Cabotage threat... worse than RJs?

[ifly4food]

There is a post below about a company called Air Atlanta. If you go to their website, their mission is scary:

The current industry trend of cutting costs and outsourcing where possible has allowed Air Atlanta to carve out a niche in a highly competitive marketplace. Air Atlanta’s position has been established and reinforced by a continuous record of fast, flexible reactions to requests, sometimes at very short notice. Aircraft can be painted in any livery, crews operate in any uniform and cabins configured to anything from full economy to completely first class. The airline offers freighters as well as passenger aircraft. Air Atlanta will discuss any problem that an airline might encounter and tailor the aircraft to provide the best solution.

Maybe ALPA should be paying more attention to fighting cabotage than it's paying to fighting RJs. Right now, Leo Mullin and the IATA are STRONGLY lobbying our government to allow cabotage (foreign airlines operating domestically). If mainline pilots think thay're being replaced now, I feel sorry for them when this hits stateside.

 

[LJDRVR]

Air Atlanta is a charter/ACMI operation. What you're talking about is not cabatoge. ACMI is perfectly legal. I agree that cabtoge is an issue, but ACMI is a not.

 

[ifly4food]

Air Atlanta is a charter/ACMI operation. What you're talking about is not cabatoge. ACMI is perfectly legal. I agree that cabtoge is an issue, but ACMI is a not.

I beg to differ.
While Air Atlanta is a charter company, what they are referring to in the quote I posted is taking on contracted flying for other airlines, similar to what Miami Air does. If for example an airline has an aircraft go out of service or drastically oversells a route, or whatever the reason, the airlines contract out their routes to these companies to cover them.

Right now, cabotage laws prohibit these foreign carriers from operating domestic routes, but it this were to change, this company with their "any livery any uniform" policy could be airline managements' wet dream. I know Delta would love it. This is exactly what Leo's fighting for. Why pay fat cat American pilots when these guys will fly the same route for less.

They're already outsourcing Connection. Mainline is next.

 

[FlyDeltasJets]

IFF,

#1. Believe me, they are outsourcing mainline, too. They have been doing it for years, on a far greater scale. Trust me on this one!

#2. I differ with your allegation that ALPA is "fighting rj's". But you already knew that! We've been discussing that to death. I don't need to repeat my points.

#2. I couldn't agree more that cabatage is a VERY big threat, as is Lott and McCain's latest bill attempting to alter the RLA to deny us our right to self-help. I urge every ALPA member to contribute to the PAC, as well as write your elected representatives and let them know your viewpoints. The rjdc get the most attention here, but it is far from the only current threat to our profession.

 

[bobbysamd]

Cabotage

I wouldn't presume to say that I understand all the RJ scope ramifications. I don't. But, I agree, we should all pay attention to cabotage. It seems that with RJs and scope, pilots are beating up each other, and that is indeed management's wet dream. Throw in the mix foreign crews flying our routes, and probably for far less money than is paid U.S. crews, meaning us, and management has a wet dream big time.

 

[LJDRVR]

O.K. I'm now fully awake. See what happens when you sleep in late and then get up and just start typing? I'm curious, do any current pilot contracts contain language concerning ACMI usage?

Please pardon my ignorance here, just a dumb charter pilot trying to learn.

Cheers

 

[skydiverdriver]

Okay, I must admit that I don't know much about cabotage, so please be kind when you answer my uninformed question.

Recenty, I heard an official of some sort, probably a congressman, who said that cabotage would be okay, as long as we had the same rights to other countries markets. In other words, if British Airways can fly from London to Miami, and then on to LAX, then United can also fly from Chicago to London, and on to Manchester. It is true that this would open up domestic markets for some foreign carriers, but would also mean the same deal for our carriers.

So, would this be a bad deal, or a good one? Isnt' it the same thing as Japenese cars being sold in the US, with a good tarrif attatched to make it fair? Please educate me. Thanks.

 

[mar]

Don't know nothin' 'bout cabotage...

...but MIA-LAX vs. London-Manchester sounds like Apples and Oranges to me.

Some trade.

