Norwegian B787 - LGW based
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who really cares where your official employment is, as long as the paycheck comes in. As someone who has lost three direct employment jobs in this industry I can assure you that direct employment is not secure either. The simple fact is if the airline is doing well, the paycheck comes in, if the airline is not doing well, the paycheck is in danger of stopping. How your employment contract is set up does not matter. Two of the jobs lost were union jobs and that did not matter either.
I certainly care about who my employer is and the need for having a clearly defined relationship, as this is the corner stone as to my rights as an employee.
That relationship has got nothing to do with the profitability of the company and its likely longevity.
Ryanair, Ezy and now Norwegian are killing our profession by allowing the workforce to be employed on ever lower T&Cs, how are they doing that? primarily by employing pilots as individuals rather than as one workforce, thus allowing them to introduce a million different contracts.
That relationship has got nothing to do with the profitability of the company and its likely longevity.
Ryanair, Ezy and now Norwegian are killing our profession by allowing the workforce to be employed on ever lower T&Cs, how are they doing that? primarily by employing pilots as individuals rather than as one workforce, thus allowing them to introduce a million different contracts.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where was the public outcry when Lufthansa outsourced longhaul holiday charter (US and Carribean and SE Asia) via Eurowings to Sun Express Germany, who pay for a Captain on A330 85k€ a year? At least Norwegian pays 100k€ for a RCA, 125k€ for a Captain (including allowance) which is not super good but really not that bad for europe. EW got DOT approval right away with no opposition from US Airlines or Unions, so all this talk about terms and conditions and lowering the standards is hypocritical, with the true reason being protectionism and fear of competition of an Airline, who seems to do it right and grows rapidly. Every company has the right to make maximum use of the available legislation to cut their costs and before anyone now explodes, think of the immense benefits that all major US airlines are reaping now after they took advantage of Chapter 11 restructuring.
And again, contracted work is not ideal but i still fail to see how this contract differs in any way from other contracts that are offered through Rishworth (or your favourite broker) which pilots have happily accepted for years everywhere in the world. And talking about Terms and Conditions, I invite anyone to point me to another job opening in the EU, where you can actually earn that kind of money with a similar career perspective and the ability to live where you want (in the EU)?
To summarize, a way one can see the Norwegian contract is that it's much like a chinese lunch buffet. It's not super good, but it's not as bad as it looks ;-)
And again, contracted work is not ideal but i still fail to see how this contract differs in any way from other contracts that are offered through Rishworth (or your favourite broker) which pilots have happily accepted for years everywhere in the world. And talking about Terms and Conditions, I invite anyone to point me to another job opening in the EU, where you can actually earn that kind of money with a similar career perspective and the ability to live where you want (in the EU)?
To summarize, a way one can see the Norwegian contract is that it's much like a chinese lunch buffet. It's not super good, but it's not as bad as it looks ;-)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not only LH/EW but also CityLine opperating 340s, that was as much dumping of T&Cs as anything else we see today in the industry. Isn't AF/KLM also starting long haul low cost airline with different T&Cs to mainline crew?
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53° 32′ 9.19″ N, 9° 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NAI got the approval from the DOT....
EXCLUSIVE: Norwegian Air granted licence paving way for first ever direct routes between Cork and US - Independent.ie
Didn't expect that, thought the decision would be done by the new Administration
EXCLUSIVE: Norwegian Air granted licence paving way for first ever direct routes between Cork and US - Independent.ie
Didn't expect that, thought the decision would be done by the new Administration
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: gate 67 JFK
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was only a matter of time before NAI would be granted DOT approval, of course the Donald may overturn it, but that is unlikely, in any event the US pilots and various union groups backed the wrong horse and contributed massively to Clintons campaign.
Next up is NUK and that should be an even more straight forward case.
Direct Bondi
DC is clearly an articulate contributor and from the outside much of what he/she writes makes some sense, however from the inside whilst acknowledging the factual elements, it does rather comes across as agenda driven, especial given the huge amount of content and research & time DC puts in, which rather begs the question as to why? (there are far worse airlines out there)
I belive DC briefly worked for a agency on behalf of Norwegian, so has some knowledge and no doubt a few contacts, but much as changed, so there needs to be balance.
I enjoy reading his posts but they have become more bitter over time.
