Latest news with #KeithGlatz
RTÉ News
5 days ago
- Business
- RTÉ News
Airlines for America warns Dublin Airport passenger cap bad for economy
A trade association representing US airlines said it expects US Department of Transportation officials to travel to Ireland to raise concerns over the passenger cap at Dublin Airport. Airlines for America also warned that it believes the US government could respond with "reciprocal restrictions" if the limit on passenger numbers is not lifted. Aer Lingus is the only Irish airline currently providing transatlantic routes to the US. The passenger cap was among the conditions attached to the planning permission that was granted in 2007 for the construction of Terminal 2 at Dublin Airport. It set a limit on passenger numbers passing through the airport at 32 million a year. Keith Glatz, the A4A Senior Vice President for International Affairs, claimed the cap is a direct violation of the EU-US Open Skies Agreement and is bad for the Irish economy. That deal opened up all transatlantic routes to EU and US airlines, enabling them to fly between any point in the two territories. "We anticipate the US government will be on the ground in Dublin later this month to have a first set of conversations with the Irish government to address the concern," Mr Glatz said. "It's a priority for all of us on the US side and certainly we are concerned about the compliance with the Open Skies Agreement," he added. Asked what the consequences could be if the passenger cap remains in place, Mr Glatz said: "There's a lot of issues on the table between the US and EU right now, and we do not need a passenger cap in Ireland, that can be solved tomorrow, to become part of that larger conversation." A4A represents both passenger and cargo carriers, including Delta, American Airlines, United, JetBlue and Air Canada, as well as FedEx and UPS. The group has also called on the Government to fulfil its commitment to address the limit. The Programme for Government included a pledge to "work with stakeholders to achieve our objective of lifting the passenger cap at Dublin airport as soon as possible." Keith Glatz said A4A was pleased to see pre-election manifesto commitments from Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael to resolve the issue. "We're a bit concerned with the timeline from the election, to now, the fact that nothing has happened, but we know that there are solutions out there that can be handled to move the issue forward," he stated. A spokesperson for the Department of Transport said Minister Darragh O'Brien is "examining a range of issues in relation to the 32 million passenger cap planning condition". The spokesperson said the Minister for Transport has also "commenced a process of engagement with key stakeholders." The trade association's Senior Vice President for International Affairs also said he believes the Government's obligations under the Open Skies Agreement should supersede domestic planning issues. Mr Glatz said the passenger cap "artificially constrains that [Open Skies Agreement] and it's a violation of the agreement." "The record's really clear here. Dublin is highly attractive to our members. We've been increasing flights year over year post-Covid. That's why the cap has become an issue today." He insisted a removal of the cap would result in "further growth, new routes and new entrants" into Ireland. "What we would envisage is record growth to Dublin, increased flights, new services, different products and new entrants, which are good for the transatlantic market, but also good for the Irish economy and good for the locality," he said. Asked if Dublin Airport is being overlooked by carriers looking to expand services because of the restriction, he said the passenger cap is "absolutely a limitation." "You're limiting the throughput to the airport. So that means fewer passengers, fewer business travellers, fewer direct investments that are going to be made into the Irish economy," he said. Airlines for America was a party to a legal challenge against the Irish Aviation Authority's move to reduce the allocation of take-off and landing slots for the winter and summer seasons to comply with the passenger cap. The action also involved Aer Lingus and Ryanair, as well as the airport operator daa. The High Court suspended the cap's implementation, while it referred the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union for determination. The Department of Transport spokesperson also said Minister O'Brien has "reiterated the importance of daa continuing to engage proactively with the planning authority and the Aircraft Noise Competent Authority to facilitate progress on the two planning applications" the airport operator has lodged seeking to amend the passenger cap.
Irish Independent
6 days ago
- Business
- Irish Independent
US airlines consider calling on Trump to weigh into Dublin Airport cap row
Keith Glatz, the senior vice president, international affairs, for Airlines for America, insisted the cap is in direct violation of the Open Skies agreement between the United States and the EU that permits extensive access rights to each jurisdiction for carriers from either region. Dublin Airport's passenger cap limits passenger numbers to 32 million a year. It's a planning condition attached in 2007 to the construction of Terminal 2. The government pledged in its election manifesto to remove the cap as soon as possible. However, it remains in place. Airlines for America represents major US carriers, such as Delta, United, American Airlines and JetBlue, which also serve Dublin. Mr Glatz said Airlines for America has so far not raised the cap issue directly with the US government. He added that Donald Trump has been clear that he wants to 'right-size' the US relationship with global governments where US businesses are being treated unfairly or governments are not complying with international obligations. 'It would be a shame for this issue to get co-opted into this larger dispute,' he said. 'It's eminently solvable. I just don't see any rationale for a cap on flights between the US and Dublin.' 'We've been trying over the last year to make sure this issue never got onto the agenda on the White House,' said Mr Glatz, adding that the lobby group has been trying to take every step short of asking the US government to intervene. 'Once I make that request, then it's out of our hands. The Irish government can solve this before it becomes a larger trade dispute,' he added. 'We're still optimistic that that's what's going to happen and that's our goal.' 'Any time the Irish government fails to comply with its international obligations under any treaty, aviation or otherwise, it endangers Irish business interests abroad.' Mr Glatz declined to speculate as to what specific measures the US government could take if the issue is not satisfactorily addressed. However, it's possible that the US government could take reciprocal measures that might impact Aer Lingus, for example. Any such measures could hamper its route network from Dublin to the United States, where it now serves almost 20 cities. 'The time to act is now,' said Mr Glatz. 'This doesn't need to turn into a dispute that would rise to the level of some of the others that you've seen between the US and EU that are currently ongoing.' The Irish government has touted potential legislation to deal with the cap. However, that could take months – even until next year, before it's law. 'I think it's in the very interest of this [Irish] government to act as soon as possible to get this legislation sorted,' said Mr Glatz. 'I am extremely optimistic that when the Irish government puts its mind to doing what is right for the Irish citizenry, we're not talking about a year, we're probably taking about a couple of months.' Mr Glatz said Airlines for America is also raising the cap issue with US media this week.
