APAAD regrouping to challenge age 60

[Andy]

MORE ON NEXT PHASE OF THE AGE 60 EFFORT

My earlier message to you noted that, due to election year politics, the Age 60 effort has run aground. Congress will adjourn and leave our legislation high and dry as ’06 ends.

However…the money bills that were not passed in ’06 are bills that fund the government in ’07. They must still be passed for the government to operate beyond the few months that a ‘continuing resolution’ will provide for. Our legislation does not carry over on a ‘cr’. The new approps legislation will have some new language and a new number.

Nothing has changed on a strategic level. The approps legislation will need to be passed early in the year. Our goal for early’07 (and commencing now) is to ensure that our legislation is attached to the Transportation Appropriations bill and that it is not stripped.

Tactically, we will need to round up our supporters from last year. We did well, with some 27 Senators and 84 Representatives signed on as co-sponsors. We also need to bring in Democratic support. After all, they now run the committees. Keep in mind, we had many who expressed support for amending the Age 60 Rule. The election year is now over. We should, and can, expect support in ’07.

We’re going to lose some good people through retirement. Hell, we already have. A number of those are still working with us, proof positive that it is not “all about me”. Those who have been hosed by this archaic rule are still in the fight, fighting for their fellow pilots.

Those guys are the heroes – those who have lost but continue to fight to right a wrong.

My hat’s off to all of you. It was a pleasure to work with you in ’06. I wish we were having a victory party instead of gathering on the Hill to fight again. But if we succeed, our party will merely be delayed until ’07.

See you in DC!

Paul Emens
Founder, APAAD

 

[Big Beer Belly]

1-800-the-scooter-store

A Mobility Consultation is a free, over the phone, no obligation, no pressure conversation with one of The SCOOTER Store mobility experts. Your mobility consultation will help you understand your power chair and scooter options and quickly get you on the road to regaining your freedom and independence.

BBB

 

[General Lee]

Will the APAAD fight for retired firemen and policemen too? I want grandpa firemen carrying my family down a burning staircase, and the drug dealers want old cops patrolling the beat, when they aren't napping. Old pilots lose their hearing, situational awareness, and depth perception as they get older, yet ICAO says males could fly to 65, and females to 69. Great, all we need are old grandmas flying the skies.....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[luckytohaveajob]

When does Paul Emens retire?

How old is Paul Emens? He is the instigator that is leading this train wreck.

APAAD, SWA, SWAPA is the problem.

What do the real SWA pilots think about losing their preferred base, getting a chance at being a captain, getting a line, getting weekends off, getting off reserve as a captain or a new fo?

Paul Emens needs to go.

 

[FNG_that's me]

How old is Paul Emens? He is the instigator that is leading this train wreck.

APAAD, SWA, SWAPA is the problem.

What do the real SWA pilots think about losing their preferred base, getting a chance at being a captain, getting a line, getting weekends off, getting off reserve as a captain or a new fo?

Paul Emens needs to go.

LTHJ,

I think we agree, but it is worth repeating for the masses:

The problem is a minority of guys at SWAPA who are pushing this issue without SWAPA voting on it. The stagnation that will occur at SWA (and others) will be amazing if this gets past. Kiss 6 year upgrades goodbye!!

SWA brothers--I hope you get to vote on this soon and (I believe) then you will have the ammunition you need to collar the SWAPA voice.

ALPA folks, please pressure your block rep to get ALPA to be more vocal and engaged. They are officially opposed(due to the vote last year), but need to be more vocal (IMHO).

 

[CaptBud330]

Tired

I don't know about other over 60 guys, but speaking for myself, after 37 years with the last 5 over water, I was ready to retire. When is enough, enough? Sure, I can still fly and I do miss the "Big Bird", but when do you finally quit? I personally think the age should remain 60. If you still have the ambition and energy, start a second career but leave the driving to the next generation. They deserve their shot.

 

[FoxHunter]

How old is Paul Emens? He is the instigator that is leading this train wreck.

APAAD, SWA, SWAPA is the problem.

What do the real SWA pilots think about losing their preferred base, getting a chance at being a captain, getting a line, getting weekends off, getting off reserve as a captain or a new fo?