When i joined Norwegian I was never offered direct employment with Norwegian, i was offered the potential of permanent employment after 2 - 3 years, which came to pass, in the early days there were issues over NI and in some cases tax, but that is history, all SH are employed by OSM (outside of K area) OSM is now 50% owned by Norwegian and pay local NI in country base and tax.
So there is no non compliance with tax/NI regulations.
The roster are tough and depending on base you will work close to the 900 hour limit.
For me after 5 years it works well, i live close to where work, get (well) paid every month, its not perfect but who is these days?
I know next to nothing about the long haul set up but position their crews around a lot and sometimes stay in the same hotel, most are happy, but again roster are an issue.
Next up is NUK and that should be an even more straight forward case.
Direct Bondi
DC is clearly an articulate contributor and from the outside much of what he/she writes makes some sense, however from the inside whilst acknowledging the factual elements, it does rather comes across as agenda driven, especial given the huge amount of content and research & time DC puts in, which rather begs the question as to why? (there are far worse airlines out there)
I belive DC briefly worked for a agency on behalf of Norwegian, so has some knowledge and no doubt a few contacts, but much as changed, so there needs to be balance.
I enjoy reading his posts but they have become more bitter over time.
When i joined Norwegian I was never offered direct employment with Norwegian, i was offered the potential of permanent employment after 2 - 3 years, which came to pass, in the early days there were issues over NI and in some cases tax, but that is history, all SH are employed by OSM (outside of K area) OSM is now 50% owned by Norwegian and pay local NI in country base and tax.
So there is no non compliance with tax/NI regulations.
The roster are tough and depending on base you will work close to the 900 hour limit.
For me after 5 years it works well, i live close to where work, get (well) paid every month, its not perfect but who is these days?
I know next to nothing about the long haul set up but position their crews around a lot and sometimes stay in the same hotel, most are happy, but again roster are an issue.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“ALPA is considering all options to reverse this action” - Link:
News Room - ALPA
Norwegian continues to declare on its website that it complies with the International Labor Organization core conventions with respect to workers rights - it categorically does not:
http://www.norwegian.com/uk/about/co...y/human-worth/
News Room - ALPA
Norwegian continues to declare on its website that it complies with the International Labor Organization core conventions with respect to workers rights - it categorically does not:
http://www.norwegian.com/uk/about/co...y/human-worth/
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets hope ALPA is successful in applying pressure to the new Trump administration and getting this decision overturned.
The sooner this kind of sleazy setup is halted the better.
The sooner this kind of sleazy setup is halted the better.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: gate 67 JFK
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DoT have had THREE YEARS to find cause to reject this proposal, they have had the best lawyers money can buy and the advice that came back is that the application is lawful and meets the requirement under open skies for grant of traffic rights.
Trump may of course overturn the ruling but I think thats very unlikely, even if he did so, then you are back to arbitration and simply saying no without just cause will simply result in the EU taking retaliatory action.
This result is so Brexit like, with people who have campaigned strongly for their position being unable to accept a verdict that does not accord with their position.
Trump will see this dispute for what it, protectionism, to protect a cosy club of mainly American airlines and a few inefficient European ones (AF/KLM, SAS & Lufthansa) wanting to maintain high prices across the pond as a money tree to prop up their loss making European short haul operations, Interestingly IAG supports the application as do many airports and regions in the US that benefit from inward tourism.
Norwegian probably need to move further with its employment methods and based on the changes to SH i suspect they will.
With oil prices on the rise again the economics of the 787 will get stronger with $ increase, by this time next year there will be dozens of flight a week from the US East coast to the west coast of Europe on the MAX in and out of smaller regional airports.
I would expect to see a raft of route announcement before Xmas
Trump may of course overturn the ruling but I think thats very unlikely, even if he did so, then you are back to arbitration and simply saying no without just cause will simply result in the EU taking retaliatory action.
This result is so Brexit like, with people who have campaigned strongly for their position being unable to accept a verdict that does not accord with their position.
Trump will see this dispute for what it, protectionism, to protect a cosy club of mainly American airlines and a few inefficient European ones (AF/KLM, SAS & Lufthansa) wanting to maintain high prices across the pond as a money tree to prop up their loss making European short haul operations, Interestingly IAG supports the application as do many airports and regions in the US that benefit from inward tourism.
Norwegian probably need to move further with its employment methods and based on the changes to SH i suspect they will.
