Cabotage Sabotage

[Rock]

I will admit that it is nice to see a democrat finally do the republican thing and finance an election with hard money. And rest assured that Dean is a very popular choice in both parties for the democrat Presidential candidacy .

 

[Pura Vida]

I think you are taking Dean's remark about Bin Laden out of context. Weren't the Nuremburgh trials by jury? Dean is simply saying that no one is above the law and we all must follow the law, even if the guilt is obvious. In other words, we must extend due process and if that includes having a jury trial then so be it.

No democratic candidate could ever hurt the piloting profession as much as a single Republican could. For the sake of your career man...open your eyes and see what is going on around you! Our profession is under attack from all sides. Only a president with a strong labor sense of fair play will be able to level the playing field again. Dean is not a middle of the road-sit on the fence type of guy. He is a hard hitting progressive candidate that will tell you like it is right to your face without whitewashing or circumventing the facts...unlike Bush and the Republicans in Congress who look out for the corporations rather than the individual citizens.

 

[Pez D. Spencer]

Originally posted by Pura Vida:

Anybody who thinks that Cabotage is not a threat to domestic U.S. jobs is a complete and total dumbass. You have your head so far up the Republican party's rear end that you are nothing more than a bought and paid for puppet...just like Bush - our illegitimate president.

I disagree.

Look into what Cabotage means. The real US jobs' concern is relaxing nationality/ownership laws. That is the major goal of the EU and that is where the threat to US jobs exists. There are plenty of other threads where this has been mentioned, but if the EU gets this concession, they will then push for labor laws to be relaxed. Then, US jobs are in jeopardy.

Cabotage is the "eighth freedom" right to begin a flight in one country that flies to a different country and continues service, with the right to pick up passengers in that second country, and continue to a second destination. Break of gauge rights included in that freedom would allow the airline to downsize the aircraft, if appropriate. This does not mean that the service will be able to continue to a third, fourth, or fifth destination.

So, is cabotage going to kill US jobs. NO. But, allowing Richard Branson to own a majority of a US airline, with a relaxation of the current US labor laws would threaten jobs in the US.

Branson made a deal in Australia which allowed him to own an airline there; however, the airline has to employ Australian nationals for labor needs. If he owns an airline in Australia, and Virgin can fly to Australia, then why would cabotage make a difference in Australia? It doesn't. And, because the government there required him to employ Australians, jobs were created, not lost. We must require the same in the US, although that is not what has been proposed.

The General has pointed out that "it is not likely for his mother to be taking a flight on Aeroflot from NY to LA" --- or, however he puts it. And, I'm pretty sure he's right.

Keeping our current labor laws intact, or even making them tougher, is paramount. I won't get into the political debate other than to say that both parties have been deeply involved in the current movement of open skies. I don't like the current trend in the ongoing negotiations - and will vote appropriately to prevent a loss of jobs in the US - to the extent that it is possible.

 

[VADriver]

Pez D. Spencer.... Always good for insightful, pragmatic and fact based post that challange one to think logically and not emotionally.

Know whadda mean dude? He's like...kewl and stuff....

 

[Spur]

No democratic candidate could ever hurt the piloting profession as much as a single Republican could.

Even if that were true, which it isn't, I would never sell out my Country for the sake of my job.

 

[jayme]

... but you won't mind sending your son or daughter to die for a warmonger?

 

[Publishers]

Pez

At least Pez somewhat understands what we are talking about. Personally I think labor has already screwed itself in this industry without the benefit or hindrance of cabotage.

Trying to tie this to terrorism is ludicrous.

 

[Pura Vida]

To Pez & Publishers,

Well let's see now. Neither of you seem to have any airline experience whatsoever but you act like you know what is best for the rest of us. Explain to us what will happen when cabotage allows China Airlines to fly a 747 between New York and Fort Lauderdale for $39 ROUNDTRIP or some kind of ridiculous low fare like that thereby robbing the revenue of every other U.S. airline on that route while lowering the bar yet once again?

As for Spur. You become more of an idiot with every post you make. Nobody said anything about selling out our country for the sake of a job. You are obviously a well-oiled republican because they excel at making up lies and stories.

 

[Rock]

Pura Vida,

You said..."No democratic candidate could ever hurt the piloting profession as much as a single Republican could. For the sake of your career man...open your eyes and see what is going on around you!" Clearly, your motivation for being a one man cheerleading squad for Howard Dean and the democrat party is the piloting profession. Good for you. For most Americans, there are things more important in life than their chosen profession. That is why the Republican party currently holds the House, the Senate and the Presidency. That is why George Bush is currently the most admired man in America. And that is why none of that will change in the 2004 election. If you and your sophomoric insult posts are representative of what Howard Dean stands for, than I have a better understanding of why his lead is declining in front of a pack of otherwise unremarkable democrat contenders. Your arguments are entirely unconvincing, and probably counterproductive for Howard Dean's campaign. So keep the insults flying and keep up the good work.

 

[Cyclone]

cabotage

For what it's worth.

