Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SWAPA gets it!

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

BILL LUMBERG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Posts
2,074
Now that International is on the horizon...SWAPA gets it!:beer:

This building must have been done, signed and delivered and just waiting for somebody to cut the ribbon while the government decided to sell out airline workers for a listening post. Didn't they just approve this 2 weeks ago. Then again, when I was there in the 90's, they would build a 10 mile road in like 21 days.

Meanwhile jetBlue management does nothing to help....appeasement should reap "rewards". Maybe a scope clause is needed......and a bargaining agent.:angryfire




DUBAI, United Arab Emirates ? Passengers traveling from the United Arab Emirates to the USA will avoid long U.S. Customs lines now that a new pre-clearance facility has opened in Abu Dhabi's airport, officials said Sunday, although the development has drawn criticism from U.S. pilots and members of Congress.
Critics allege the decision to open the facility was made mainly on the basis of funding offered by the UAE, which pays 85% of the costs associated with the operation, including the salaries of U.S. Customs and Border officials.
In exchange, travelers may be lured to fly from Abu Dhabi direct to the USA on Etihad Airways, the UAE's national carrier and sole airline flying non-stop between the two locations. The facility does not process cargo.


The U.S. has pre-clearance passenger facilities throughout Canada, in four Caribbean locations and Ireland. The new facility in Abu Dhabi, which allows passengers to complete U.S. customs and immigration before boarding flights to the USA, is the Middle East's first. It is also the first pre-inspection arrangement to be enacted with another country since the 1980s.
U.S. Embassy spokesman Jeffrey Ladenson told The Associated Press that the first flight using the U.S. Customs and Border Protection preclearance inspection took off Friday from UAE's capital city of Abu Dhabi for Washington Dulles airport.
Some U.S. lawmakers and domestic airline associations were angered because they say the decision gives competitive advantage to Etihad over U.S. airlines, which don't fly direct between Abu Dhabi and the USA.
In a statement to the AP, Etihad said that additional flights to the U.S. will be processed via the facility in the coming days. The state-backed airline currently operates non-stop daily flights from Abu Dhabi to New York, Washington, D.C. and Chicago. It plans more routes this year to Los Angeles and Dallas/Fort Worth.


The airline has codeshare partnerships with JetBlue Airways and American Airlines that allow passengers to fly on routes operated by both carriers on a single ticket.
The Air Line Pilots Association said on its website that it opposes the Abu Dhabi facility because only Etihad benefits from the agreement. Long customs lines at airports already are hurting U.S. airlines and passengers from Asia or Europe could opt to fly Etihad over U.S. carriers to avoid those lines, it added.
The Southwest Airlines Pilots' Association similarly raised questions about why Abu Dhabi airport was chosen, saying Friday that the traffic rate there for U.S.-bound passengers is less than a mere 200 per day on average, "making this a poor investment of U.S. taxpayers' increasingly limited resources."
One of the world's busiest airports, and the Middle East's largest, is in nearby Dubai, which does not have a U.S. Customs pre-clearance facility.
"We are more than willing to compete against any airline in the world, including state-sponsored Middle East entities. However, Middle East entities that already enjoy generous state sponsorship should not receive additional government support from the U.S. taxpayer," Southwest Airlines Pilots' Association President Capt. Mark Richardson said in a statement.
In April, 14 members of Congress signed a letter to the Department of Homeland Security saying that the preclearance facility in Abu Dhabi "sets the dangerous precedent" of deploying customs resources based on third-party financing and "not national security, common sense or the needs of traveling taxpayers." In November, a bill was introduced in Congress to block the UAE facility, saying it "threatens American jobs" by encouraging travelers to use foreign airlines instead of U.S. carriers.
However, at least one U.S. airline backs the idea. JetBlue told USA TODAY's Today in the Sky blog that it was in favor of the Abu Dhabi facility.
"We believe that in addition to the need for an increase in CBP (Customs and Border Control) staffing at key U.S. gateway airports, more preclearance facilities like the one planned for Abu Dhabi are both a vital tool to enhance our nation's security and reduce the number of travelers clearing Customs at already delayed entry points ? and that ultimately reduces wait times for everyone else," JetBlue said in a statement to Today in the Sky.
"We have many customers today who arrive from Abu Dhabi on our partner Etihad Airways who then continue their journey on JetBlue flights across the U.S.," the airline continued. "Preclearance would allow them to make faster connections state-side and get on with business. The less hassle travelers have coming into the country, the more visitors will come and that's good for all of us in the travel industry."
Also in defense of the facility, president of the U.S.-U.A.E. Business Council Danny Sebright wrote in July that government and airport authorities in Abu Dhabi have made it clear to U.S. airlines that they are welcome to fly to and from Abu Dhabi's International Airport to tap into this new preclearance program.
The opinion piece, which was published on The Hill's Congress Blog, argued that the program is good for travelers and saves the U.S. government money.
___
USA TODAY reporter Ben Mutzabaugh contributed to this report from Washington. Additionally, Associated Press writer Adam Schreck contributed to this report.
 