With oil prices on the rise again the economics of the 787 will get stronger with $ increase, by this time next year there will be dozens of flight a week from the US East coast to the west coast of Europe on the MAX in and out of smaller regional airports.
I would expect to see a raft of route announcement before Xmas
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53° 32′ 9.19″ N, 9° 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's see how this will end.....
Bipartisan Bill Introduced to Stop Short-Sighted DOT Decision to Allow Norwegian Air Operations in the U.S. | House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure
Bipartisan Bill Introduced to Stop Short-Sighted DOT Decision to Allow Norwegian Air Operations in the U.S. | House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure
Washington, D.C. – Today, Representatives Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), Rick Larsen (D-WA), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), introduced H.R. 5090, legislation that would prevent the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) from permitting a foreign air carrier to operate between European countries and the United States unless the carrier complies with basic, fair U.S. or European Union labor standards. The legislation was introduced in response to the DOT’s tentative decision to grant a permit to Norwegian Air International (NAI). NAI established itself in Ireland, where labor laws permit the airline to hire its pilots and flight attendants on individual employment contracts under non-European law in order to cut costs. NAI’s overt practice of labor forum-shopping violates our Open Skies agreement with Norway and the European Union and gives it an unfair competitive advantage in the transatlantic market.
“Consumers may purchase tickets on Norwegian.com and they may board planes marked Norwegian in big bold letters, but this airline is ‘Norwegian’ in name only. The DOT record shows that Norwegian Air International is headquartered in Ireland and employs contract crews based in Thailand to circumvent Norway’s fair and strong labor standards. It’s a virtual airline set up to undercut competition by exploiting cheap labor. Our bipartisan legislation sends a strong message to DOT—we must stop this race to the bottom, and protect the open and fair transatlantic aviation market,” said DeFazio.
“Norwegian Airlines has sidestepped the bedrock labor agreements that are the foundation of the US-EU Air Transport Agreement. In so doing, they have compromised the competitiveness of American air carriers. There has been long-standing opposition in Congress to permitting this to go forward. The U.S. Department of Transportation must reconsider its position,” said LoBiondo.
“My colleagues and I have been clear with DOT that strong labor standards must factor into NAI’s air carrier permit decision. Today we are introducing legislation that would prohibit DOT from issuing a permit to NAI if doing so would undermine labor standards,” Larsen said. “Granting an air carrier permit to NAI would say to the world that the U.S. rewards other countries that break their commitments to protecting workers. Our agreements with other countries are only as strong as our ability and willingness to enforce them, which is why I am pushing hard for the U.S. to hold other countries accountable for their end of the deal,” said Larsen.
Article 17 bis of the U.S.-EU-Iceland-Norway Open Skies Agreement states that “[t]he opportunities created by the Agreement are not intended to undermine labour standards or the labour-related rights and principles contained in the Parties’ respective laws” and further requires that these “principles . . . shall guide the Parties as they implement the Agreement.” With the decision to grant temporary approval, DOT has decided provisions in the U.S.–EU Agreement that address labor are not, on their own, a sufficient basis for rejecting an otherwise-qualified applicant.
The bipartisan legislation introduced today would require the DOT to find that a permit is consistent with article 17 bis before issuing a permit, maintaining the competitive balance in the transatlantic aviation marketplace.
In 2013, NAI applied for a foreign air carrier permit to permanently operate in the United States. DOT granted tentative approval on April 15, 2016. Behind the NAI application is a global outsourcing business model that will put U.S. airlines and their employees at a competitive disadvantage. U.S. and other European carriers rightly adhere to the high labor standards created through decades of hard work and commitment to a sustainable and socially-responsible aviation system. The point of Open Skies is to create an environment that fosters competition, not flags of convenience.
Yesterday, DeFazio, LoBiondo, and Larsen sent a letter urging the Department, in the strongest possible terms, to set aside the flawed tentative decision on Norwegian’s permit application and to deny the application.
“Consumers may purchase tickets on Norwegian.com and they may board planes marked Norwegian in big bold letters, but this airline is ‘Norwegian’ in name only. The DOT record shows that Norwegian Air International is headquartered in Ireland and employs contract crews based in Thailand to circumvent Norway’s fair and strong labor standards. It’s a virtual airline set up to undercut competition by exploiting cheap labor. Our bipartisan legislation sends a strong message to DOT—we must stop this race to the bottom, and protect the open and fair transatlantic aviation market,” said DeFazio.