This thread wasn't started to instigate a political debate about which candidates are bigger jackarses.

Cabotage effects include economic fallout that may create more competition in an already intensely competitive environment. And with respect to foreign carriers...the playing field is not level.

Security concern? We can debate this too.

The original post merely pointed out the "way" the vast majority of Republicans voted (I'm not a Republican or a Democrat). It surprised me that all but 2-3 Republican Senators approved the amendment. The sad thing about it is that this is the norm...politicians tend to vote the party line...regardless of what the right thing to do is. To them, the party line is usually what's "right." Even when it's wrong. That's what makes them politicians. There are plenty of bad examples on both sides.

Cabotage is a threat...some of our posters (publishers, pez, etc) believe "security issues" are too much of a stretch...OK...entitled to their opinion. But, I don't think anyone can contest that cabotage has the potential to be a huge threat in exactly the same way Al Qaeda creamed us on 9/11--our pocketbooks.

 

[GogglesPisano]

I seem to have heard that a certain Democrat Pres had Osama offered on a silver platter, but was too buisy trying to retrieve a lost cigar to take Qatar up on their offer.... things that make ya go HMMMMM

I'll bet you heard that one on Fox News. With the deal-maker himself, a Raid Mansur, on screen. The story has been repudiated by more reputable news organizations

 

[Pez D. Spencer]

VADriver, Thanks for your nice words.

Cyclone,
I do not believe that security issues are too much of a stretch - that is a valid threat that I won't even debate... you'll find me in complete agreement with you, therefore, no need to debate. (I don't even remember implying my concern). The argument I focused on was the impact to US jobs. We could debate whether cabotage, alone, will result in huge divets in American pocketbooks - or is it just the tip of the iceberg? IMO, there is a bigger issue (other than cabotage) at stake that will impact US jobs.

Pura Vida,
Is the US currently negotiating new "open skies" bilaterals with Asian markets? Where can I find info about those negotiations? I am aware of the current bilaterals, but they don't include cabotage. A Chinese 747 doing laps for $39... don't you think that if that was profitable then some US LCC's might have already figured that out? Sorry, but I see no way to debate your points, although I see plenty of ways to shoot holes in your example.

I realize that you have two battles going on here - the political debate and the actual subject that this thread is predicated on... but, don't confuse me with your other debate. I am not attacking you. I am interested in what you have to say about cabotage. But, so far, I don't agree with you - and that does not mean that I am not just as concerned about US jobs/airlines as you are. Nor does it mean that I want eighth freedoms extended to the EU or Asia. IMO, the larger issue is nationality/ownership - and the impact that would have on labor laws and US jobs.

Can't see the forest for the trees? Well, go back and read my original post - if nationality/ownership is relaxed along with labor laws, then cabotage will only add insult to injury.

BTW, Don't presume to know me or my background.

 

[T-Bags]

"I am aware of the current bilaterals, but they don't include cabotage. A Chinese 747 doing laps for $39... don't you think that if that was profitable then some US LCC's might have already figured that out?"

here's how it works. Egypt Air flies from Cairo-LAX-JFK-Cairo. In LA, they offload the Cairo to LA folks, the NY destined pax stay seated. They pick up LA to Cairo folks. They fly to NYC and off load the Cairo to NYC folks and onload NYC to Cairo. What they can NOT do is sell tickets for the LAX to NYC leg. Cabotage would allow it. That extra revenue stream would likely result in foriegn carriers putting larger equip onto US routes, and fly more intra US routes for efficiency sake (instead of a widebody sitting on the ground in NY and LA waiting for the east bound Nats, they could swap positions with US pax on board)

 

[Pez D. Spencer]

Good example T-Bags...

Now, take that idea a step further... Say, break of gauge rights are included. Then, they don't have to continue to fly that 747... they could make it a 75 instead, and send the 74 back to Cairo - with another 74 in NY to continue service to Cairo. (I'm throwing this out there to get the worst possible scenario view).

My questions to you are: will this have a major impact on US jobs? Is Egypt Air actually taking a job from an American pilot? Will it dent the economics of major airlines or LCC's - e.g. how much impact will it have on Delta's LA - NY routes (Delta used as example only)?

I understand cabotage and the associated mess. I still contend that ownership/nationality is a bigger issue that is being served up on the same plate as cabotage.

 

[Publishers]

Pure Vida

Let's start with my employment with Flying Tigers, Evergreen International, Arrow Air, and others.

Some years ago, El Al started North American Airlines just to deal with the issue. They parked the big plane and had 757's do the carry on from original point of entry.

Iberia today acutally hubs in Miami. Big aircraft into and then smaller carry ons. The difference is that in their case they are going on to foreign countries.

Basically the Star Alliance and the others were the result of prohibition of ownership. In the end, that is what this is about. Ownership of carriers across borders not employment issues.

Long before the Chinese bloodied up a square, I was in country trying to do joint ventures around 5th freedom issues.

from a pilot perspective, there are many more American pilots flying for other carriers outside US than the other way around.

Before you say someone does not know the subject, you should know more about them.