Yuppyguppy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2003
- Posts
- 934
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't like discussing the economics of this issue, because it should only be about safety. And I've already clearly demonstrated through safety data that accident rates increase above the age of 55. Does that mean that 55-59 is unsafe? No; it just means that it is less safe than the 45-55 age bracket. And the accident rate takes an increasingly sharp upward turn approaching 60.
Oh, really? You have volumes of accident data on airline pilots in their 50's and 60's and all signs point to rapidly increasing accident rates for these pilots especially as they approach their 60th birthday? If it's that blatanly obvious, then why are they being allowed anywhere near an airplane after they're 35? And are passengers of 135 fractional jets deserving of any less protection from the FAA than airline passengers? Whose keeping the grey menace at bay. You alone? Compare apples to apples and not GA stats to airline stats; you make yourself look foolish by doing any less.
As for the economics of it, let's keep it in macroeconomic terms. The increase in retirement age will cause a sudden supply-demand imbalance due to the surplus supply of pilots. Over time, this will result in lower wages in order to increase pilot demand. It's Econ 101.
If you learned that in college, you ought to get your money back. By the way how is ERAU's econ course? There will be a slight decrease in the demand for pilots caused by SOME pilots electing to continue beyond 60. This will be offset by the growth in pilot hiring (as much as you may want to deny that). The only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage that will allow foreign carriers to operate with foreign crews on domestic US routes at much lower pay scales. Keep your boogeymen straight.
One should also keep in mind that these top pilots will be the least efficient for the company, causing the company to increase the number of pilots in order to achieve the same number of block hours flown. Since the total size of the pilot wages pie is only so big, all pilots will lose due to this rule change. The only ones to benefit from such change are in the mid-50s to 59 age bracket.
Nothing in this paragraph makes any sense, so I can't even begin to comment.
Long story short: Eliminating Age 60 provides opportunity for All at a small cost to some. If you need further protection, negotiate it into your next contract.
These guys have to have somebody to blame for all their troubles. It must be pretty depressing to be so young and so hopeless. It's funny how as you mature you realize there really AREN'T monsters in the closet after all.OK...after looking at all the comments on Flightinfo.com....I've decided to get on the SWAPA website and vote....No...on the age 65....
Nahhhh....just kidding....But, I promise, I won't call in sick for multiple trips monthly after I turn age 60....I'll just put them in "Trip trade/Give away"...if they go...they go...if they don't...I'll fly them.
Deal? OK, deal....
Tejas
Oh, really? You have volumes of accident data on airline pilots in their 50's and 60's and all signs point to rapidly increasing accident rates for these pilots especially as they approach their 60th birthday? If it's that blatanly obvious, then why are they being allowed anywhere near an airplane after they're 35? And are passengers of 135 fractional jets deserving of any less protection from the FAA than airline passengers? Whose keeping the grey menace at bay. You alone? Compare apples to apples and not GA stats to airline stats; you make yourself look foolish by doing any less.
If you learned that in college, you ought to get your money back. By the way how is ERAU's econ course? There will be a slight decrease in the demand for pilots caused by SOME pilots electing to continue beyond 60. This will be offset by the growth in pilot hiring (as much as you may want to deny that). The only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage that will allow foreign carriers to operate with foreign crews on domestic US routes at much lower pay scales. Keep your boogeymen straight.
These guys have to have somebody to blame for all their troubles. It must be pretty depressing to be so young and so hopeless. It's funny how as you mature you realize there really AREN'T monsters in the closet after all.
So you're saying that pilot demand will decrease due to pilots continuing past 60 but that there is no effect on the supply curve? Please elaborate. And please explain to me what curve shifts and in which direction due to 'growth in pilot hiring'
Once you're done talking about that, please discuss in detail how the 'only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage.' No other economic factor will effect pilot wages -is that what you're saying?
I don't know about that, but you sure are having a tough time selling me, using your arguments.However, I did major in Economics. But I'm sure that you know all them thar economic concepts much better than me.
If you learned that in college, you ought to get your money back. By the way how is ERAU's econ course? There will be a slight decrease in the demand for pilots caused by SOME pilots electing to continue beyond 60. This will be offset by the growth in pilot hiring (as much as you may want to deny that). The only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage that will allow foreign carriers to operate with foreign crews on domestic US routes at much lower pay scales. Keep your boogeymen straight.
What are you really trying to ask? Do you know? Do you grasp the connection between pilot hiring of 10-20% per year and 20%+/- retention of pilots in the first few years of Age 65 implementation.
A massive 9*11 type event would probably wash out the domestic airline industry at this point anyhow, so it is of little use to include it as a threat. No doubt you'd like to pin all the evils of airline economics on those who have suffered through the worst downturn in aviation's history and now are looking to eliminate an outdated rule.
I don't know about that, but you sure are having a tough time selling me, using your arguments.
Flop-
Rising wages will only come as a result of leverage given to the pilot group by a limited supply of pilots. Pushing out pilots unnecessarily at 60 doesn't solve the problem, it just allows them to shoulder it. ALL qualified pilots get the opportunity to work and earn an additional 5 years if they choose. Why don't you want 5 more years of top scale pay, especially if it means you only have to forego 2-3 years of bottom scale CA pay? Can you explain that to me (oh, and why this even matters to someone who has bypassed CA already)?
If you look back at any gains made by organized labor, they came when the demand for labor outstripped supply. Otherwise, things languished. You might want to wish it was solely the nerve of those willing to strike, but the reality was and is that they knew that supply and demand was on their side and the bet on a strike was hedged. This is true in the steel industry, coal industry, pilot industry and to a lesser extent the teaching industry (where the threat of screaming kids at home helps the teacher's case).
The bright spot of the regionals finding fewer capable applicants is dimmed by their acceptance of unqualified applicants.