Effective date for age 65

[Bally]

I hope it takes a long time for the age 60 rule to change since it will put off my upgrade. Does anyone know when the change is schedudled to take place. What is going on in the governemnt and what needs to happen before the change takes place?

 

[airfogey]

Excuse me, but when exactly was your upgrade scheduled for? You never know in this business, and remember the people junior to you are hoping that age 65 doesn't take effect until the day after you turn 60.

Airfogey

 

[PCL_128]

I hope it takes a long time for the age 60 rule to change since it will put off my upgrade. Does anyone know when the change is schedudled to take place. What is going on in the governemnt and what needs to happen before the change takes place?

We're probably looking at a minimum of 1.5-2 years before this ridiculous change takes place. Probably longer. The FAA won't issue the rule until congress provides protection from litigation, and the congress won't pass any legislation because they don't want to get involved in what they consider to be an FAA regulatory issue. Until that gets resolved, don't expect any action.

 

[Bally]

I understand that people jr to me want the rule change to be delayed until they turn 59.5. Lets be real. How many want it to change now because it is unfair. Of coarse the rule is unfair. But given the fact that I have no vested interest in the other guy, I want it to change when it is most advantageous to me which means ideally it will change when I am 59 and 364 days old.

 

[Bringupthebird]

But given the fact that I have no vested interest in the other guy,

Is this ALPA's new motto, replacing the specious "Schedule With Safety"?

It's a pretty versatile comment. It works for justifying Pay For Training, RJ Proliferation, Contract Giveaways, Elimination of Retiree medical benefits, and Staple Jobs, just to name a few of the things that have brought this former profession to where it is today.

 

[Ralph Cramden]

I understand that people jr to me want the rule change to be delayed until they turn 59.5. Lets be real. How many want it to change now because it is unfair. Of coarse the rule is unfair. But given the fact that I have no vested interest in the other guy, I want it to change when it is most advantageous to me which means ideally it will change when I am 59 and 364 days old.

And I hope you find the rule change is indeed coarse, of course.

"I have no vested interest in the other guy" Wow, what a conceited statement there junior. So, please excuse the other guy for feeling the same way about your eagerly anticipated upgrade. Yawn.

It's going to happen here because it has already happened at ICAO. Cry all you want, you will get to wait five more years until you get to the top of the list and have your junior guys eagerly waiting for your retirement (if you don't medical out, lose your job or just quit). Of course, you will then be screaming for age 70. How coarse!

 

[bendover]

just because it happened in icao doesn't mean it should happen here in the usa.
Since when does America follow other countries laws? when does the UN set America's law's? did i miss something? I don't see other countries opening their aviation jobs for american's like the US accepts all these foreigners flying in the US. shouldn't they follow us and allow americans to fly for Air france, BA or lufthanza and alot of other airlines currently only allowing only thier nationals to get jobs> my point is so what if icao has the 65yr limit that has no bearing on what US law should be.

 

[Ralph Cramden]

Well bendover, it's not "other countries laws", it's an international agreement between many countries. Sorta like coordinating "N" numbers, safety standards, aircraft certification standards, operating rules. Many industries do this, not just aviation, and many governments rubber stamp these industry standards into their own laws.

I certainly agree with you on the issue of allowing foreign pilots to work within the USA. That is not a fair playing field at all. I cannot get employment in Europe or Australia but have flown with many of their pilots over here. They are nice guys, but the fact remains they are here competing with me for work in my country, while I cannot go there and compete for work.

Back to ICAO: If you fly internationally, you certainly want to know the landing minimums and TERPS criteria are safe. You certainly want to know the fuel you buy in Asia will work in your plane, right? When member states agree to abide by international standards, they abide by international standards. Take comfort in the fact that we in the US have written many of these standards, but not all of the international standards.

What I am saying is certification and safety standards are set internationally. Right to work laws unfortunately are not.

Think globally...

 

[heilhaavir]

Bendover & Ralph, you mean to say that foreigners can come & work here without a work permit or a green card? Sorry to deviate from the original thread, am a bit confused...

