Hey guys - airline pilot here. Will respond shortly.
A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
401–410 of 413 posts
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#402Earlier quoted context omitted.
Singapore is not a representative example of... anything, honestly. Certainly not of "EU / Japan / Korea" which was the original question. So I have no idea what you're getting at.
Singapore is not unique when it comes to interactions with unions. Check out out the violent union protests in Korea or Japan.
If you're trying to claim something relevant you're going to have to do so more explicitly.
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#403The bigger issue here is that the ILS is being set aside in favor of visual approaches in order to slot in a few more approaches per hour. What's the point of equipping SFO with ILS if it's just going to sit idle?
It’s not “a few”. Parallel landings allow double the throughput.
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
Singapore is not unique when it comes to interactions with unions. Check out out the violent union protests in Korea or Japan.
If you're trying to claim something relevant you're going to have to do so more explicitly.
https://www.industriall-union.org/korean-trade-unions-protes...
"On 20 July 2023, the Korean Metal Workers' Union (KMWU) took another strong stand against trade union repression in Korea, calling for an end to the heavy-handed tactics employed by the government."
The idea that workers in unions in Asia suddenly have robust worker protections is false.
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice post. This part: > This sounds reasonable to me as a safety precaution. I tried Googling, but I couldn't find anything. How do you know this information?
https://youtu.be/qNtDdmq-b5M?si=hoMslBXthGoj9YZU 09:50 It is not Lufthansa specific and applies also for many other airlines. Quote German pilot working for Condor. Sadly there are no closed-captions in English available. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/47652 In Europe it is quite common for airline companies to only allow their aircrews visual approaches at their home bases (e.g. Amsterdam for KLM) or, in case…
Excellent reply. Thank you!
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
Singapore is not a representative example of... anything, honestly. Certainly not of "EU / Japan / Korea" which was the original question. So I have no idea what you're getting at.
Singapore is not unique when it comes to interactions with unions. Check out out the violent union protests in Korea or Japan.
Check out out the violent union protests in Korea or Japan.
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does anyone know why EU / Japan / Korea does not have the same issues? Because over there the job comes with a strong union and real job security?
Like the pilots of Singapore Airlines? In the words of Lee Kuan Yew… “I gave them a choice. Continue this and I will by every means at my disposal teach you and get the people of Singapore to help me teach you a lesson you won't forget. Took them 65 minutes and they decided ok it isn't worth the fight. Why? Because they know they'll lose. They know that I'm prepared to ground the airline. They know that I can get the…
I'm confused here. Were the Singapore Airlines pilots unionized? If yes, was it illegal for them to strike? These types of "strong man" posts do so little for me. Zero useful context provided and lacking in any nuance.
For example, some light Googling tells me:
Mr Lee had in 1980 taken the pilots' union to task for staging an unofficial work-to-rule protest in November, to demand a 30 per cent basic pay...
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#408Earlier quoted context omitted.
The original "Thanks Regan" comment makes no sense to me. To be clear, President Regan fired all striking air traffic controllers in 1981. The same Wiki article says: > So that means, FAA had enough controllers by 1991. What does that incident have to do with today's shortage? Nothing. Deeper: I tried to Google why is there a shortage of air traffic controllers in the United States. The root cause appears unclear to…
127k is not a huge salary in large cities with a life and death responsibility job.
Most US airports are not located inside large cities. They are located 15-30km outside large cities. Normally, there is plenty of much cheaper suburban housing available.
Also, in your view, is 127k as a starting salary not enough for a "life and death responsibility job"? If no, are you willing to pay higher airfares to cover the cost? If yes, by how much in %?
I love these types of reactionary, emotional HN posts. This term: "life and death responsibility job": Do bus/train/truct drivers, crane operators, ER nurses/doctors, firefighters, police, military group troops qualify for that same phrase? I am sure all except medical doctors have a starting salary much, much lower than 127k.
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're trying to claim something relevant you're going to have to do so more explicitly.
https://www.industriall-union.org/korean-trade-unions-protes... "On 20 July 2023, the Korean Metal Workers' Union (KMWU) took another strong stand against trade union repression in Korea, calling for an end to the heavy-handed tactics employed by the government." The idea that workers in unions in Asia suddenly have robust worker protections is false.
The very fact that these fights are happening in 2023 demonstrates that there are, or at least were until recently, strong and active unions. Maybe the Korean government's 2009 law really did depower the unions, and maybe Korea will see a corresponding shortage of workers in air traffic control and similar safety-critical jobs gradually develop as the effect of that works its way through.
Re: A Lufthansa A350's frustrating Oakland diversion
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, Lufthansa can make up whatever rules they want for “safety”. Safest would be to not venture 7 miles above the arctic at 500mph at all. But if their rules are obviously in conflict with the standard operations at an airport, it’s on Lufthansa to adjust not everyone else. You can’t barge in and expect to get ATC priority on account of “company policy” or suddenly there’d be a lot of company policies requiring onl…
Describing this as "barging in" is rather strange to me. The aviation industry is neither a charity nor the average software engineering shop; not only is air traffic control something that airlines pay for, this is far from the first or the last time that Lufthansa will fly into SFO.
Now I am confused - I have no actual knowledge on this but on the post there is a comment from an experienced pilot saying the opposite:
> [...] But IMO ATC was absolutely not doing what they are supposed to do. Air traffic control is literally a service provided to and paid for by the airlines.