Foreign Nationals-Miami
- Thread starter 737823
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #47
The lesson was helpful but open market forces - which include job protections - have been much slower coming to Latin America than they have been in Asia. I'm not sure what visas would be required but it is not a given that many countries in the world, including Latin countries, would grant a visa to a US born employee who wanted to live in a foreign FA base as UA FAs are allowed to do. It is precisely because of the imbalance in immigration laws that many countries would not reciprocate in granting visas for work which could be done by locals. The option is to close the base - which UA ended up doing because of contractual language - but the cost to UA was probably minimal since the pay was the same... the difference probably comes down to hotel expenses and possibly insurance or other benefits.
Since UA has less intra-Asia flying than it once had, the real effect might not be that great compared to the ideological barrier of retaining foreign FAs.
.
Similarly, DL has reduced the amount of work which their (PMNW) Asian based FAs and translators can do including returning transpac flying to US employees while retaining 2 US FAs on every intra-Asia flight.
.
It seems apparent that AA is not intending to expand foreign FA flying... the real question would seem to be if APFA can ever gain an opportunity to reduce the amount of foreign FAs that AA has.... but let's be honest that 300 and change FAs is enough to operate less than 20 flights per day at 6 hr each leg on a 757 .... reducing the freedoms AA has to use foreign FAs should be a goal but AA continues to grow its Latin business and that growth must all come with US employees.
Since UA has less intra-Asia flying than it once had, the real effect might not be that great compared to the ideological barrier of retaining foreign FAs.
.
Similarly, DL has reduced the amount of work which their (PMNW) Asian based FAs and translators can do including returning transpac flying to US employees while retaining 2 US FAs on every intra-Asia flight.
.
It seems apparent that AA is not intending to expand foreign FA flying... the real question would seem to be if APFA can ever gain an opportunity to reduce the amount of foreign FAs that AA has.... but let's be honest that 300 and change FAs is enough to operate less than 20 flights per day at 6 hr each leg on a 757 .... reducing the freedoms AA has to use foreign FAs should be a goal but AA continues to grow its Latin business and that growth must all come with US employees.
No, it's apple to apples. If AA were to let go all of the foreign nationals and staff all flights with APFA members, it's possible (even likely) that the foreign nationals would sue AA for severance and pensions, just like the TLV employees sued TWA. Looks very similar in potential result.
Wrong. They sued TWA in TLV about a month before the asset deal closed (as AA had no presence there and thus the employees had no jurisdiction over AA). The employees then tried to domesticate their judgment against AA and courts denied that motion.
I disagree. TWA was liquidated, it stopped flying to Israel. AA is reorganizing, it will keep flying to South America.
TWA terminated its TLV employees without providing the severance pay - one month salary for each year of employment - and pension benefits that are guaranteed by Israeli law.
The discussion here concerns replacing the foreign nationals with US based workers. No one suggested that they be laid off without receiving severance pay or pensions.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #50
There is nothing that says that AA would be sued if it chose to not replace its foreign national FAs when they left or retired. That may take years to end outsourced flying but that would provoke virtually no response, even from the most hostile country. I don't think AA serves any country where they are required to use even a designated percentage of foreign national FAs.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #52
ok so what countries REQUIRE AA to fly their routes with nationals from their own countries? AA serves some countries in Latin America that are not served by other US carriers, but there aren't many - and no other US carrier that I know of has Latin based FAs.
.
And it also goes to what countries have AA FA bases in Latin America- for which I haven't seen an answer.
.
And it also goes to what countries have AA FA bases in Latin America- for which I haven't seen an answer.
They do. Example a EZE 777 crew will fly to Miami layover, split into separate 757 crews and do trips, come back to Miami, and go home.
EZE-MIA-GYE-MIA-EZE and EZE-MIA-CLO-MIA-EZE
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #55
thanks... all of those countries are served by other US carriers and I am all but positive that none of the bilaterals between the US and those countries have any current requirements about FA staffing by nationals.
I can certainly believe that might have been the case at one time... but it has been years since any such requirement remained as part of the bilaterals with the US... and perhaps back to when EA operated the routes.
.
Foreign national FAs exist because they are a cost advantage and I would not expect AA to give them up unless they are forced to do so.
>
But let's also be honest that this is one of the smaller issues that face the APFA.... these were never APFA jobs so nothing has been lost although the potential might exist to regain some of those jobs in the future.
The greatest threat to US based FA jobs at AA is the growth of large RJs which will certainly come - it will only be a very large growth of mainline operations that could offset the number of FA (and pilot) jobs that will be lost due to large RJ growth.
JAMAKE1
Veteran
I totally agree.
kirkpatrick
Veteran
On the same note, TWA had foreign nationals based in Paris, Rome and Hong Kong. They slit their own throats by getting into the habit of pulling little job actions, sitting down and refusing to do the service after takeoff. The company got fed up and closed the bases on Nov 1, 1974, greatly improving the quality of JFK flying for those of us based there.
Too bad AA's foreign national problem can't be solved as easily.
MK
kirkpatrick
Veteran
Haven't seen a word on the subject. They say full language might be posted on the APFA site today. I'm attending the Road Show meeting at LGA on the 7th so I'll make it a point to find out.