Paul Emens needs to go.

I believe Paul has quite a few years to go. He started fighting issue when his dad was at Pan Ameican. Those were the days that his dad's union, ALPA, was still fighting the age 60 rule. That was the day when the FAA claimed that it was a safety issue, not an affirmative action program for junior pilots.uke:

 

[seefive]

Good luck in retirement FH.

 

[PCL_128]

We’re going to lose some good people through retirement. Hell, we already have. A number of those are still working with us, proof positive that it is not “all about me”. Those who have been hosed by this archaic rule are still in the fight, fighting for their fellow pilots.

Those guys are the heroes – those who have lost but continue to fight to right a wrong.

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. uke:

 

[TexaSWA]

How old is Paul Emens? He is the instigator that is leading this train wreck.

APAAD, SWA, SWAPA is the problem.

What do the real SWA pilots think about losing their preferred base, getting a chance at being a captain, getting a line, getting weekends off, getting off reserve as a captain or a new fo?

Paul Emens needs to go.

SWAPA will no longer support change of age 60 after the leadership change in January. There will be another vote and we all know which way it will go. 99% of FOs and a surprising number of captains are against change.

 

[chase]

LTHJ,

I think we agree, but it is worth repeating for the masses:

The problem is a minority of guys at SWAPA who are pushing this issue without SWAPA voting on it. The stagnation that will occur at SWA (and others) will be amazing if this gets past. Kiss 6 year upgrades goodbye!!

SWA brothers--I hope you get to vote on this soon and (I believe) then you will have the ammunition you need to collar the SWAPA voice.

ALPA folks, please pressure your block rep to get ALPA to be more vocal and engaged. They are officially opposed(due to the vote last year), but need to be more vocal (IMHO).

Dear FNG,

Paul and a "minority" of pilots within SWAPA have been focused exclusively on Age 60, you are correct. The term "minority" though is a misnomer I believe as it would imply that something less than a majority of SWAPA members had no influence into the direction of SWAPA on the issue. In fact over the last 7 years, SWAPA has had two votes on the issue, both were in the 60-40% range of those voting who supported age 60 changes. I didn't say that 60-40% of all members supported change, just those who bothered to vote. As is always the case, I believe those who were present & didn't vote aren't in a position to complain and that for folks to claim that "SWAPA" is in favor of changing the Age 60 rule would be accurate, based upon the votes....just as it is fair to say an elected official was elected and represents the "will of the people" who voted. Only in contract balloting is participation high enough to make the statement 100% accurate.

However, for the nearly 1500 (5300 on property now) pilots who have been hired since the last vote (2003, same results with about the same level of participation by the general membership) the argument can be made that another vote is needed. That is a very salient point but merely because another vote might occur, I don't believe it represents a seminal shift in how the membership feels about it, at least from those that are polled. I hope those individuals who wish to have another vote pass their thoughts to their elected association officials for actions or take up the cause and petition for a change; all are reasonable options and would be well received by your representatives and executives.

For Paul or anyone to lead a charge on any issue could be construed as a "minority" of a few....most bills in congress or eventual laws are "minority" laws. Most "majorities" are satisfied for others to do the legwork and trudge up the hill. It could be said a "minority" has the right to speak its piece also for if another vote was to occur & the results were the same or even more in favor of change, would you expect those on the minority side to remain silent?

I applaud anyone who has the passion to fight for something, particularly if it is in DC where the obstacles are the greatest to overcome policy/law and pursues it with the zest and zeal Paul has and others. Not all causes are worthy of this passion as those on the other side would argue....so be it but to disparage the individual vs. debating the issue & its merits trivializes the efforts of those who have worked hard in the past for the "majority" when in fact the "majority" was happy to let other "minorities" fight for them. I applaud the proponents of both sides of the arguement and hope the debate will be settled soon in order to remove a divisive issue in the minds of some.

 

[skykid]

SWAPA will no longer support change of age 60 after the leadership change in January. There will be another vote and we all know which way it will go. 99% of FOs and a surprising number of captains are against change.

