Norwegian - Last 36 pilots not needed during the winter.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You may not even get paid during your notice period. You will not be protected by Employment Law because you have entered into an employment contract/agreement with the agency, which almost certainly indemnifies the agency from their obligations due to any action taken by the airline.
That would suggest you are an employee, and not quasi self-employed as other competitor airlines would have you believe. If you are then, indeed, an employee would you not have some workers' rights under EU law, albeit from the agency? Is there some opt-out for agencies in the employer/employee relationship and obligations? Is the agency used an EU based one, and are you an EU citizen? Equally, IMHO, contracts can not be written so as to remove legal rights from the signee. That is often attempted under duress & ignorance, but I thought judges had ruled this was invalid. The law has to stand and can not be removed.
That would suggest you are an employee, and not quasi self-employed as other competitor airlines would have you believe. If you are then, indeed, an employee would you not have some workers' rights under EU law, albeit from the agency? Is there some opt-out for agencies in the employer/employee relationship and obligations? Is the agency used an EU based one, and are you an EU citizen? Equally, IMHO, contracts can not be written so as to remove legal rights from the signee. That is often attempted under duress & ignorance, but I thought judges had ruled this was invalid. The law has to stand and can not be removed.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In my seat
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Direct Bondi,
Utter tosh what you wrote.
When you get your uniform, roster and badge from the Airline that "rents" you, you are effectively EMPLOYED by that airline, and NOT by the "middle man" who is just a facade for FALSE SELF EMPLOYMENT.
That IS EU law. maybe things are different in your part of the World, but here in Europe, the law is quite strict and as Ryanair and others are experiencing, the noose is tightening around those employers who have avoided social and employment legislation for many years. Bear in mind that False Selfemployment is ALWAYS the fault of the employER, and that illegal contracts are ALWAYS the tesponsibility of the EMPLOYER, never the employee as the employer is expected to draw a legal contract, the employee is not meant to know the legality of a contract. FACT.
Utter tosh what you wrote.
When you get your uniform, roster and badge from the Airline that "rents" you, you are effectively EMPLOYED by that airline, and NOT by the "middle man" who is just a facade for FALSE SELF EMPLOYMENT.
That IS EU law. maybe things are different in your part of the World, but here in Europe, the law is quite strict and as Ryanair and others are experiencing, the noose is tightening around those employers who have avoided social and employment legislation for many years. Bear in mind that False Selfemployment is ALWAYS the fault of the employER, and that illegal contracts are ALWAYS the tesponsibility of the EMPLOYER, never the employee as the employer is expected to draw a legal contract, the employee is not meant to know the legality of a contract. FACT.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sicyon
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OECD - Article 15
Due to Tax Fraud and other 'events' around the Globe, the old Taxation principle of being 'taxed' in your country of 'residence' is no longer acceptable. Thanks to Ryanair pilots 'declaring their residence in a small village (actually a pub) in western Ireland' pilots are now on 24/7/365 day open season Tax Inspectors Menu!
To close the noose on Global Companies and other 'enterprises' who have been using loopholes, the OECD Article 15 surfaced. The Taxation principle is now on 'who benefits from your services and not where you reside' ie. being TAXED at source and not on the individual to 'self declare'.
http://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/1914467.pdf
Article 15
INCOME FROM EMPLOYMENT
1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 16, 18 and 19, salaries, wages and other similar remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment shall be taxable only in that State unless the employment is exercised in the other Contracting State. If the employment is so exercised, such remuneration as is derived there from may be taxed in that other State.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment exercised in the other Contracting State shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State if:
a) the recipient is present in the other State for a period or periods not exceeding in the aggregate 183 days in any
twelve month period commencing or ending in the fiscal year concerned, and
b) the remuneration is paid by, or on behalf of, an employer who is not a resident of the other State, and
c) the remuneration is not borne by a permanent establishment which the employer has in the other State.
3. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Article, remuneration derived in respect of an employment exercised aboard a ship or aircraft operated in international traffic, or aboard a boat engaged in inland waterways transport, may be taxed in the Contracting State in which the place of effective management of the enterprise is situated.
NOTE:
- the key is 'effective management'
However, some countries are not happy about pilots working for Ryanair and paying 'token tax' in Ireland but living full time in the country where they are based. These countries have instigated their own legislation to 'ensure tax is paid in the country where the services (children in state schools/medical facilities) are being used'.
How does one become a 'nobody'?