Travel Weekly
6 days ago
- Business
- Travel Weekly
Middle East conflict adds to the global airspace squeeze
Instability in the Middle East and Eastern Europe has ratcheted up route challenges for global air carriers. And despite the cessation of bombing over Iran in late June, the puzzle faced by many airline operations teams isn't likely to get easier soon. For now, most airlines are continuing to steer clear of Iranian airspace, altering routes to fly north through Turkey or south through Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The diversions have placed additional pressure on flight corridors that were already more crowded due to the closure of Ukrainian airspace in 2022 and the shutdown of Russian airspace for Western carriers. Faced with limited choices, airlines are often forced to fly longer routes, and with less scheduling flexibility, due to the challenges of dealing with more crowded skies. "If you're thinking about a six-lane highway, we are basically now funneling all traffic through two and three lanes," said Keith Glatz, senior vice president of international affairs for Airlines for America (A4A). For U.S. carriers, the restrictions on Iran preceded the closures over Russia and Ukraine, dating back to January 2020, when tensions escalated in the aftermath of the U.S. assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani. U.S. airlines have also chosen not to fly over Iraq, though the FAA allows it as long as an altitude of 32,000 feet is maintained. Currently, the flight risk database Safe Airspace advises against flying over Iran, Israel, Syria and Lebanon along with Russia, Ukraine and several other countries. Cumulatively, the closures have mostly impacted India and China routes for U.S. airlines. To and from China, the closure of Russian airspace can increase flight time by two hours, depending on the route and on conditions, as carriers stay south of their usual transpacific routing. The Russian closure, augmented by the Iran closure, has caused U.S. airlines to mostly stay out of the Indian market. United has canceled three of its four India routes since 2022. And the only U.S. airline routes to India are one each from American and United -- to Delhi from New York JFK and Newark, respectively. Due to the closures, American operates JFK-Delhi by going across Turkey, then staying north of Iran and Afghanistan before cutting sharply south toward the Indian subcontinent, data from the flight-tracking service AirNav Radar shows. In contrast, until India's flare-up with Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region in early May closed Pakistani airspace to Indian carriers, Air India was able to fly the preferred polar route over northern Scandinavia and Greenland, often saving 30 minutes to an hour, depending on trade winds. The Pakistani closure, however, first led Air India to adjust its routing to go over Iran. Then came the bombing campaign by Israel, and later the U.S., against Iran. Now Air India is operating its U.S. service through the crowded Saudi Arabia/Egypt flight corridor, where it shares the skies with East/West services from European and Gulf airlines. Another popular Iran-avoidant corridor for non-U.S. operators has them cutting north/south over eastern Iraq in transit between Turkey and the Persian Gulf. "When you funnel a lot of traffic through a small corridor, that can create a bunch of air traffic management challenges," said industry analyst Bob Mann of R.W. Mann & Co. One impact, he noted, is that airlines might not have the option to substantially vary their routes to find the best wind conditions. "To have to fly the same corridor in both directions can create quite a bit of operational penalty," Mann said. Headwinds on alternate routes Slower airline throughput is another pitfall, as Glatz's reference to traffic highway lanes illustrates. He said airlines can try to fly bigger planes with fewer frequencies to alleviate that problem. But no matter what, scheduling challenges are heightened. Longer flight times also increase fuel usage and up the difficulty of crew scheduling, especially if delays cause more frequent occurrences of crews being timed out due to regulations on crew duty duration. And all of these issues, said Mann, impact the economics of each route, making some routes less appealing, if not unviable. "Some of it you try, but the cost of it is so high in equipment utilization and fuel burn and staffing utilization that you cancel that stuff," he said. Despite all the problems caused by airspace closures, many airlines might not be quick to return to the skies over Iran. In a recent opinion published by IATA, the trade group's senior vice president for security, Nick Careen, pointed to the downing of Ukrainian Airlines Flight PS752 by Iran in 2020 and last December's downing of Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 8243 by what is believed to have been a Russian missile. That second incident, he said, "was a fresh reminder that the risks in conflict zones are real." Regardless of whether regulators forbid airlines from flying over one area or another, carriers are obligated to do their own operational risk assessments, Careen wrote.