 

[Ralph Cramden]

No, they need legal permission to work in the US. I am saying this permission is much easier for a foreigner to obtain here in the US than it is for a US citizen to obtain in some foreign countries.

Case in point: Years ago I used to work in the Cayman Islands, as a pilot, for a company with US FAA certification and CI certification. I was a DC-3 Captain and am a US citizen. A Cayman citizen applied for my job. The net result was I could not fly in the CI and had to restrict my work to the US certificate AND stay out of the CI. He was allowed to work under both certificates and could fly into and around the US unrestricted. I agree that he had superior rights in the CI due to citizenship, but why did he have unrestricted US rights WITHOUT citizenship?

The original poster was asking about age 65. I gave a case for following ICAO practices, as on the whole this is a good thing. My comment to the next poster was ICAO practices do not include right to work laws.

Does that help? I admit that sometimes my writing is not as clear as I would like it.

BTW, the DC-3 work was the best flying ever!

 

[GuppyWN]

Does anyone know when the change is schedudled to take place.

Never...... unless you know something I don't. The rule hasn't changed and isn't scheduled to change. The FAA said they MIGHT issue a NPRM this fall which is a notice of PROPOSED rule making. There is a very real possiblility that this rule won't change at all.

That being said I have heard 18 months from August is the best guess of the "it's a slam dunk for change" crowd.

Gup

 

[Neubyfly]

Take the ALPA survey at ALPA.org

 

[bendover]

just because icao changes it to 65 w/one pilot under 60 doesn't mean the US cant keep it at two pilots under 60 , sounds safer than one? If you need an under sixty guy for safety sake why not make it even safer. sure adopt the rule but require while flying in the us . all pilots are under 60. Its always the more restrictive of the rules.

 

[T3700]

Back to ICAO: If you fly internationally, you certainly want to know the landing minimums and TERPS criteria are safe.


We don't TERPS our approaches to ICAO standards. Our TERPS standards are actually quite a bit different. Where is the outrage over our non-compliance with that ICAO standard? There are plenty of valid arguments for and against the age 65 rule. Compliance with ICAO just happens to be one of the weaker ones.

 

[The Victors]

just because icao changes it to 65 w/one pilot under 60 doesn't mean the US cant keep it at two pilots under 60 , sounds safer than one? If you need an under sixty guy for safety sake why not make it even safer. sure adopt the rule but require while flying in the us . all pilots are under 60. Its always the more restrictive of the rules.

All this has NOTHING to do with safety.

 

[Flopgut]

The retirement age issue is political. The need for one pilot to be under age 60 is a real safety aspect.

 

[The Victors]

It's not political either. Just good old fashion greed. on both sides.

 

[Flopgut]

Hmmm. Three on duty heart attacks at CAL so far this year, and a rule that's worked flawlessly for 4+ decades? It's a safety issue all right! And it's a rule we've grown into and perhaps need now, more than before. I don't care who you think is greedy...It's a good rule!

The change proposal IS nothing more than political. Not safe and not warranted, greed based only.

 

[Falconjet]

It is ONLY about SAFETY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There just because I typed it doesn't make it true.

Nor does the fact that you post the opposite make that true.

Good day.

FJ

 

[fr8doggie]

10/13/2007

 

[whymeworry?]

Flew a trip recently where the Captain told me his best friend, who is a UPS driver, told him the IPA did a study and found that not one of their pilots lived past the age of 66 once they retired.

Any UPS drivers care to comment? Is this true?

FWIW, he was hoping the age would change because his recent divorce just cost him $1,000,000... wrote a check for that amount so that he wouldn't have to pay alimony, give her the house, nor give her his retirement. While he wanted to see the rule change to fix his financial situation, he really didn't WANT to work past 60 and agreed he would probably be dead by 65-70 so what's the point of working until 65.

 

[vixin]

........

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Hmmm. Three on duty heart attacks at CAL so far this year

This tells me more CAL pilots need to spend more time on the treadmill and be more careful with their diets.