Bill,

SWAPA has been on this for quite awhile (and working with ALPA/APA), so you trying to link SWAPA to today's international announcement by Southwest makes you look clueless. But carry on nonetheless.

Southwest aside, it's in the best interest of all US carriers to fight this. Whether they go international or not. I don't think SW is going to the Middle East anytime soon....so why would we care? Same with the Norwegian proposal (SWAPA is there as well). Because it's a US issue, not a carrier issue.
 
Last edited:
Hey Red,

Call me whatever you want....clueless, sure? Happy?

I was just pointing out that you guys are onboard even though some of you have made issues with ALPA "wasting time" leading the charge as if "what? me worry?". If you feel you wanna go dukes up, have at it, I won't play. Congrats on the new expansion BTW.

Throttle back, you aren't talking to GL.
 
I will throttle back Bill. It's really the reporter that linked the two. But neither one has anything to do with the other. SWAPA has been working on this about as long as ALPA has.

I never thought ALPA was wasting there time here. Maybe it's time we all increase our PAC donations.

I'll also raise a glass that you aren't like GL. Cheers!
 
Gotta look at the big picture. The US can't be against Abu Dhabi having their own C&BP, when they approve what amounts to the exact same strategic advantage to SWA at Hobby. Sucks, but that's how it works.
 
SW building their own terminal is the same as the a middle eastern Customs pre-clearance?

Yea, I don't think it's even close Flop but thanks for confirming my thoughts on how delusional you are.
 
Think about it Red. SWA is being handed it's own FIS, and has no more exposure to competition than one gate can provide. Abu Dhabi can't be stopped when at the same time SWA is getting as much (or more). Gotta get yourself a worldview of things Red.

What do you think an FIS is?
 
Last edited:
Being HANDED a FIS? Again, delusional Flop.


Your talking about the building that Southwest is PAYING for? You know SW is a domestic flag carrier right? And paying for the structure completely, right?

How many structures has Continental actually PAID for Flop? Not city bonds, not county bonds...but actually paid for?

I'm sure if UCAL wanted to build a terminal with FIS in Lake Charles, LA (and the airport authority/city approved it)......you could have at it. You see how stupid your argument is? I'm pretty sure Southwest management wouldn't put together a campaign to shoot you down either.

Just sour grapes that someone is going to challenge your monopoly in Houston Flop. That's all your whining about. Same as last week, same as next week.
 
First: SWA is not really paying much. $150 million is around the total bill, and you're only paying 2/3rds of that. And yea, you're a flag carrier. That's really not the point however. The point is that paying for something like this is meant to be a red flag. Notice that Abu Dhabi is paying for the C&BP facility.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/today...assenger-facility-opens-in-abu-dhabi/4933747/

That was what the United [CAL] opposition to your terminal was based on in large part. It was a poor choice to approve it. And it's a poor choice for C&BP to be put in place in Abu Dhabi. I would say the Hobby terminal set a bad precedent, but it already had a precedent for being refused in Denver.
 
Last edited:
So in the end, your SW argument is this...

No other non-legacy carrier should be able to get a FIS, even if they pay for it?

Again Flop, completely delusion. And yes, SW is paying for the entire terminal. The city is building the parking deck on their dime. Which we all know is a no brainer on the payback with parking fees.

Your argument here is like Swiss cheese. I believe the US government (your taxes and mine) are paying for the Middle East facility, right? Apples and oranges my friend.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top