To close the noose on Global Companies and other 'enterprises' who have been using loopholes, the OECD Article 15 surfaced. The Taxation principle is now on 'who benefits from your services and not where you reside' ie. being TAXED at source and not on the individual to 'self declare'.
http://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/1914467.pdf
Article 15
INCOME FROM EMPLOYMENT
1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 16, 18 and 19, salaries, wages and other similar remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment shall be taxable only in that State unless the employment is exercised in the other Contracting State. If the employment is so exercised, such remuneration as is derived there from may be taxed in that other State.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment exercised in the other Contracting State shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State if:
a) the recipient is present in the other State for a period or periods not exceeding in the aggregate 183 days in any
twelve month period commencing or ending in the fiscal year concerned, and
b) the remuneration is paid by, or on behalf of, an employer who is not a resident of the other State, and
c) the remuneration is not borne by a permanent establishment which the employer has in the other State.
3. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Article, remuneration derived in respect of an employment exercised aboard a ship or aircraft operated in international traffic, or aboard a boat engaged in inland waterways transport, may be taxed in the Contracting State in which the place of effective management of the enterprise is situated.
NOTE:
- the key is 'effective management'
However, some countries are not happy about pilots working for Ryanair and paying 'token tax' in Ireland but living full time in the country where they are based. These countries have instigated their own legislation to 'ensure tax is paid in the country where the services (children in state schools/medical facilities) are being used'.
How does one become a 'nobody'?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
despegue:
Your post is probably the most absurd on any thread regarding Norwegian so far. However, you are not the only chump deceived by Norwegian's employment circumvention. You are confusing the perception that Norwegian is the employer with the reality of the agency being the actual employer. Even those agency pilots flying for Norwegian who disagree with my posts, have acknowledged their employment relationship is with the agency and NOT with Norwegian. Your purported "facts" are easily trashed:
Your assumption that because Norwegian issues an ID badge, uniform and roster, automatically forms a legally binding employment relationship because Norwegian 'controls' the pilot, is based on nothing more that an obscure EU Employment Law, part-definition, interpreted at the discretion of the respective member state. It is entirely unenforceable due to Norwegian's convoluted employment circumvention. Notwithstanding, the Norwegian ID badge names OSM as the employer - (certainly for 787 crew).
If, as you suggest, Norwegian is the employer, why does BALPA disagree and state: "120 NAS pilots operating out of Gatwick and employed by OSM Aviation"
Link: BALPA | Norwegian Air Shuttle & West Atlantic pilots join growing BALPA pilot family
Also, why does BALPA represent its member pilots only to OSM and not directly to Norwegian? - Answer: A Trade Union can only represent members to their employer (Trade Union and Labor Relations Act 1992).
The Scandinavian group of Norwegian's pilots are the only pilots directly employed by Norwegian. Those pilots have all associated labor rights and labor principles, including seniority, union representation and collective agreement directly with Norwegian. Note: these pilots also have a defined disciplinary process, right to union representation and appeal.
Agency employed pilots rented by Norwegian have none of the above with Norwegian whatsoever. Previous agency contracts have included the clause: "The pilot shall have no claim nor rights as an employee of the lessee airline" - or similar wording.
Once again: As an agency employed pilot rented by Norwegian, your services may be terminated by Norwegian at any time, entirely without recourse. Norwegian simply notifies the agency your particular services are no longer required. The agency then removes you from their contract with Norwegian and may, or may not, find you alternative work. Your notice period is with the agency, not Norwegian. Your employment contract/agreement with the agency almost certainly indemnifies the agency from their obligations due to any action taken by the airline.
Contact any pilot representative organization to confirm the above:
NPU website:
NPU - Norwegian Pilot Union
PARAT website:
Paratluftfart
European Cockpit Association website:
https://www.eurocockpit.be/
Norwegian Airline Pilot Association, NF website:
Norsk Flygerforbund
BALPA website:
https://www.balpa.org/
Your post is probably the most absurd on any thread regarding Norwegian so far. However, you are not the only chump deceived by Norwegian's employment circumvention. You are confusing the perception that Norwegian is the employer with the reality of the agency being the actual employer. Even those agency pilots flying for Norwegian who disagree with my posts, have acknowledged their employment relationship is with the agency and NOT with Norwegian. Your purported "facts" are easily trashed:
Your assumption that because Norwegian issues an ID badge, uniform and roster, automatically forms a legally binding employment relationship because Norwegian 'controls' the pilot, is based on nothing more that an obscure EU Employment Law, part-definition, interpreted at the discretion of the respective member state. It is entirely unenforceable due to Norwegian's convoluted employment circumvention. Notwithstanding, the Norwegian ID badge names OSM as the employer - (certainly for 787 crew).
