View Single Post
Old 02-20-2017 | 05:03 AM
  #42  
Beretta01's Avatar
Beretta01
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
From: A320
Default

Originally Posted by NEDude
Just a quick summary:

NAI is not a true 'flag of convenience' scheme because Ireland is a part of the European Union, meaning Norwegian is unable to skirt EU/EEA laws by starting a subsidiary in Ireland. Calling it a 'flag of convenience' also ignores the fact that pilots are also covered under the laws of the nation of their contract (which is Norway or the UK - NOT Singapore as ALPA claims), the nation where they are based, and the nation where the aircraft they are on is registered (ALL Norwegian aircraft are registered in Norway or the EU).

Starting or owning a subsidiary airline in another EU/EEA nation is not new and is not unique to Norwegian. Lufthansa, IAG (British Airways-Iberia), easyJet, and Thomas Cook, to name a few, own and operate subsidiary airlines in nations outside of where their main headquarters is. Most of the subsidiary airlines hold US DOT approval.

The use of contract employees is not new or unique to Norwegian and it is a common practice in many parts of the world. Brussels Airlines, WOW Air, Korean Air, Air China and many others make use of contract pilots and also hold US DOT approval.

Norwegian is an average paying job for the European market. Eurowings, a Lufthansa alter-ego airline which flies to 3 US destinations, pays 15% less for wide body pilots than Norwegian. Where is the ALPA outrage over that - an alter-ego airline significantly undercutting even the LCCs and competing against ALPA carriers?

Legal experts for the authorities on both sides of the Atlantic have examined the 'Open Skies' treaty as it relates to NAI and ALL OF THEM have concluded there is no legal basis for denying, or as the case is now, revoking the operating certificate of NAI. Revoking a legally issued operating certificate on zero legal grounds would only serve to start an aviation trade war between the nations of the Open Skies treaty. Who do you think would benefit from that? You are a fool if you think such a dispute would be beneficial to the careers of U.S. pilots.

If pointing out those facts makes me a tool, then so be it. But ignoring those facts and blindly following the ALPA propaganda makes the rest of you fools.
Might I ask: is employment at OSM/NAI worth being pseudo-blacklisted from every U.S. 121 air carrier minus Mesa/Go-Jet?
Reply