Open Skies

[waveflyer]

Rez - you hijack every thread w/ the one topic that is more important than the national list that I always hijack with.

OPEN-SKIES

We need to learn the lessons of this decade and ORGANIZE right now and start talking about the affect of OPEN-SKIES.

Rez, can you (or anyone else w/ better than average knowledge) talk about why Open Skies and foreign ownership is such a threat to our careers?

Next, how can we begin? Where do we start and what would you like me to do?

Please, everyone- post any links or sources of good information as to where the country stands w/ this issue.

 

[nyboilermaker]

The age 65 ruling was pretty quiet to the public. Open Skies has been too.

This will be a precedent setting event which will affect all of us at every level.

I remember having an Indian student knock off his Multi-Commercial and go back to India for a 737 job the next week. That was 12 years ago.

Problems with Microsoft outsourcing to India? You think Mesa or CHQ is a slime bag operation? Wait until India can come here to fly your routes, for 1/4 the pay.

This one's going to be BIG.

 

[Jonny Sacko]

Is coming, and Prater's going to be behind it, sporting some F'ed up idea that it's good for the over 60 folks.

He should be treated as a treasonous swine!

 

[General Lee]

Open skies will not affect us like that, primarily because there is no room for new airlines to expand at any large US airport. Do you know of any large airport that has a lot of room for some airline to get a large foot hold? Maybe St Louis and COS. That is about it. Also, there are limits to foreign ownership---even Branson is limited to how much he can own and how much "say" he actually has. This is due to MAC or Military Airlift capabilites US airlines have---and the possibility that they will be needed in a time of conflict, and their INTL owner not agreeing with our administration's views.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[FlyAuburn]

Open skies will not affect us like that, primarily because there is no room for new airlines to expand at any large US airport. Do you know of any large airport that has a lot of room for some airline to get a large foot hold? Maybe St Louis and COS. That is about it. Also, there are limits to foreign ownership---even Branson is limited to how much he can own and how much "say" he actually has. This is due to MAC or Military Airlift capabilites US airlines have---and the possibility that they will be needed in a time of conflict, and their INTL owner not agreeing with our administration's views.

Bye Bye--General Lee

"puff, puff, give...you're messing up the rotation!"

Let's hope you're right.

 

[nyboilermaker]

I don't know...

...maybe if I were a business person, I'd start the ball rolling by purchasing 19% percent of a new airline, no union, mostly new kids, good Atlantic gateway airport...never know what could happen...

-NYB

 

[Lear70]

Open Skies is more of a threat to Legacy carriers and, to a somewhat lesser extent, the LCC's.

Yes, they can fly point-to-point in the U.S. but, as previously mentioned, they'd need a base to do that out of, as they would have to rotate their crews back to their country unless they opened a domicile in the U.S. and made their citizens move for the job.

That kind of growth is *POSSIBLE* down the road, but not going to happen this year or even next in all likelihood.

The first thing you'll probably see is Transcon - bring their 777 or 747-400 into an East or West coast major city from overseas, then have another crew already here pick it up and fly across the country then reverse the route, such as Tokyo-SFO-JFK-SFO-Tokyo or London-JFK-LAX and maybe a stop in Hawaii thrown in for good measure.

Right now the big guys on the block internationally have VERY high yields and won't be lowballing the market, and the Ryan Air types don't have the equipment to really get that kind of operation going.

When Ryan Air and other ultra-LCC's start purchasing 767's and bigger and start flying over here with their ultra-LCC pricing, then you'll see the big pressure start.

Of course by then, it'll be too late and, to a certain extent, it already is. It's going to take a LOT of effort and a CONCERTED drive to get that legislation rescinded. I was hoping ALPA would jump on that fight now that 65 was pushed through, but I haven't seen or heard a peep from Herndon.

 

[waveflyer]

Lear- I'm fairly sure they are allowed to make stop now, provided they don't sell tickets on that domestic leg. BA i know goes from IAH-ORD already.

Can someone educate me on what open-skies is? Is it cabotage-full on foreign ownership of US Airlines? (Which GL, would get rid of your argument- which is why i'm concerned) Or does it just allow foreign airlines to fly domestically? And what would be the difference?

Boiler- kind of like Lufthansa buying into Jet Blue recently?? !

 

[Lear70]

Lear- I'm fairly sure they are allowed to make stop now, provided they don't sell tickets on that domestic leg. BA i know goes from IAH-ORD already.

They've been allowed to do that for several years now, that's not Open Skies, that's just overfly with fuel stop privileges.

Can someone educate me on what open-skies is? Is it cabotage-full on foreign ownership of US Airlines? (Which GL, would get rid of your argument- which is why i'm concerned) Or does it just allow foreign airlines to fly domestically? And what would be the difference?

