Trump supports NAI
02-09-2017, 04:44 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2012
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 508
Trump supports NAI
Originally Posted by NEDude
If you publicly post who you work for, then I will do the same.
As for enlightening you about how it put upward pressure on wages I have stated it many times. But here it goes again:
Over the past five years Norwegian (all of Norwegian - NAS, NAI, NAN and NUK) has grown significantly at the same time as more European airlines have begun to hire. Many of the smaller airlines and other LCCs have begun to lose pilots to the Norwegian group. As a result many of them have had to improve the salaries and working conditions in order to attract and retain pilots. My wife's airline (she works in crew planning) recently raised wages approximately 8% across the board and instituted a fixed roster pattern in an effort to retain pilots who have been leaving for Norwegian. Over the past year I have worked two contract jobs in Europe and have seen the terms and conditions increase. For my most recent contract I was asked in the interview if I had interest in returning to China or if I had looked at the Norwegian long haul operation (I am an Airbus guy but Norwegian has been known to occasionally accept Airbus time for the 787 operation). They have had pilots leave for both, had just increased their contract offering, and wanted to know if that was something I was considering.
The European market is very different than the U.S. market, the legacy airlines tend to be very protective of their nationalities and often practice blatant age discrimination - Lufthansa and Austrian have very strict age requirements. If you are a 45 year old experienced pilot from Ireland, you have ZERO chance of getting a job with most legacy airlines in Europe and your options at home are limited to Ryanair, an occasional cadet opening with Aer Lingus, and ....Norwegian. If you are a 45 year old experienced pilot from Ohio, you have a very good shot at American, Delta or United. It is just a very different environment over here and clearly, from many of the statements made on here, many of you fail to comprehend that. The options for a 45 year old experienced pilot in Europe are just not the same as they are in the States. And when compared to what is available for an experienced pilot in their 40s or 50s, Norwegian is actually a pretty decent option overall. It is certainly a lot better than Germania, or Small Planet, or Primera, HiFly, Avion Express, Jet Time, WizzAir or any of the other ACMI or ULCCs out there. And without question it is far better than the Lufthansa alter-ego Eurowings.
As for enlightening you about how it put upward pressure on wages I have stated it many times. But here it goes again:
Over the past five years Norwegian (all of Norwegian - NAS, NAI, NAN and NUK) has grown significantly at the same time as more European airlines have begun to hire. Many of the smaller airlines and other LCCs have begun to lose pilots to the Norwegian group. As a result many of them have had to improve the salaries and working conditions in order to attract and retain pilots. My wife's airline (she works in crew planning) recently raised wages approximately 8% across the board and instituted a fixed roster pattern in an effort to retain pilots who have been leaving for Norwegian. Over the past year I have worked two contract jobs in Europe and have seen the terms and conditions increase. For my most recent contract I was asked in the interview if I had interest in returning to China or if I had looked at the Norwegian long haul operation (I am an Airbus guy but Norwegian has been known to occasionally accept Airbus time for the 787 operation). They have had pilots leave for both, had just increased their contract offering, and wanted to know if that was something I was considering.
The European market is very different than the U.S. market, the legacy airlines tend to be very protective of their nationalities and often practice blatant age discrimination - Lufthansa and Austrian have very strict age requirements. If you are a 45 year old experienced pilot from Ireland, you have ZERO chance of getting a job with most legacy airlines in Europe and your options at home are limited to Ryanair, an occasional cadet opening with Aer Lingus, and ....Norwegian. If you are a 45 year old experienced pilot from Ohio, you have a very good shot at American, Delta or United. It is just a very different environment over here and clearly, from many of the statements made on here, many of you fail to comprehend that. The options for a 45 year old experienced pilot in Europe are just not the same as they are in the States. And when compared to what is available for an experienced pilot in their 40s or 50s, Norwegian is actually a pretty decent option overall. It is certainly a lot better than Germania, or Small Planet, or Primera, HiFly, Avion Express, Jet Time, WizzAir or any of the other ACMI or ULCCs out there. And without question it is far better than the Lufthansa alter-ego Eurowings.
SWA. Your turn. Ok, thanks for the explanation. I understand where you're coming from in regard to your limited options of carriers to work for as a middle aged pilot in Europe and I'm sorry to hear that. You presented a laundry list of carriers that are undesirable places to work for in Europe all the while mentioning that we have great options to chose from here in the states. I think what you are failing to comprehend is that most pilots in the states DON'T want to follow in Europe's footsteps in creating such a landscape where Norwegian "looks pretty decent" because quite frankly, from our perspective, it doesn't at all. Many view NAI as the proverbial camel's nose in that regard. If you take a gander at the the airline profile sections on this site of the biggest carriers here (that are all massively hiring btw), you can clearly see that we don't need NAI to help bring upward pressure on pilot wages.