 

[PuffDriver]

Maybe ALPA should be paying more attention to fighting cabotage than it's paying to fighting RJs. Right now, Leo Mullin and the IATA are STRONGLY lobbying our government to allow cabotage (foreign airlines operating domestically). If mainline pilots think thay're being replaced now, I feel sorry for them when this hits stateside. [/B]

Perhaps, instead of expulsion, you will allow me to enlighten. Section 1 F 9 of the Delta PWA:

The Company will join the Association in opposing any change in U.S. law that would permit foreign air carriers to engage in cabotage.


Care to revise your post?????

Now if you want to talk about baseball style arbitration, we would probably agree there.

Puff

 

[TurboS7]

Our biggest headaches are Part 129 carriers that are coming here to the U.S. and underbidding our traditonal business. We have lost over 20M in revenue to these carriers this year alone, consequently we have guys out on the street.

 

[publisher]

Apples and Oranges

You guys are all over the place here,,,,,,acmi, cabotage, and Part 129.

We have had US carriers doing ACMI for all kinds of domestic and foreign carriers forever. They do it and we do it.

As to the rights issues, that is very complex and not something that will get resolved here. In a small world, it is not easy for what goes around comes around.

Part 129 are merely carriers flying into the US and following FAA regulations for this type carrier.

There is a lot of talk on here about "our" flights and "our flying". Who is the our. This compeititve world means there is no our anything.

 

[skydiverdriver]

I beg to differ with publisher. Dont' we have trade laws and tarifs on imported goods? What's the difference with services? And aren't our commercial airlines important to interstate commerce and national defense? Arent there laws regulating how much a foriegn company can own a US airline?

Perhaps my example was apples and oranges, but I'm not sure why. Again I say that I don't know much about this, and would like someone to explain it to me. Just telling me that my example was not good doesn't help much.

 

[Dieterly]

ifly4food,

Ever heard of an airline called Atlas, or how about Gemini (sp), even Airborne does the same thing with their -8's out of MIA.
Or how about NW in Asia, in NRT can see 10-12 747's and 4 320's at the same time, many of just stopping to pick/drop off up PAX and then continue to TPE, ICN or MNL, to name a few places.

"""Atlas Air Long-Term ACMI

Maximum Payload is 112 metric tons for the 747-200F and 118 metric tons for the 747-400F. A standard ACMI (Aircraft, Crew, Maintenance, Insurance) 3-5 year lease includes:

Aircraft
Crew
Maintenance
Insurance (aircraft third-party liability)
On-Demand Customer Service Center"""

 

[publisher]

Rights

There are restrictions which are in fact negotiated. There are limits on foreign ownership of Part 121 air carriers, I believe it is 20% but not sure.

These do not cover ACMI which is really just a lease of an aircraft with crew to fly your routes. For instance, while I was at Evergreen, we flew a Quantas route and a Saudi Arabian cargo route.

The Freedoms are why a foreign carrier can first of all fly to the United States at all and are also what restricts them from landing at Miami and then picking up domestic passengrs to go on to NY. They are allowed to go on to NY with passengers originating in the foreign country.

To deal with some of this you have airlines like North American which was created by El Al however US owned. They take El Al passengers along with domestic. Tower Air was sort of like this.

These rights are negotiated by the Department of State in cooridination with other agencies to see to it that we get equal rights into other countries. It is as much political as having anything to do with aviation.

 

[TurboS7]

All sounds well, but try and do an ACMI deal in the EU with U.S. pilots. Sorry it won't work, they, the EU, will not allow it. Something to think about. What is fair has to be fair, at this point it is not.FYI Miami Air is not doing any ACMI business at this time, it just doesn't pay.

 

[publisher]

Turbo

ACMI is not a pilot issue..... The question is will they let a US 121 certificated carrier fly others routes under an ACMI contract, it is not a pilot thing.

Miami Air may not but there are many different type ACMI contracts. The advantage is you have no market risk. They are done all the time. Like a full charter, the advantage to an airline is that they are usually providing their own fuel at their price and the same with ground handling. It works out better for them than having th echarter operator do them.