It's the latter, it allows foreign airlines, for the first time, to do point-to-point with ticket sales inside the U.S.

The "complaint" was that the U.S. airlines could do point-to-point in Europe, but they couldn't do likewise in the U.S. The reason is that, in Europe, they're all different COUNTRIES that are about the same size (or smaller) as many of our states.

So, Bush said, "That's reasonable", and signed Open Skies.

Boiler- kind of like Lufthansa buying into Jet Blue recently?? !

I think that's what he was referring to in a tongue-in-cheek way.

 

[waveflyer]

So- why haven't we done more point to point competing w/ hubs in europe? Are we just not competitive where others will be here? What's the danger of this?

 

[Lear70]

So- why haven't we done more point to point competing w/ hubs in europe? Are we just not competitive where others will be here? What's the danger of this?

1. We'd have to open a crew base. Flying a 777 or 747/400 from London to Paris or Frankfurt isn't economical. You'd have to have 737's/A320's/E-190's to do it and that means a crew base.

2. Skybus. Or the European equivalent (Ryan, Air Lingus). They run point-to-point inside Europe for next to nothing, pay their employees crap, and provide no-frills service and pay-for-extras like water or chips. Our airlines aren't set up to compete at that price point, except for Skybus (which is actually based on those European carriers' business models).

It all boils down to profitability.

That's why the Open Skies argument was ludicrous to begin with. They were complaining that we *COULD* do point-to-point inside Europe when, mostly, we don't and it's not profitable to do so and they know it while, at the same time, point-to-point in the U.S. IS a viable possibility for them because of how big our country is.

It's basically a horsesh*t way for them to get a foothold on our flying without giving us anything in return.

 

[YourPilotFriend]

The only thing foreign control will bring is the ability of a foreign carrier to buy a US carrier in cheaper dollars and strip it of its assests. There is no money in doing point-to-point in the US, even with pilots that work for free.

 

[General Lee]

Open Skies is more of a threat to Legacy carriers and, to a somewhat lesser extent, the LCC's.

Yes, they can fly point-to-point in the U.S. but, as previously mentioned, they'd need a base to do that out of, as they would have to rotate their crews back to their country unless they opened a domicile in the U.S. and made their citizens move for the job.

That kind of growth is *POSSIBLE* down the road, but not going to happen this year or even next in all likelihood.

The first thing you'll probably see is Transcon - bring their 777 or 747-400 into an East or West coast major city from overseas, then have another crew already here pick it up and fly across the country then reverse the route, such as Tokyo-SFO-JFK-SFO-Tokyo or London-JFK-LAX and maybe a stop in Hawaii thrown in for good measure.

Right now the big guys on the block internationally have VERY high yields and won't be lowballing the market, and the Ryan Air types don't have the equipment to really get that kind of operation going.

When Ryan Air and other ultra-LCC's start purchasing 767's and bigger and start flying over here with their ultra-LCC pricing, then you'll see the big pressure start.

Of course by then, it'll be too late and, to a certain extent, it already is. It's going to take a LOT of effort and a CONCERTED drive to get that legislation rescinded. I was hoping ALPA would jump on that fight now that 65 was pushed through, but I haven't seen or heard a peep from Herndon.

Ryanair threatened to start a LCC transatlantic operation because the EU wasn't going to allow it to take over AerLingus. The said they would use A330s, even though they are an all Boeing operator--738s. Ryanair also hits airports around Europe that are not congested, which suggests that they would, if they did fly to the US, go to smaller, out of the way airports. Does that sound like any current US LCCs? Skybus is not doing very well flying to those out of the way fields. Allegiant does ok, but they are always flying back to a large metropolitan center (LAS, MCO (Sanford), TPA (St Pete), FLL, IWA (PHX). Ryanair was testing the waters, and so far hasn't decided to go through with that threat. I haven't seen anyone else suggest they would start up a LCC transatlantic operator, only high cost--ultra first class operations---and Ryanair is NOT one of them.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

1. We'd have to open a crew base. Flying a 777 or 747/400 from London to Paris or Frankfurt isn't economical. You'd have to have 737's/A320's/E-190's to do it and that means a crew base.

2. Skybus. Or the European equivalent (Ryan, Air Lingus). They run point-to-point inside Europe for next to nothing, pay their employees crap, and provide no-frills service and pay-for-extras like water or chips. Our airlines aren't set up to compete at that price point, except for Skybus (which is actually based on those European carriers' business models).

It all boils down to profitability.

That's why the Open Skies argument was ludicrous to begin with. They were complaining that we *COULD* do point-to-point inside Europe when, mostly, we don't and it's not profitable to do so and they know it while, at the same time, point-to-point in the U.S. IS a viable possibility for them because of how big our country is.