I hope you are right!! I'm sick of hearing how SWA and Jetlbue are pushing this grandpa crap. Stand up and be heard.

 

[Jim Smyth]

If/when there is another vote at SWA the turn out will be the same IMO. In this forum you have a very vocal group of guys on the outside looking in and see this as a threat to there being hired at SWA or if there on the inside a threat to there upgrade. Yes if it passes your hire date will be pushed back or your upgrade will be delayed a bit but if you look at whats happening at most of the other airlines it isn't a big hurdle, just a hurdle. Also FWIW Paul has a few good years left and is a good man with a purpose!

If you are a Captain you would be foolish not to vote to extend the option of going to age 65. You never know whats going to happen plus you can always quit at 60 or 55 if you wish or cut back on your flying. We are a growth airline and hearing guys complaining about not being able to upgrade in 6 years, well just ask your buddies at brand "X" how long it takes there! Each airline is different. Even if they went to age 65 (IMO which in inevitable) not every Pilot will want to go to that age, myself included! I also fly with plenty of FO's that spent 20+ years in the military. Do you think they would like to extend it to 65? You bet they do. So to think that with a new vote there will be an overwhelming change of SWAPA direction on this issue is very much mistaken! Again this is only my opinion but we will see when it happens. Onward again to 2007! Go gettum Paul!

 

[Heavy Set]

Jim Smyth and Fox Hunter,

Have a great retirement. The majority of the SWA pilots will not vote your way, and the democratic Congress will not either. Maybe Rick Santorum will. Wait, he lost. Get those golf clubs ready.

 

[GoodTimes]

This SWA pilot is waiting for the chance to vote. I'm not happy that my dues have been pushing this agenda.

 

[Jim Smyth]

Jim Smyth and Fox Hunter,

Have a great retirement. The majority of the SWA pilots will not vote your way, and the democratic Congress will not either. Maybe Rick Santorum will. Wait, he lost. Get those golf clubs ready.

Outside looking in! Enjoy that Lear time!

 

[pilot141]

OK....let me try to understand this....

Some SWA guys are saying "See how lousy the upgrades are at the legacies? Vote for Age 65!". How exactly will this help the legacies?

He (or someone) then says "We hire a lot of retired military guys! They ALL want to fly to Age 65!"

Or did I miss something?

OK, I guess I did miss something: you APAAD guys, how come you are not fighting for a change to the air traffic controller age?

They retire at 55 with a full federal pension, for anyone who is wondering. I'm wondering why the guys who actually fly the metal are older and have less pension protection than the controllers.

Instead of increasing the AGE that we can work to, how about increasing the quality of the job we do.

How about an Age 55 for pilots: match it to the ATC guys.

 

[ferlo]

"We’re going to lose some good people through retirement. Hell, we already have. A number of those are still working with us, proof positive that it is not “all about me”. Those who have been hosed by this archaic rule are still in the fight, fighting for their fellow pilots.

Those guys are the heroes – those who have lost but continue to fight to right a wrong.

My hat’s off to all of you. It was a pleasure to work with you in ’06. I wish we were having a victory party instead of gathering on the Hill to fight again. But if we succeed, our party will merely be delayed until ’07.

See you in DC!

Paul Emens
Founder, APAAD"

If Mr. Emens is so impressed with these guys contribution, why is he adamant that they be legally barred from returning to the industry? Can a person speak out of both sides of their mouths this loudly? Apparently, Yes. Lets just call it what it is...GREED. Greed and a lifetime of poor financial planning. What's that saying about lying in the bed YOU made?

 

[GuppyWN]

For all my Southwest brothers who are pro change I ask you one question. What happens when we quit growing and upgrades stop. Will you still be a pro change guy?

The guys hired pre 9/11 upgraded in 4 years. It will take me 6.5 years plus.

Gup

 

[spinproof]

Continuing ---
​

​

Air Carrier Incident Rates (per 1000 pilots)
Involving Air Carrier Pilots: 1990-1999

FAA statistics show that air carrier pilots aged 60 and over have a superior safety record as compared to other pilot age groups within either Part 121 or Part 135.
[As reported in Chicago Tribune, July 11, 1999.]

​