I may have missed your response, but why is SAS planning to launch an airline in Ireland?
Last edited by Burton78; 02-09-2017 at 04:58 AM.
02-09-2017, 06:35 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted by Burton78
SWA. Your turn. Ok, thanks for the explanation. I understand where you're coming from in regard to your limited options of carriers to work for as a middle aged pilot in Europe and I'm sorry to hear that. You presented a laundry list of carriers that are undesirable places to work for in Europe all the while mentioning that we have great options to chose from here in the states. I think what you are failing to comprehend is that most pilots in the states DON'T want to follow in Europe's footsteps in creating such a landscape where Norwegian "looks pretty decent" because quite frankly, from our perspective, it doesn't at all. Many view NAI as the proverbial camel's nose in that regard. If you take a gander at the the airline profile sections on this site of the biggest carriers here (that are all massively hiring btw), you can clearly see that we don't need NAI to help bring upward pressure on pilot wages.
I may have missed your response, but why is SAS planning to launch an airline in Ireland?
I may have missed your response, but why is SAS planning to launch an airline in Ireland?
My other issue with the campaign against NAI is a lot of the information spread is wrong, and most of the legal opinions by those who are in a position to know agree that there is no legal basis by which to deny NAI. If NAI is denied, what happens next? Does the DOT then go after my company because of the use of contract pilots? Do they go after any airline that uses contract pilots? Do they then go after any European airline that has multiple AOCs in several countries? Does the EU retaliate if the DOT violates the Open Skies agreement if they ignore the ruling of an arbitrator? This can also be a slippery slope the other way. I get not liking the idea of NAI, but the legal opinions have been made and decision was made by the DOT. To keep the fight going, in hopes of revoking an already approved permit, with false claims of Asian pilots contracted through Singapore (doesn't happen), and ignorance of labour law of the various nations of the EU/EEA, seems like it can lead to very dangerous precedents that could also be harmful.
As for SAS, I am not totally sure. But Ireland is well known provide very favourable tax advantages, such as favourable breaks on aircraft depreciation. It also has much simpler rules when it comes to accounting. On the labour point, Ireland does require lower social security contributions than many other EU countries, so that is another advantage too. But I have not done any research on the proposed SAS operation.
02-09-2017, 07:27 AM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
If the European pilot environment is as described where NAI looks good why are people still signing up for the job? In general Europe is more expensive to live than the US and with pay that low the buying power is even lower. Why in the world are people becoming pilots. I gotta say I wouldn't be doing it if those were the options. I mean is the whole industry just full of naive kids trying to live a dream? At some point they must realize when they have a family that the pay and qol just doesn't add up, right?
02-09-2017, 07:55 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Posts: 846
Originally Posted by NEDude
All of their pilots are hired under UK or Norwegian pilot contracts. Even the American pilots would be hired under OSM, which is a Norwegian agency. And in Europe, you are covered by the labour law of the country where you are based. So Barcelona based pilots for Norwegian are covered by both Spanish and Norwegian/UK labour law, depending which agency they are contracted through. Amsterdam based pilots are covered under Dutch labour law in addition to their contract. Paris based pilots are covered under French labour laws. All of this is in writing, it is in the pilot contracts and it is written into the labour laws of all the countries involved. In addition EASA regulations mean you are also covered under the laws of the country where the aircraft you are operating is registered. All of this has been reported in multiple sources, do a Google search and you will find it.
Then why create these subsidiaries? What is it then that Norwegian is trying to do with these subsidiaries if they can do all these things with the original Norwegian Airlines?
02-09-2017, 09:16 AM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2015
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by Judge Smails
Obama couldn't stop it. The administration admitted there was nothing they could do to stop it. Trump didn't try. Not only that, his administration actually likes it. There's the difference.
My point is Trump supporters are naively championing him as a jobs Messiah. Republicans have been and always will be the party of big business.
My point is Trump supporters are naively championing him as a jobs Messiah. Republicans have been and always will be the party of big business.
The only naivety I see is the rose colored alt universe that you see when we talk about what the Democrat president did to us.
02-09-2017, 09:18 AM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 607
Don't worry gents, you can be sure that Mr. Trump has the utmost respect for airline pilots; in fact his older brother Freddy flew for TWA.
Freddy disgraced himself by leaving the family real estate business to pursue his aviation dream. He died in his 40's from alcoholism, his heirs cut out of the family fortune.