It's basically a horsesh*t way for them to get a foothold on our flying without giving us anything in return.

The only reason we wanted openskies was to get access to Heathrow, which we all did, but very limited access. Delta got 6 slots (3 roundtrips) from AF, Northwest got 6 from KLM, USAir bought 4 slots, and CAL bought 8. That was it. We wouldn't give away the farm if we KNEW that a foreign invasion would occur. We KNOW that our major airports are already clogged up, and that INTL carriers will get about the same amount of access as we did Heathrow--a very limited amount. If they want to start new service to Little Rock and use up one of their precious slots in FRA or even LHR, they can do it. They won't do that though, because they are looking for high cost business travellers, and they don't frequent smaller towns as much. Air France now will fly from LHR to LAX, and thanks to a large SkyTeam presence in LHR now, it may fill up the flight each day. If Lufthansa wants to do the same, they may try, but slots are limited--and even buying part of Jetblue won't give you access to enough gates etc. It will be a draw, with British Airways, Virgin, United, and American now getting competition at LHR from the rest of us.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The only reason we wanted openskies was to get access to Heathrow, which we all did, but very limited access.

Hardly... the power players what access to global investment cash to feed the US carriers...

General Glee... you talk that there is no more room for international carrier to come into the usa. That is not the intention... the intention is to REPLACE you and your high labor costs....


Cut n paste from another thread...

What makes you think you and your fellow United States pilots will be the ones flying the jet?​

There are more pilots globally that have a lower standard of living than us, that would gladly operate our jets for pennies on the dollar.​

There is a reason why all the maritime freighters are operated by Ol East Soviet bloc Officers and Philippine sailors.. meaning the citizens of lesser countries with lower standards of living that do it cheaper.​

Foreign ownership is not only the problem... The brand alliances such as Star Alliance, OneWorld and Skyteam are also a threat.... We saw it briefly and similarly, when KLM and NWA got in bed.... KLM wanted to do more if not most of the transoceanic flying.... How'd you like to be limited to narrowbody domestic flying... for all US pilots? (SWA is going to have to tap the int'l market...)​

The US domestic market is huge... and we dominate it. Take for example the Japanese and their domestic market... simply put they want a bigger piece of the pie and will negotiate that they should have more pacific routes.​

Combine foreign ownership of say United Airlines majority owned by Lufthansa and the ability shift flying within the Star Alliance is very real. United will sell its B747's (widebodies) to LH and LH pilots will do all or most of the flying...​

But the LH pilots are really not the threat.. These alliances will allow assets shifted to the eastern European or Asian companies such as Air China, LOT... or the new Transnational Airlines.​

Transnational Airlines can be very problematic for labor. Under what law to they follow? These type Airlines have the ability to move labor and capitol over political boundaries... These types companies, such as Ryan Air, and their markets are years ahead of the law....​

Ryan Air, A low Cost Carrier, operated by Michael O'leary, makes Jonathan Orienstein look like an alter boy. He treats labor like disposable diapers. With wicked loans for training, he has pilots on an indentured servitude type work agreement. Finally, the money made on these carriers isn't necessarily in the cost of the ticket.. its in the "extras". Checked luggage, food, blankets, wheel chair service, all which the passenger pays ala carte. So you can see how Ryan Air doesn't value its pilots cause they are not the true revenue producers...​

Finally the LCC model is being copied globally. The problem is... Southwest isn't the model. Its O'Leary's Ryan Air.​

Don't forget cabatoge. NYC can't hold back the Atlantic if it was to raise sea level 3 ft. Labor unions can't hold back global market forces... Cabatoge will probably come to the USA....the goal is to ensure that US Pilots are protected...​

All of this... the global market place, globalism, is really about the distribution of wealth and those who control it. Labor is a cost to be controlled. Why should American pilots with their hyperconsumption, hyperconsumerism lifestyle that demands a large annual income be placated when a third world country pilot will do it happily for nickels....​

But let's be clear.... it is not the Third World pilot that is the problem..... many of these pilots fear their company before regulators... In the USA, we rather fear the FAA. With PIC authority if we don't think it is safe we tell the company to pound sand. Not so in Africa, S. America and Asia for example.. Their companies tell them to fly unsafe and if they don't like it they can find another job. A reality hard for us to comprehend...​

The point is this.... we must understand the airline global market place... it is already effecting us. If we don't help pilots in third world countries.. to raise their standard.. then we will all go down....​

Advise if links are needed to get educated...​

 

[waveflyer]

Please, post any and all links- i'll do my best to copy- and post these in crew lounges, and forward them to my LEC and MEC's.
What else do you need Rez? Where else can i put in my efforts?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Open skies for business

• <LI class=cnnhiliteheader>Story Highlights
• Open Skies agreement lifts restrictions on transatlantic air services
• British Airways and Virgin will launch flights from European capitals
• Business-only services set to expand across London airports