“Norwegian Airlines has sidestepped the bedrock labor agreements that are the foundation of the US-EU Air Transport Agreement. In so doing, they have compromised the competitiveness of American air carriers. There has been long-standing opposition in Congress to permitting this to go forward. The U.S. Department of Transportation must reconsider its position,” said LoBiondo.
“My colleagues and I have been clear with DOT that strong labor standards must factor into NAI’s air carrier permit decision. Today we are introducing legislation that would prohibit DOT from issuing a permit to NAI if doing so would undermine labor standards,” Larsen said. “Granting an air carrier permit to NAI would say to the world that the U.S. rewards other countries that break their commitments to protecting workers. Our agreements with other countries are only as strong as our ability and willingness to enforce them, which is why I am pushing hard for the U.S. to hold other countries accountable for their end of the deal,” said Larsen.
Article 17 bis of the U.S.-EU-Iceland-Norway Open Skies Agreement states that “[t]he opportunities created by the Agreement are not intended to undermine labour standards or the labour-related rights and principles contained in the Parties’ respective laws” and further requires that these “principles . . . shall guide the Parties as they implement the Agreement.” With the decision to grant temporary approval, DOT has decided provisions in the U.S.–EU Agreement that address labor are not, on their own, a sufficient basis for rejecting an otherwise-qualified applicant.
The bipartisan legislation introduced today would require the DOT to find that a permit is consistent with article 17 bis before issuing a permit, maintaining the competitive balance in the transatlantic aviation marketplace.
In 2013, NAI applied for a foreign air carrier permit to permanently operate in the United States. DOT granted tentative approval on April 15, 2016. Behind the NAI application is a global outsourcing business model that will put U.S. airlines and their employees at a competitive disadvantage. U.S. and other European carriers rightly adhere to the high labor standards created through decades of hard work and commitment to a sustainable and socially-responsible aviation system. The point of Open Skies is to create an environment that fosters competition, not flags of convenience.
Yesterday, DeFazio, LoBiondo, and Larsen sent a letter urging the Department, in the strongest possible terms, to set aside the flawed tentative decision on Norwegian’s permit application and to deny the application.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before the US election both Sanders and Clinton made statements opposing Norwegian’s race to the bottom scheme. No doubt this was to ensure workers votes. It is ultimately an Obama, workers betrayal. Considering the reaction to the misguided DOT decision, you may expect an uprising of opposition unprecedented in the airline industry. In a press release the Transport Trades Department of the AFL-CIO posted (12/3);
“Given the disgust with our trade policies expressed loudly by American voters on November 8, it is especially galling that the Administration has ignored the wants of the American people in favor of a rogue, foreign airline. We urge Congress to take whatever action is needed to undo this decision and prevent NAI and similar business models from poisoning the trans-Atlantic aviation market”
http://ttd.org/news-and-media/press-...ation-workers/
Southwest Airlines Pilot Association also posted a press release (12/2);
“Captain Weaks noted that the NAI subsidiary and its use of contract workers hired by a foreign staffing agency also poses potential serious safety risks. Crewmembers working under employment contracts with no direct line of communication to airline management often lack the ability to highlight potential safety oroperational issues. Clear and open communication between frontline operators and airline management is critical to running a safe and efficient airline."
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...300372453.html
There are specific examples of the adverse safety affects associated with Norwegian’s labor model, involving extensive use of multi jurisdictional agency crew with no direct employment relationship to the airline. The most publicised being Norwegian's flight DY7006, JFK-ARN. Following an illegal flight across the Atlantic, some of the agency crew were summarily terminated before Norwegian conducted a proper and thorough internal safety investigation, as legislatively required by their AOC. The crew were quickly rehired after the Norway CAA became involved;
“As part of the work the company does, they should carry out all the employees who were involved to conversations and interviews, says CAA operational director - Einar Schjølberg”
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/02/18/n...gian/37782004/
Of course, “conversations and interviews” are difficult to accomplish when some of the crew were immediately fired and no longer with the airline;
“I was told that I had been fired and the decision had been taken at the very top”
“A week later she suddenly got a new message that she was not dismissed, but suspended with pay while an independent investigation was ongoing”
“Feel exposed to witch-hunt from Kjos from Norwegian argument”
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/03/03/n...kjos/37978024/
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/06/23/n...fart/39793427/
A labor model where crew members “feel exposed to a witch-hunt” from the airline CEO, and/or punitive action taken against them after reporting safety concerns, can only be described as abhorrent and should be outlawed. Incidentally, the Captain involved had previously written a letter to the DOT in support of NAI and, to my knowledge, was not summarily terminated.
