Southwest Pilots Aggressively Push Age 65

[roadrunnerblue]

Senate panel sympathetic to Southwest Airlines

Southwest Airlines Co. won victories from a U.S. Senate panel Tuesday, which voted to expand destinations the carrier can serve from Dallas Love Field and raise the retirement age for pilots.

Limits on Southwest destinations from Love would be lifted in eight years, and the carrier could immediately connect Love passengers to airports throughout the United States, under a bill approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee's transportation panel.

The $69 billion budget legislation approved Tuesday in Washington also requires the Federal Aviation Administration to raise the mandatory retirement age for all airline pilots to 65 from 60. Dallas-based Southwest has been a major proponent of raising the age so it's pilots could work longer.

The FAA since 1959 has required that airline pilots retire at 60, saying a higher age could hurt safety.

From Bloomberg, AP, staff reports




With some of the highest paid pilots in the industry, why are the Southwest pilots so aggressively pursuing the increase in age to 65? If their retirement isn’t good enough, instead of hosing the rest of us, why doesn’t SWAPA just negotiate a better retirement at their company?

AA767AV8TOR

That is because some of us work for messed up airlines that do not provide a pension nor medical after age 60!!!

 

[satpak77]

why would ANYONE want to be still working for someone else at age 65?

jeez, play golf, fly your Bonanza, go to Oshkosh, and enjoy the grandkids while you still can.

fly airliners for some company at age 65? you gotta be kidding me

 

[Andy]

Andy I hope UAL furloughs you next. That will teach you to wish bad karma on me!!

You're a friggin' rocket scientist. I'm already furloughed. I will be recalled this fall; will take MLOA. I'm also hoping that UAL turns around and furloughs me again ... more furlough pay!

As for wishing you 'bad' karma, that is incorrect. I merely stated that I was counting on karma to take care of you. You chose to insert bad instead of good. Very telling.

... and thanks for wishing that I'll get furloughed from UAL again. I could use the extra cash while on mil leave.

 

[Andy]

Hi Andy, I'm curious if you have anything specific to make you believe that the FAA will file an exception to allowing ICAO rule folks over 60 into the US? This is the first I have heard from anyone saying such a thing and I hadn't even thought of it till you brought it up.

Since Marion Blakey is on record saying that if asked to testify the FAA would be neutral on upping the age, I would think that the FAA would not be thinking of filing an exception to the ICAO this fall.

Personally I think the age 60 rule works, but I'm not really opposed to 65 either. I think it will all come out in the wash anyway.

Link: http://www.intl-pilot.com/content/view/27/16/

Don't forget that Blakely is a politician. She will make wishy washy statements that don't decisively favor or oppose the age 60 rule; it's a political football.
I prefer to see what she has directed her minions to testify. In the link below, you can read about the FAA's Federal Air Surgeon said in testimony (page 11): http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/fasmb/media/Vol43_3.pdf

 

[satpak77]

Andy I hope UAL furloughs you next.

nice comment bro, real professional

representing SWAPA once again....good job

 

[vetrider]

Thank you for the links Andy.

 

[Andy]

Thank you for the links Andy.

Vetrider, no problems. Unless it's my opinion, I always try to have a reliable source (or two).
In my current job, I'm in the DC area and have had a chance to observe the inside workings of politics first hand. Political appointees aren't going to voice a strong opinion on a controversial subject. They will delegate that task to their subordinates. For that reason, I consider the Federal Air Surgeon's testimony to be the most telling indication of where the FAA stands. It's very disarming testimony for advocates of changing the age limitation.

 

[Widow's Son]

I don't go to rallys or march around Congress, but if I had to vote to end age 60, I would in a heartbeat. Wrong is wrong. It came to fruition by a anti-union management at AA to attack and punish the senior union pilots who were fighting for many of the gains we have today.

Life isn't always fair, but you deal with the cards you were dealt. I would have liked to have gone into the military but in their wisdom they wouldn't let me fly because of glasses. It wasn't fair but I dealt with it and moved on.
I doubt I go all the way to 60, but I want the choice and option to be mine and not the Feds. (who allow their own pilots to fly beyond 60). I really don't think changing the law will affect seniority that much. Changing the law will bring updates and advancements in medical screening for older guys and many won't make it to 60 and to me that is a good thing. If you are fit you should continue and if you aren't fit you should go on medical retirement. That is best for all concerned.

BTW, on SWA retirement vehicles it took me a little over 14 years to pass 1 million in walk away funds. I would never want or support any retirement vehicle that I didn't control. It would actually be cheaper for SWA to switch to a pension plan over what they average paying out in 401k match and profit sharing. All those years when the legacies weren't funding because of market conditions and now because of BK, SWA was, and continues making the payments like clockwork.

 

[sandman2122]

The only way I would consider voting to change the Age 60 mandatory retirement is if it's delayed at least 20-25 years so all the current advocates will not benefit from an immediate change.

If you're in favor a changing the rule, which allowed this same group of pilots to upgrade due to Age 60 retirements, then fall on your sword and let the change benefit the young pilots that won't receive an instant reward for the retirement change.

Like that'll ever happen..

 

[FoxHunter]

Link: http://www.intl-pilot.com/content/view/27/16/

Don't forget that Blakely is a politician. She will make wishy washy statements that don't decisively favor or oppose the age 60 rule; it's a political football.
I prefer to see what she has directed her minions to testify. In the link below, you can read about the FAA's Federal Air Surgeon said in testimony (page 11): http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/fasmb/media/Vol43_3.pdf

Thanks for the link regarding Dr. Jordan's testimony. Now for the rest of the story! He did make those remarks provided in the link. The problem he had were with the questions that followed. His performance was such that he is no longer the FAA's Federal Air Surgeon. He was Retired. S.65 was passed out of the Senate Committee.