Originally Posted by
bedrock
As I understand it, it allows them to do what all multinationals are doing--shop for countries that give them the cheapest deal.
So they could incorporate in Ireland, have revenue generated in Switzerland, have labor based in Vietnam, and still have FAA certification to fly domestic routes. Something like that.
Kind of like American that has South American based flight attendants on 1/3 the pay of the U.S. based flight attendants. Oh, and United that has Asian based flight attendants on lesser terms than U.S. based flight attendants.
Then there is the whole Narita hub for both DAL and UAL. So that is kind of like "revenue generated in Switzerland", isn't it.
Again, when you debate against this get some facts straight so that you don't look like fools.
Is NAI a threat? Sure it is, but the fear mongering simplistic arguments that are being made against it by the pilots in the USA are not going to sway lawmakers. ALPA has done a slightly better job than what I read on here, but they're still coming up short on valid reasons to deny NAI.
TP