Norwegian has a history of silencing crew they perceive as critical of the regime;
“Norwegian has kicked [sacked] senior safety representative during strike”
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/08/07/n...fart/40523738/
Norwegian later agreed to a settlement, however;
“Reprehensible issues came up during the trial on Monday and Tuesday that makes NPU need to see concrete changes of the company”
http://www.dn.no/nyheter/politikkSam...ovedverneombud
The purveyors of Norwegian’s “employment” snake-oil and insatiable consumers of Kjos Kool-Aid are no doubt expecting further sales and licking their lips after the recent DOT decision. But it was only in late July this year that 90% of Norwegian’s Spanish cabin crew surveyed were so disillusioned with their treatment by Norwegian, they were ready to strike;
http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/her-...eider/60311265
Late last year 30% of the 800 Norwegian pilots surveyed were looking for a new job and 75% would not recommend Norwegian as an “employer”;
http://www.dn.no/nyheter/naringsliv/...-nsker--slutte
Even the Norway press refers to Kjos as “The boss and spin doctor”;
http://www.dn.no/meninger/2016/07/08...g-spinneri-ltd
Strong stuff that Norwegian “employment” snake-oil, and may even remove paint – in addition to removing labor rights and labor principles.
“Given the disgust with our trade policies expressed loudly by American voters on November 8, it is especially galling that the Administration has ignored the wants of the American people in favor of a rogue, foreign airline. We urge Congress to take whatever action is needed to undo this decision and prevent NAI and similar business models from poisoning the trans-Atlantic aviation market”
http://ttd.org/news-and-media/press-...ation-workers/
Southwest Airlines Pilot Association also posted a press release (12/2);
“Captain Weaks noted that the NAI subsidiary and its use of contract workers hired by a foreign staffing agency also poses potential serious safety risks. Crewmembers working under employment contracts with no direct line of communication to airline management often lack the ability to highlight potential safety oroperational issues. Clear and open communication between frontline operators and airline management is critical to running a safe and efficient airline."
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...300372453.html
There are specific examples of the adverse safety affects associated with Norwegian’s labor model, involving extensive use of multi jurisdictional agency crew with no direct employment relationship to the airline. The most publicised being Norwegian's flight DY7006, JFK-ARN. Following an illegal flight across the Atlantic, some of the agency crew were summarily terminated before Norwegian conducted a proper and thorough internal safety investigation, as legislatively required by their AOC. The crew were quickly rehired after the Norway CAA became involved;
“As part of the work the company does, they should carry out all the employees who were involved to conversations and interviews, says CAA operational director - Einar Schjølberg”
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/02/18/n...gian/37782004/
Of course, “conversations and interviews” are difficult to accomplish when some of the crew were immediately fired and no longer with the airline;
“I was told that I had been fired and the decision had been taken at the very top”
“A week later she suddenly got a new message that she was not dismissed, but suspended with pay while an independent investigation was ongoing”
“Feel exposed to witch-hunt from Kjos from Norwegian argument”
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/03/03/n...kjos/37978024/
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/06/23/n...fart/39793427/
A labor model where crew members “feel exposed to a witch-hunt” from the airline CEO, and/or punitive action taken against them after reporting safety concerns, can only be described as abhorrent and should be outlawed. Incidentally, the Captain involved had previously written a letter to the DOT in support of NAI and, to my knowledge, was not summarily terminated.
Norwegian has a history of silencing crew they perceive as critical of the regime;
“Norwegian has kicked [sacked] senior safety representative during strike”
http://www.dagbladet.no/2015/08/07/n...fart/40523738/
Norwegian later agreed to a settlement, however;
“Reprehensible issues came up during the trial on Monday and Tuesday that makes NPU need to see concrete changes of the company”
http://www.dn.no/nyheter/politikkSam...ovedverneombud
The purveyors of Norwegian’s “employment” snake-oil and insatiable consumers of Kjos Kool-Aid are no doubt expecting further sales and licking their lips after the recent DOT decision. But it was only in late July this year that 90% of Norwegian’s Spanish cabin crew surveyed were so disillusioned with their treatment by Norwegian, they were ready to strike;
http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/her-...eider/60311265
Late last year 30% of the 800 Norwegian pilots surveyed were looking for a new job and 75% would not recommend Norwegian as an “employer”;
http://www.dn.no/nyheter/naringsliv/...-nsker--slutte
Even the Norway press refers to Kjos as “The boss and spin doctor”;
http://www.dn.no/meninger/2016/07/08...g-spinneri-ltd
Strong stuff that Norwegian “employment” snake-oil, and may even remove paint – in addition to removing labor rights and labor principles.
