it. Facebook, Google, PayPal, Microsoft, and more than 700 other international companies base their European operations in Ireland, and the reason is overwhelmingly for its corporate tax rates. This is glaringly obvious, totally legitimate, and widely practiced, yet you conspiracy theorists totally ignore that in favor of a theory that does not hold up under even mild scrutiny. The AOC being based in Ireland does not do a bit of good at allowing Norwegian to work around labor laws for its UK based employees, or its Copenhagen based employees, or its Paris based employees. But it does a world of good at reducing corporate taxes, getting lower lease rates, and opening up some potential routes.

On top of that NAI is dying, and was dying long before Kjos left the building.

ManaAdaSystem 25th Mar 2020 13:32

Those 3 billion NOK come with a lot of strings attached. I'm pretty sure there is a clause or two about how they can spend it. That is, if they can meet all the requirements in the first place.

NEDude 25th Mar 2020 14:21


Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem (Post 10727767)
Those 3 billion NOK come with a lot of strings attached. I'm pretty sure there is a clause or two about how they can spend it. That is, if they can meet all the requirements in the first place.

They met the first hurdle, and many thought they would not be able to that.

ManaAdaSystem 25th Mar 2020 16:08

10% of the money...

NEDude 25th Mar 2020 16:26


Originally Posted by ManaAdaSystem (Post 10727924)
10% of the money...

True, but a 10% that many analysts claimed they would not be able to get. Of course many of these same analysts have been swinging and missing on their predictions of imminent demise for the past five years.

Brenoch 28th Mar 2020 23:35

They’re 60 BNOK in debt
Govt support at best 3 BNOK, with a fair few hoops to skip through. I’m not a wizard with numbers but I can not, for the life of me, see It happening. This is a dead horse that’s been flogged for far too long.

NEDude 29th Mar 2020 08:34


Originally Posted by Brenoch (Post 10731514)
They’re 60 BNOK in debt
Govt support at best 3 BNOK, with a fair few hoops to skip through. I’m not a wizard with numbers but I can not, for the life of me, see It happening. This is a dead horse that’s been flogged for far too long.

The "experts" have been saying that for five years. Seriously, CAPA reported that Norwegian was in an unsustainable position in February 2015. Yet Norwegian is still here. Obviously there is something going on behind the scenes that the "experts" are not fully aware of. Yet none of them have acknowledged that. I fully agree that things don't look good for them. But clearly there is a lot more to the financial dealings of Norwegian than many are aware of.


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:35.


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