ALPA on Emirates and Etihad

[General Lee]

I see you disagree ....... Four years at Emirates or Trans States ? You choose.

Click here: Dubai - the rules - YouTube


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[GogglesPisano]

Cut them some slack. They get a free limo to/from the compound. And their FA's are hot. So it's all good.

 

[8sugarsugar]

http://www.emirates247.com/news/emi...00-high-paying-jobs-in-us-2013-03-29-1.500536

 

[Jetjockey]

Give up civil rights, right to join a union, and other various forms for oppression for a paycheck.......NO thanks.

Might be good for some.

 

[SplitBar]

Click here: Dubai - the rules - YouTube


Bye Bye---General Lee

Wow. I was lucky to get out of there without jail time when I interviewed back in 2006. It was a 5 day party and the EK guys were holding the leash. Good times.

 

[Flyer1015]

New U.S.-U.A.E. Business Council Aviation Report Released
The United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) has been running an aggressive PR campaign in the United States to win support for its state-sponsored airlines. A new report by the U.S.-U.A.E. Business Council goes as far as to exalt the benefits to U.S. workers from the commercial aviation partnership between the United States and the U.A.E.

The above is good news. Notihng wrong with that.

However, the report fails to mention that Emirates’ and Etihad’s expansion poses a direct threat to U.S. pilot and aviation jobs.

Oh yikes! A country has an airline that is growing and it's a threat to US pilots and aviation jobs. Oh no. How can this be? Capitalism competition?!

While the report heralds the value of this aviation “partnership,” only 2 of the 13 daily U.S.–U.A.E. nonstop flights are operated by U.S. airlines, and no U.S. airline flies into or out of Abu Dhabi.

And who's freakin fault is that? Why don't the US airlines operate more flights to Dubai or Abu Dhabi. Delta and United pack those flights with good loads. This is a stupid argument. You can't really cry wolf when you don't go there in the first place.

]quote] Furthermore, the U.A.E. airlines do not need to adhere to labor relations rules comparable to those that govern our domestic carriers, and they operate at a competitive cost advantage thanks to the U.A.E.’s favorable tax and regulatory structure.[/quote]
In America, we call that Chapter 11 and then motion 1113e.

Increased international air travel certainly has the potential to deliver economic benefits to the United States; however, the U.S. government should promote policies that ensure U.S. aviation jobs are protected as this expansion occurs and promote the growth and success of our domestic airlines.

If our airlines can't function and make profits after taking everyone to the cleaners through Chp 11, then they need to go out of business.

As a starting point, ALPA has proposed reducing the tax burden on U.S. airlines, maintaining strong foreign ownership and cabotage restrictions,

Agreed with above. The tax burden on US airlines is getting ridiculous. But, the government is broke so there won't be any changes here anytime soon.

and avoiding gifting one-sided advantages to foreign competitors, such as the creation of a CBP preclearance facility at Abu Dhabi airport.

That's a nice convenience. Doesn't mean our pilots will be furloughed and Delta goes out of business just because Abu Dhabi opened a CBP preclearance. Good for them. Maybe that will finally get a US airline to start serving Abu Dhabi.

 

[Flyer1015]

I can't edit the above post.

This part should have read:

Furthermore, the U.A.E. airlines do not need to adhere to labor relations rules comparable to those that govern our domestic carriers, and they operate at a competitive cost advantage thanks to the U.A.E.’s favorable tax and regulatory structure.

In America, we call that Chapter 11 and then motion 1113e.

 

[Jetjockey]

The flaw with the above argument is that it's NOT capitalism in the truest sense. It's state sponsored competition based on skewed favoritism for the national carrier. To compete, the US would need a viable aviation policy. The sad part is the US government sees the airlines in this country, (and it's customers) as a big fat piggy bank. Aviation is taxed higher than a "sin" tax that tobacco and alcohol gets hit with.

If you have no problem with the US airline industry going the same was as US shipping industry, then Support Arab Emerites based airlines.

 

[Flyer1015]

The flaw with the above argument is that it's NOT capitalism in the truest sense. It's state sponsored competition based on skewed favoritism for the national carrier. To compete, the US would need a viable aviation policy. The sad part is the US government sees the airlines in this country, (and it's customers) as a big fat piggy bank. Aviation is taxed higher than a "sin" tax that tobacco and alcohol gets hit with.

If you have no problem with the US airline industry going the same was as US shipping industry, then Support Arab Emerites based airlines.

Agreed that the US government taxes the airlines way too much and does see them as a huge revenue source. "9/11 security fee" what BS. It's the government's job to protect our skies, and they shouldn't be taxing US airlines for this "9/11 security fee." Do everyone a favor and disband the TSA and replace with privatized security that is efficient and runs in fewer numbers than the thousands standing around with full pensions.

And MOST people I know that fly Emirates or Abu Dhabi aren't doing it to travel within America or to Europe. They are connecting to cities that just aren't served by USA airlines. MANY connect to countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and tons of African counries/cities that are untouched by USA. On a EK or EY flight, only a small portion will stay in DXB or AUH, the rest are all connecting to destinations outside of .

For example, an Iranian American citizen hoping to see his family in Tehran has no USA option. He must take either EK or EY through DXB or AUH to get there. Same goes for Pakistan, Bangladesh, and many countries in the Middle East. In fact, in the middle east, Delta and United do Dubai and United also does Bahrain/Kuwait. Those are the only Middle East destinations I know that USA airlines do (excluding Tel Aviv). Everything else is left untouched.

Most people don't take Emirates to go from USA to Europe, it would just be too long and the cost the same (or more) as opposed to taking a USA carrier over to Europe. I see the ME carriers fulfilling a role that the USA airlines just can't, places in the ME, Africa, Indian Subcontinent, and Asia.

 

[GogglesPisano]

It seems like the guys in the US who have decent jobs at major airlines can see the light and can remember what this job used to be like. For everyone else it's sour grapes and their rooting for the other team.