If, as you suggest, Norwegian is the employer, why does BALPA disagree and state: "120 NAS pilots operating out of Gatwick and employed by OSM Aviation"
Link: BALPA | Norwegian Air Shuttle & West Atlantic pilots join growing BALPA pilot family
Also, why does BALPA represent its member pilots only to OSM and not directly to Norwegian? - Answer: A Trade Union can only represent members to their employer (Trade Union and Labor Relations Act 1992).
The Scandinavian group of Norwegian's pilots are the only pilots directly employed by Norwegian. Those pilots have all associated labor rights and labor principles, including seniority, union representation and collective agreement directly with Norwegian. Note: these pilots also have a defined disciplinary process, right to union representation and appeal.
Agency employed pilots rented by Norwegian have none of the above with Norwegian whatsoever. Previous agency contracts have included the clause: "The pilot shall have no claim nor rights as an employee of the lessee airline" - or similar wording.
Once again: As an agency employed pilot rented by Norwegian, your services may be terminated by Norwegian at any time, entirely without recourse. Norwegian simply notifies the agency your particular services are no longer required. The agency then removes you from their contract with Norwegian and may, or may not, find you alternative work. Your notice period is with the agency, not Norwegian. Your employment contract/agreement with the agency almost certainly indemnifies the agency from their obligations due to any action taken by the airline.
Contact any pilot representative organization to confirm the above:
NPU website:
NPU - Norwegian Pilot Union
PARAT website:
Paratluftfart
European Cockpit Association website:
https://www.eurocockpit.be/
Norwegian Airline Pilot Association, NF website:
Norsk Flygerforbund
BALPA website:
https://www.balpa.org/
Last edited by Direct Bondi; 3rd Sep 2015 at 07:56. Reason: correct BALPA website link
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am preparing my application to join Norwegian. I hear its a great place to work with new aircraft, friendly crew and good training. Obviously the first year or two can be tricky with the part time but am thinking its really worth it in the longer run?
Anyone have any ideas of numbers and what bases are likely?
Anyone have any ideas of numbers and what bases are likely?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to Tax Fraud and other 'events' around the Globe, the old Taxation principle of being 'taxed' in your country of 'residence' is no longer acceptable. Thanks to Ryanair pilots 'declaring their residence in a small village (actually a pub) in western Ireland' pilots are now on 24/7/365 day open season Tax Inspectors Menu!
To close the noose on Global Companies and other 'enterprises' who have been using loopholes, the OECD Article 15 surfaced. The Taxation principle is now on 'who benefits from your services and not where you reside' ie. being TAXED at source and not on the individual to 'self declare'.
http://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/1914467.pdf
Article 15
INCOME FROM EMPLOYMENT
1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 16, 18 and 19, salaries, wages and other similar remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment shall be taxable only in that State unless the employment is exercised in the other Contracting State. If the employment is so exercised, such remuneration as is derived there from may be taxed in that other State.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment exercised in the other Contracting State shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State if:
a) the recipient is present in the other State for a period or periods not exceeding in the aggregate 183 days in any
twelve month period commencing or ending in the fiscal year concerned, and
b) the remuneration is paid by, or on behalf of, an employer who is not a resident of the other State, and
c) the remuneration is not borne by a permanent establishment which the employer has in the other State.
3. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Article, remuneration derived in respect of an employment exercised aboard a ship or aircraft operated in international traffic, or aboard a boat engaged in inland waterways transport, may be taxed in the Contracting State in which the place of effective management of the enterprise is situated.
NOTE:
- the key is 'effective management'
However, some countries are not happy about pilots working for Ryanair and paying 'token tax' in Ireland but living full time in the country where they are based. These countries have instigated their own legislation to 'ensure tax is paid in the country where the services (children in state schools/medical facilities) are being used'.
How does one become a 'nobody'?
