Open skies: open to whom?

تغيير خيارات الرسومات المنخفضة | تغيير اللغة | القفز عن المحتوى إلى الملاحة

محتوى الصفحة: Home > مجلة النقل الدولي "Transport International" > Issue 19 April 2005 > Open skies: open to whom?

ITF translations available: Deutsch, Français, Español, Svenska
Google free translation service: Nederlands, Italiano, Português, العربية, 中国的, Polski, Русский, 日本語, 한국의, Български, فارسی , Norske - About these links

The system of controlled market access which has governed international aviation for over 50 years is gradually giving way to a free-for-all of “open skies” deals. Aviation unions are calling for nation states to retain some essential influence

In 1944, 52 nations gathered in Chicago in the US reached agreement on the foundations for the future of international air travel. Agreement was reached on the principle that air transport services should be arranged between nations through “bilateral air service agreements”. Countries would negotiate the capacity, routes, airports served and pricing for air travel between themselves.

The bilateral agreement system established by the Chicago Convention has been integral to international aviation law for over 50 years. Country A might agree to let an airline from country B fly to three of A’s airports, in exchange for permission for a national airline from country A to land at three airports in B. Safety and security issues are fundamental parts of the agreements, which are generally reciprocal and are overseen by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

Since the 1970s, however, there has been a creeping liberalisation in air transport, led by the US and the European Union. More liberal agreements have been drawn up, which remove government restrictions on capacity and pricing. These are known as “Open Skies” agreements and may even remove the government’s restrictions on which routes and airports can be used.

Open skies agreements essentially deregulate the market access aspects of the air service between two countries, or even between countries within a whole region. In such agreements, countries or regions A and B agree to allow unrestricted air travel between their countries, and the demands of the market decide which airports or routes are served by which airlines.By 2002, some 85 open skies agreements were in operation among approximately 70 countries – two-thirds of the agreements involving the US. In 2004, there were 10 regional open skies arrangements in operation.

Developing national air transport: ITF recommendations

States should ensure that safety and security are not compromised by commercial considerations. Clear lines of responsibility and accountability for safety and security must be established for the parties involved.
Nations should pursue “SMART” economic regulation, with the basis of regulation being that it must be sustainable, measured, accessible to the input of all stakeholders, establish the responsibility for various activities and targeted towards key areas of activity like training, safety and security.
Future developments in the aviation industry should be based on the principles of fairness and reciprocity, the highest safety, labour and social standards, the protection of jobs and working conditions, quality service, fair distribution of benefits of the industry and a continuing public service ethos.
There should be full and meaningful participation of trade unions and their international representatives in all intergovernmental discussions on the future of the industry, and in negotiations between countries on bilateral and other agreements governing air transport.

Market dominance

Advocates of air transport deregulation argue that it will improve competition. Its effect has actually been to strengthen a small number of huge international carriers, while small airlines have been priced out of the market. Large carriers with huge fleets benefit from economies of scale, are able to fly more routes and to more airports at a lower cost. Under open skies, smaller carriers cannot compete. They loose their market share and collapse. This can lead to some countries having no national airline of their own, and just a few large carriers enjoying a monopoly.

For the consumer, open skies have often resulted in less choice and higher ticket prices.

Stability and safety

Since 2001, the air transport industry has suffered economic instability. Regulation of the industry helps to maintain stability. It demonstrates ‘business as usual’ to consumers and standardises routes over long periods. In a deregulated market, airlines are able to pile on capacity when times are good. However, when the industry is in an economic downturn, there are more severe crises. As a result, air travel routes will come in and out, prices fluctuate from very high to very low, and consumer confidence can easily collapse.

At the same time, whereas bilateral agreements incorporate binding safety and security standards, deregulation risks separating economic considerations from those of safety and security. In a drive for profits, it is likely to be safety and security measures which are discarded first. This puts airline staff, passengers and the general public at greater risk.

Effects on aviation workers

It is estimated that 25 to 30 per cent of airline operational costs are labour costs. When an industry suffers economic fluctuations, it is usually airline staff who suffer first. In order to keep prices to consumers stable, airlines attack the pay, conditions and benefits of air transport workers to absorb the shock of cost fluctuation. To allow for this, staff are expected to work on temporary, flexible or insecure contracts.

In open skies agreements, labour standards are generally disregarded as not relevant to the economic deal being struck. The safety dimension of labour standards can still be overseen by external bodies, like ICAO and the International Labour Organisation (ILO), but when they are not linked to economic agreements there is little incentive for airlines to protect them.

Developing a trade union policy

Air transport has a wider role than the commercial objectives of providers. The transport of goods and passengers, or lack of it, can have profound economic implications. For example, if carriers see no profit in flying to a particular community, that community could become cut off from the rest of the world. There is also a vital relationship between civil aviation and national sovereignty. It is important that countries retain the right to dictate who can use their airspace and in what way. States, and not the free market, should dictate air transport priorities.

There is no consensus among governments that the World Trade Organisation and its Global Agreement on Trades in Services should be allowed to encroach on and dictate the air transport market. The ITF urges resistance to this option, and is especially concerned that its impact would break the historic link between economic regulation, and safety and security regulation.

A free for all, in terms of flying rights, can threaten the safety of crew and passengers, jeopardise stability, and lead to smaller airlines in less developed countries being pushed out of the market by giant carriers. All of these factors threaten the jobs, working conditions and safety of air transport workers. ITF affiliates believe therefore that the evolution of the air transport industry, and agreements governing it, should be based on reciprocity between member countries. It should take place in a way which protects all stakeholders, including transport workers.

For a copy of the ITF factsheet, Open Skies, please email: aviation@itf.org.uk or see related pages below.

صفحات ذات علاقة:
Civil Aviation Education Resource Pack

أعلى

الصفحة الرئيسية للأقسام:
Issue 19 April 2005

نسخة الرسومات الكاملة

إمكانية الدخول | مساعدة الموقع | خريطة الموقع

صحيفة الاتحاد الدولي لعمال النقل

ITF House, 49-60 Borough Road, London SE1 1DR | +44 20 7403 2733 | mail@itf.org.uk