By Emma Clarke for CNN
LONDON, England (CNN) -- The negotiations are over. The treaty has been signed. The skies across the Atlantic are now open for free movement of flights between European and U.S. cities. Now the battle commences between airlines as they prepare for their new-found commercial freedom when the Open Skies agreement comes into action in March 2008.
The main beneficiaries of increased competition between airlines are likely to be business travelers. And while they may not see a dramatic reduction in ticket prices, they can look forward to a greater choice of flights from a greater number of airlines as well as an increase in business-only services.
Airlines with the strongest brands and best quality products are likely to lure passengers away from European rivals by launching flights from other major European cities.
British Airways has confirmed it will launch its first transatlantic flights from continental European cities once the agreement comes into place next year. And while it is not ready to confirm branding, types of aircraft, or even final routes, a BA spokesperson said likely contenders for new transatlantic routes will be from business destinations such as Paris, Frankfurt, Brussels and Milan.
She also confirmed that, contrary to expectations, these flights would not be exclusively business class. Though they will offer premium cabins for business customers.
Virgin Atlantic is expecting to place a greater focus on its business customers and has established a team to work towards the launch of business-only flights in 2009. These will fly from airports such as Paris, Frankfurt, Milan and Zurich and the airline is currently in discussion with Airbus and Boeing to place orders for between 10 and 15 aircraft.
Virgin and BA are both confident they can entice customers away from European national carriers due to the strength of their brands and service offering. As Paul Charles, director of corporate communications at Virgin Atlantic says, "we are seen as a truly global brand and well-placed to compete with the quality of business services currently coming out of cities such as Paris and Milan."
Open Skies will put an end to the exclusive arrangement granted to British Airways, Virgin Atlantic, United Airlines and American Airlines to fly transatlantic out of Heathrow.
As a result, airlines including BMI, Continental Airlines and Northwest Airlines are all lined up to launch direct transatlantic flights from Heathrow from next year. But with the airport currently operating at almost-maximum capacity, it is likely that new flights will be limited.
Airlines operating from other airports, in particular the new business-only players such as Eos, Silverjet and Maxje, will, however, see an opportunity to expand their own services across the Atlantic.
Joshua Marks, executive vice president for planning and development at U.S. business-class airline, Maxjet, says it expects to "strengthen its position at Stansted" as a result of the Open Skies agreement. "With more flights moving from Gatwick to Heathrow, three major airports will become two in London." As such, he adds, Stansted could become the default airport for travelers coming from and to the east of the city.
Now that the U.S. Department of Transport has given approval for Maxjet to launch flights from Stansted to other countries with open skies agreements with the U.S., business travelers in London should also be able to pick up Maxjet flights to destinations such as India.
Maxjet has confirmed that it will not fight for slots at Heathrow, which Marks says has become an "operational nightmare."
Yet, other premium-only services are not ruling out the move. Silverjet, currently operating out of Luton, has been in discussion with (un-named) airlines interested in striking deals to launch flights out of Heathrow.
Opportunities have been offered for flights to U.S. cities such as Los Angeles, says Lawrence Hunt, Silverjet's chief executive. "This is an ongoing dialogue," he says.
But before they make the move, they would need to see major changes to facilities at Heathrow in order for it to offer the "personalized, discreet and carefree" travel experience Silverjet offers customers from Luton. "Heathrow has become a zoo and the customer experience has become appalling," he says.
Airline executives agree that growth in transatlantic flights as a result of the Open Skies agreement will be aimed at business customers. As Hunt says, airlines have little else to offer, or gain, in terms of economy long-haul seats.
And as Charles at Virgin points out, given the success of the new business-only entrants and the simultaneous ongoing demand for its business class seats, "there's clearly a market out there for business-only flights."
While there may be some softening of prices from Heathrow as airlines fight for slots, few expect prices for business travelers to drop dramatically as a result of the Open Skies agreement. As BA's spokesperson says, UK to North America is already a very competitive market. "It is not as if we are moving from a monopoly," she says.
Despite this, there is still a great deal to offer business customers and those that will make the most of the opportunity, says Anthony Concil, spokesperson from IATA, will be the most innovative.
"We have created a new playing field and it is up to players to make the most of that and for governments to take the agreement forward towards further liberalization."

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

http://www.eurunion.org/newsweb/HotTopics/OpenSkies.htm


http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/openski1.html

Please, post any and all links- i'll do my best to copy- and post these in crew lounges, and forward them to my LEC and MEC's.
What else do you need Rez? Where else can i put in my efforts?

Your MEC should have a committee on it... if not... create the committee and be the guy....

www.alpa.org

www.ifalpa.org

www.icao.int

www.iata.org