Mach 3
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwegian 738 incident. Go2Sky Pilots "contracted" in?
Connect the dots.
Connect the dots.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Meteorology Avenue
Age: 44
Posts: 189
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing will happen. Denying NAI the approval on grounds of article 17 bis without any legal basis will undermine the credibility of the open skies agreement, which, in case of a sure retaliation of the EU, would eventually deliver a big blow to the US airline industry as the US big 3 are among the main profiteers from said agreement. Not being a fan of Trump, but he and especially his advisors are intelligent enough to see through this. And this is not even accounting for the positives that increased travel will bring to the US economy.
So you and your union friends can cry and moan as much as you like, eventually the new reality will sink in.
Here is an excellent and factual analysis from earlier this year:
http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/norwegian-airs-nai-awaits-final-approval-of-us-rights-credibility-of-us-eu-open-skies-is-at-stake-283001
Some quotes:
"It seems that one of the side effects of US consolidation has been to concentrate considerable political power (in addition to market power) in the hands of the three major legacy airline groups. The US big three have benefited hugely from consolidation and from the US-led open skies movement, which provided the context for the anti-trust immunity of the powerful North Atlantic joint ventures that dominate that market.
Now faced with a new competitor developing a new business model, they have joined forces with their own labour unions and are seeking to shut the door on competition"
and
"In its analysis of 17-Mar-2016, DoT's General Counsel stressed that no public interest analysis was necessary, but "it would be very difficult to construe promoting the competitive position of United States carriers as a compelling reason to outright reject a fit foreign competitor"
Its analysis added that "it would be entirely novel and legally unsustainable" to find that this and the labour issue outweigh all the other public interest factors supporting NAI's application, including:
the availability of low-priced services;
maximum reliance on competitive market forces;
avoiding unreasonable industry concentration;
freedom to offer prices corresponding to demand;
elimination of operational and marketing restrictions;
opportunities for foreign carrier services in exchange for comparable rights and
action consistent with international agreements
"
Says it all really...
So you and your union friends can cry and moan as much as you like, eventually the new reality will sink in.
Here is an excellent and factual analysis from earlier this year:
http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/norwegian-airs-nai-awaits-final-approval-of-us-rights-credibility-of-us-eu-open-skies-is-at-stake-283001
Some quotes:
"It seems that one of the side effects of US consolidation has been to concentrate considerable political power (in addition to market power) in the hands of the three major legacy airline groups. The US big three have benefited hugely from consolidation and from the US-led open skies movement, which provided the context for the anti-trust immunity of the powerful North Atlantic joint ventures that dominate that market.
Now faced with a new competitor developing a new business model, they have joined forces with their own labour unions and are seeking to shut the door on competition"
and
"In its analysis of 17-Mar-2016, DoT's General Counsel stressed that no public interest analysis was necessary, but "it would be very difficult to construe promoting the competitive position of United States carriers as a compelling reason to outright reject a fit foreign competitor"
Its analysis added that "it would be entirely novel and legally unsustainable" to find that this and the labour issue outweigh all the other public interest factors supporting NAI's application, including:
the availability of low-priced services;
maximum reliance on competitive market forces;
avoiding unreasonable industry concentration;
freedom to offer prices corresponding to demand;
elimination of operational and marketing restrictions;
opportunities for foreign carrier services in exchange for comparable rights and
action consistent with international agreements
"
Says it all really...
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Sand free now
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parkbremse. "So you and your union friends can cry and moan as much as you like,"
Nothing like nailing your colours to the mast.
And, by the way, "Trump and his advisors are intelligent enough to." This is the man who does not think that global warming is man made and has appointed an environment secretary who is best friends with the fossil fuel industry.
Nothing like nailing your colours to the mast.
And, by the way, "Trump and his advisors are intelligent enough to." This is the man who does not think that global warming is man made and has appointed an environment secretary who is best friends with the fossil fuel industry.