"What Donald told me at the time was that he and his father had perhaps been way too hard on him. They used to say to him, because he was an airline pilot, 'What’s the difference between what you do, Freddy, and driving a bus?'" -Marie Brenner, Vanity Fair, from PBS Frontline
Freddy disgraced himself by leaving the family real estate business to pursue his aviation dream. He died in his 40's from alcoholism, his heirs cut out of the family fortune.
"What Donald told me at the time was that he and his father had perhaps been way too hard on him. They used to say to him, because he was an airline pilot, 'What’s the difference between what you do, Freddy, and driving a bus?'" -Marie Brenner, Vanity Fair, from PBS Frontline
02-09-2017, 09:32 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: A320
Posts: 694
Originally Posted by Bluesideup1
All he had to do is not sign it. How is it he couldn't stop it? He also said nothing that would indicate that he didn't like it.
The only naivety I see is the rose colored alt universe that you see when we talk about what the Democrat president did to us.
The only naivety I see is the rose colored alt universe that you see when we talk about what the Democrat president did to us.
The DOT made the decision it was legal, you don't think that tied Obama's hands? Leaders can't pick and choose which parts of the Open Skies agreement they want to follow, otherwise the whole thing could go out the window.
I'm not saying I agree with NAI, I think it's shady as hell, but don't blame Obama, blame the ambiguous language and loopholes of Open Skies, which BTW was approved originally by a Republican administration.
02-09-2017, 10:39 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 751
02-09-2017, 10:51 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
If the choice is between 100,000 jobs that each pay $200,000 or 200,000 jobs that each pay $100,000, which will sell better politically? Which will fulfill the promise to create more jobs? Which will voters be more sympathetic to when the average annual salary is nearer to $50,000.
If foreign airlines say they will hire 50% U.S. workers, increasing the total number of jobs, regardless of pay, seems this administration will be all for it. Heck, Spicer in today's press briefing is already taking credit for the low unemployment rate, after just 3 weeks in office. "We are putting Americans back to work."
This is going to a quick decision and it's likely we are currently under the best contracts we will ever see. Next round of contracts, "pattern bargaining" will include U.S. pilots working at reduced scales with foreign airlines. When the door gets opened for them there is no bottom the airlines won't push for. Look to the '80s and the '00s for that.
If foreign airlines say they will hire 50% U.S. workers, increasing the total number of jobs, regardless of pay, seems this administration will be all for it. Heck, Spicer in today's press briefing is already taking credit for the low unemployment rate, after just 3 weeks in office. "We are putting Americans back to work."
This is going to a quick decision and it's likely we are currently under the best contracts we will ever see. Next round of contracts, "pattern bargaining" will include U.S. pilots working at reduced scales with foreign airlines. When the door gets opened for them there is no bottom the airlines won't push for. Look to the '80s and the '00s for that.
Last edited by APC225; 02-09-2017 at 11:17 AM.
02-09-2017, 11:22 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Posts: 846
Originally Posted by APC225
If the choice is between 100,000 jobs that each pay $200,000 or 200,000 jobs that each pay $100,000, which will sell better politically? Which will fulfill the promise to create more jobs? Which will voters be more sympathetic to when the average annual salary is nearer to $50,000.
If foreign airlines say they will hire 50% U.S. workers, increasing the total number of jobs, regardless of pay, seems this administration will be all for it. Heck, Spicer in today's press briefing is already taking credit for the low unemployment rate, after just 3 weeks in office. "We are putting Americans back to work."
This is going to a quick decision and it's likely we are currently under the best contracts we will ever see. Next round of contracts, "pattern bargaining" will include U.S. pilots working at reduced scales with foreign airlines. When the door gets opened for them there is no bottom the airlines won't push for. Look to the '80s and the '00s for that.
If foreign airlines say they will hire 50% U.S. workers, increasing the total number of jobs, regardless of pay, seems this administration will be all for it. Heck, Spicer in today's press briefing is already taking credit for the low unemployment rate, after just 3 weeks in office. "We are putting Americans back to work."
This is going to a quick decision and it's likely we are currently under the best contracts we will ever see. Next round of contracts, "pattern bargaining" will include U.S. pilots working at reduced scales with foreign airlines. When the door gets opened for them there is no bottom the airlines won't push for. Look to the '80s and the '00s for that.
How many jobs does Boeing create versus all the US airlines? How many jobs does US airlines lose every time they have to pull out of a European market? And how many less Boeings will the US airlines need because of the market erosion? How many jobs does Boeing outsource versus the US airlines? How did the state of Washington electoral vote go?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