To close the noose on Global Companies and other 'enterprises' who have been using loopholes, the OECD Article 15 surfaced. The Taxation principle is now on 'who benefits from your services and not where you reside' ie. being TAXED at source and not on the individual to 'self declare'.
http://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/1914467.pdf
Article 15
INCOME FROM EMPLOYMENT
1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 16, 18 and 19, salaries, wages and other similar remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment shall be taxable only in that State unless the employment is exercised in the other Contracting State. If the employment is so exercised, such remuneration as is derived there from may be taxed in that other State.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, remuneration derived by a resident of a Contracting State in respect of an employment exercised in the other Contracting State shall be taxable only in the first-mentioned State if:
a) the recipient is present in the other State for a period or periods not exceeding in the aggregate 183 days in any
twelve month period commencing or ending in the fiscal year concerned, and
b) the remuneration is paid by, or on behalf of, an employer who is not a resident of the other State, and
c) the remuneration is not borne by a permanent establishment which the employer has in the other State.
3. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Article, remuneration derived in respect of an employment exercised aboard a ship or aircraft operated in international traffic, or aboard a boat engaged in inland waterways transport, may be taxed in the Contracting State in which the place of effective management of the enterprise is situated.
NOTE:
- the key is 'effective management'
However, some countries are not happy about pilots working for Ryanair and paying 'token tax' in Ireland but living full time in the country where they are based. These countries have instigated their own legislation to 'ensure tax is paid in the country where the services (children in state schools/medical facilities) are being used'.
How does one become a 'nobody'?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Published date: 07.09.2015 - Updated: 07.09.2015
Norwegian summoned for unfair dismissal of senior safety
Captain and chief during spring pilot strike in Norwegian has been sacked because of "unacceptable behavior." Parat believes the dismissal is unjustified and an attack on the role of shop steward.
Leader in Federation Hans-Erik Skjæggerud says Parat will give the captain dismissed all legal support and use all available means to prevent the employer attack on the role of senior safety representative.
- It can not be that Norwegian workers who undertake statutory duties risking dismissal when they take up current issues and we look forward to having the case comes to trial, says Skjæggerud.
Lawyer in Parat Christen Horn Johannessen says Norwegian justifies the dismissal of the company not trust him because of what they refer to as "unacceptable behavior as an employee captain and the role of chief safety."
- Contrary to the company, we believe he has fulfilled his obligations as senior safety, where he has had a role in which it has been natural and right to take up to criticism. This issue touches fundamental aspects of employment protection for employees in sensitive roles, both unionized and chief says Horn Johannessen.
Contact:
Hans-Erik Skjæggerud
Parat Leader
Mobile: 959 38 769
[email protected]
Original article
http://parat.com/newarticle.aspx?m=7...9#.Ve7iA-kUvjC
Norwegian summoned for unfair dismissal of senior safety
Captain and chief during spring pilot strike in Norwegian has been sacked because of "unacceptable behavior." Parat believes the dismissal is unjustified and an attack on the role of shop steward.
Leader in Federation Hans-Erik Skjæggerud says Parat will give the captain dismissed all legal support and use all available means to prevent the employer attack on the role of senior safety representative.
- It can not be that Norwegian workers who undertake statutory duties risking dismissal when they take up current issues and we look forward to having the case comes to trial, says Skjæggerud.
Lawyer in Parat Christen Horn Johannessen says Norwegian justifies the dismissal of the company not trust him because of what they refer to as "unacceptable behavior as an employee captain and the role of chief safety."
- Contrary to the company, we believe he has fulfilled his obligations as senior safety, where he has had a role in which it has been natural and right to take up to criticism. This issue touches fundamental aspects of employment protection for employees in sensitive roles, both unionized and chief says Horn Johannessen.
Contact:
Hans-Erik Skjæggerud
Parat Leader
Mobile: 959 38 769
[email protected]
Original article
http://parat.com/newarticle.aspx?m=7...9#.Ve7iA-kUvjC
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Schloss Neuschwanstein
Posts: 3,715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
catplaystation - the sad fact is that, despite overwhelming evidence to suggest to many that Norwegian are a company run by charlatans, the unwise and uninformed just keep coming. The history of aviation has shown on numerous occasions that pilots consciously choose to ignore a plethora of facts about their potential employers (and future partners!) that would make the average bear run for many miles in the opposite direction. Such is the nature of misplaced optimism. It really cannot be all that bad, and surely an employer cannot be that unscrupulous etc. Yes, it can be that bad and yes, they can be that unscrupulous - but still they keep coming, choosing to believe that all they have heard is lies, with the same certainty they once believed in fairies at the bottom of their Gran's garden and that Santa would visit them every Christmas morning. So here we sit on this thread, listening to numerous personal testimonies of shameful dealings, and still the likes of Speedoneeighty and APUinop are just champing at the bit to get in there. There will be no one more surprised than them when they are laid off next winter, and no one less surprised than me that they were so gullible. It is a strange world indeed.
