As far as I know, all of the crew members you mention are flying for Norwegian Long Haul (NLH) which is registered in and operates out of Norway. This means they are still subject to Norwegian taxes, labor laws, rules and regulations. NLH is a sister airline to Norwegian Air International (NAI), and currently does all of the long-haul flying. The proposal for NAI adopts the afore mentioned flag-of-convenience model which means NAI can circumvent Norwegian tax and labor laws by hiring crews from one country a labor can be found at a significantly lower cost than in Norway, and not be subjected to Norwegian labor laws because NAI is registered in Ireland.
If foreign labor has an issue with the treatment of their workers by U.S. they are free to push back and change the circumstances much like we are doing with NAI. I know that at least one U.S. airline that had domicile in Europe afforded those foreign nationals they employed the same union contract and protections their U.S. counterparts were allowed. This came straight from the horse's mouth so-to-speak when I met a couple of them a few years ago. Beyond this specific example I don't know much about how U.S. carriers treat or pay foreign nationals that they employ so I will defer to others with more knowledge on that subject.
As far as oversight goes, the issue isn't necessarily about NAI in and of itself. It is about setting the precedent for the flag-of-convenience business model and the potential ramifications. The proximity of two countries in and of itself doesn't equate to effective oversight, what happens when a country with questionable safety regulations or a lesser developed regulatory body becomes responsible for the oversight of an airline that utilizes less than reputable safety and/or labor practices? Why even open the rules to allow for that possibility?
This is about preventing the business model that absolutely decimated the U.S. maritime industry from becoming a very legitimate threat to the U.S. aviation industry.
The NLH crew are the ones to whom I was referring. They are Bangkok based employed under a Singapore contract agency.
My brother's wife was an American Airlines Buenos Aries based flight attendant for 30 years. Her salary was significantly below a U.S. based flight attendant. United and Northwest also have/had foreign based flight attendants for decades. That makes some of the arguments a little bit hypocritical, don't ya think?
You are aware that the FAA has categories for different countries based on their regulatory oversight, right?
http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/iasa/
Additional Background on the FAA’s IASA Program:
As part of the FAA’s IASA program, the agency assesses on a uniform basis the civil aviation authorities of all countries with air carriers that operate or have applied to operate to the United States and makes that information available to the public. The assessments determine whether or not foreign civil aviation authorities are meeting ICAO safety standards, not FAA regulations.
They are defined as follows:
- Category 1, Does Comply with ICAO Standards: A country's civil aviation authority has been assessed by FAA inspectors and has been found to license and oversee air carriers in accordance with ICAO aviation safety standards.
- Category 2, Does Not Comply with ICAO Standards: The Federal Aviation Administration assessed this country's civil aviation authority (CAA) and determined that it does not provide safety oversight of its air carrier operators in accordance with the minimum safety oversight standards established by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
Category 2 is further refined as:
One group are countries that have air carriers with existing operations to the United States at the time of the assessment. While in Category 2 status, carriers from these countries will be permitted to continue operations at current levels under heightened FAA surveillance. Expansion or changes in services to the United States by such carriers are not permitted while in category 2.
The second group are countries that do not have air carriers with existing operations to the United States at the time of the assessment. Carriers from these countries will not be permitted to commence service to the United States while in Category 2 status.
So again, fear mongering based on lack of knowledge. It's not like somebody is going to start an airline in Liberia and be allowed to have unlimited to service to the USA because they won't even be approved for service under the FAA/DOT guidelines.
Typhoonpilot
.