You say 3 on duty heart attacks "so far". You mean there are more coming? How many more in 2007 ? How many did CAL have in 2005 or 2004 or 2003? got those numbers?

 

[Flopgut]

This tells me more CAL pilots need to spend more time on the treadmill and be more careful with their diets.

You say 3 on duty heart attacks "so far". You mean there are more coming? How many more in 2007 ? How many did CAL have in 2005 or 2004 or 2003? got those numbers?

I say "so far", because it's only April! Three would be a lot in any twelve month period, of course. I don't know how many more are coming and I don't know how many there have been in the recent past. I know you'd like to have that data because you're secretly amused by awful things befalling non SWA pilots.

Treadmill? More careful diets? So basically you're saying you'll support changes to medical standards? Figures.

As you're so fond of pointing out how unique you are: "Your house" doesn't do any long haul, international, back side of the clock flying so the effects of that are something you think should be ignored!? Further ignore the effects of career churn these CAL pilots suffered 20 years ago?....that couldn't possibly help our profession understand how the last 6 years have affected our fellow pilots?

Nope! You don't care, all is well at "your house".

 

[Tejas-Jet]

I say "so far", because it's only April! Three would be a lot in any twelve month period, of course. I don't know how many more are coming and I don't know how many there have been in the recent past. I know you'd like to have that data because you're secretly amused by awful things befalling non SWA pilots.

Treadmill? More careful diets? So basically you're saying you'll support changes to medical standards? Figures.

As you're so fond of pointing out how unique you are: "Your house" doesn't do any long haul, international, back side of the clock flying so the effects of that are something you think should be ignored!? Further ignore the effects of career churn these CAL pilots suffered 20 years ago?....that couldn't possibly help our profession understand how the last 6 years have affected our fellow pilots?

Nope! You don't care, all is well at "your house".

3 pilots is not an epidemic, so relax...BTW...all is well at "my house"...and I'm napp...errrr...I mean, Happy with the state of affairs...here.

 

[Flopgut]

3 pilots is not an epidemic, so relax...BTW...all is well at "my house"...and I'm napp...errrr...I mean, Happy with the state of affairs...here.

In any case, 3 is at least noteworthy. When you're talking about raising the retirement age? It's a big deal. If you're concerned about more than just money for yourself.

 

[AA717driver]

Maybe it's the CAL FO's they're hiring these days that are causing the CA's to croak...

At TWA, even with Icahn, frozen pensions, 50% paycuts, three-packs-a-day, 6 post-flight martinis and 25 years of international we didn't have three guys croak in the cockpit--the whole time I was there (15 years).

BTW, a 48 year old guy who did 6-8 marathons a year just keeled over after crossing the finish line in the Tucson Marathon last year. Guess we'd better lower the retirement age to 45. TC

 

[Andy]

At TWA, even with Icahn, frozen pensions, 50% paycuts, three-packs-a-day, 6 post-flight martinis and 25 years of international we didn't have three guys croak in the cockpit--the whole time I was there (15 years).

Really? You were in charge of monitoring pilot health at TWA? Are you an MD?

 

[tailhookah]

A long study was just completed that found airline pilots actually live longer than the rest of society after retirement... as far as being unfair I can't believe I'm hearing this... It's unfair or age discrimination not to change it or it's unfair to go ahead and change it. You new generation and ALPA stooges are beautiful sometimes... You all want your cake and eat it too!

It's a good rule... sure I would love double the wages and a 60hr guarantee but that's not life. I would like the option to work to 65, although I plan on retiring much sooner. If I am healthy why should I be told I can't work? 65 is working all over the world. Right now as I write this there are multiple 60+ pilots flying all over the USA. Whether it's a foreign airline pilot or a corporate guy or fractional guy or private pilot. But the amazing thing about it is that I'm not reading about airplanes falling out of the sky! But ALPA and you generation me type's would have us believing otherwise. Stop crying about it, it's coming. And if you think Alpa can stop it, then keep spending that 1.95% and continue to hit that hookah pipe.

Tailhookah

 

[kwick]

You're helping to restore my confidence in the military, Tailhookah.