APAAD Age 60 UPDATE 06 October 2007

[spitfire1500]

Screw ....age 65...until Im 59 (2026)!!!

 

[walkthasky]

BLAH BLAH BLAH, SO sick of hearing how they're being thrown under the bus, CRY BABIES! Lifes a bitch, then you retire (and die)...

 

[PsubS]

CRY BABIES!

Yes, indeed you are. All those contesting this issue are simply flapping your gums, since it is going to change whether you like it or not.

"if it doesn't benefit me then I don't care" selfish, sorry, self centered individuals.

That quote applies to everyone who has posted here. Don't think that you have a lock on the moral compass in this issue!

 

[nimtz]

You are obviuously ill-informed or choose to ignore facts. Most who are heavily involved changing this rule have been involved since their 40's. Many continue to work for change even though they have already turned 60. They believe in the principle that this rule is wrong.

Glad these guys were busy trying to change 60 back then instead of oh I don't know, fighting to get Herb's wallet open to fund a real retirement...

 

[Andy]

All those contesting this issue are simply flapping your gums, since it is going to change whether you like it or not.

WOW! With your ability to see into the future, you shouldn't be hanging out here. Put that talent to good use and bring us world peace.

As far as the age changing, yes, it's got a much better shot at changing than in the past. However, barring some miracle, it isn't going to change during this session of Congress. GW will veto the Reauthorization Bill which is very unlikely to override his veto. And Oberstar isn't going to let it be stripped from the Reauthorization Bill to be voted on separately. So the earliest that Congress is likely to act on an age change is mid 2009.

A lot can happen between now and mid 2009.

The economy can go down the toilet and airlines could be furloughing again. What are the odds that an age change would pass while airlines are furloughing? Do you think that the airlines would support a change under those circumstances? Do you think that it would have a bunch of political support under those circumstances?

ALPA's support for the change seems to have waned considerably this summer. Perhaps ALPA will once again be opposed to a change by 2009. I don't know; there was substantial outcry from the membership over ALPA's push poll.

This topic doesn't raise a large amount of political interest outside of those of us immediately effected by the change; the general public could care less. If there are a number of hot button political topics in 2009, this issue won't come to the surface.

And where's the promised NPRM that was supposed to be on the street by this fall, as promised by the FAA Administrator? Oh yeah, her term ended and it's now been shuffled between back offices where it will end up getting buried. I doubt that the acting Administrator's going to put out an NPRM; that'll have to wait for a new Administrator. If the new Administrator doesn't see a need to change the rule, the NPRM will get round filed.

The odds are that age 60 will eventually change. But neither you nor I can speak with absolute certitude that it will or will not change. Nor can either of us give a concrete timeframe for instituting such a change.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Glad these guys were busy trying to change 60 back then instead of oh I don't know, fighting to get Herb's wallet open to fund a real retirement...

But wouldn't that be "changing the rules" that were in place when they got hired?

If you would examine SWA pay, not just pay rates, over the last 15 years you would see that there has been a steady progression.

 

[Freight Dog]

Occam... you're killing me man! You're just absolutely killing me... LOLOL.

Ah, gotta love the geezer's persistency.

Here's the mentality of one pro-65 Aloha pilot who since retired:

It was his contention that the sole reason we lost our A-plan was because of the mass hiring we did in 2000 - 2004 and launching our mainland ETOPS operation. He argues that now that we are implementing our C-plan, those of us hired in that time frame shouldn't get anything.

It gets better...

The day this captain was leaving on his retirement trip, he was flying with his son who's one of our FO's. His son is a very nice guy, by the way. As they were getting all their paperwork, another captain who is also soon to retire came in to our remote dispatch. They were turning in paperwork to the company requesting LOA's so when the rule changed (after their retirement), they can come back at their old seniority - they knew the company was gonna deny their request, and they were saying how getting that would give them grounds for a lawsuit.

I wanted to throw up when I heard that. I didn't want to trump on the old man's last flight, but how about letting your son take a turn in the left seat, old man?

This is the mentality of most pro-65 people. They need to go away...

Nominee: Most Ironic Quote EVER!


The effort is "bogged down" just like the careers of younger pilots would be bogged down by pilots attempting to stick around longer than they should!



50?

YESSSSS!

Keep in mind, you've been moving up because of that process!



Ha! Not quite! Your math is wrong. There are sponsors who support the Reauthorization Bill...but don't support your plan. Example: My hero and my congressman: James Oberstar.



Yeah...my wife gets like that for a few days every month too...



Holy Misleading Statements, Batman!

"Discussed" don't mean "endorses" or "will vote for".



...and by lobbyists and informed constituents, like me!

Looks like you don't hold the sway I do!

Neener! Neener!



(sniff) I wuv him!



Wow! You mean ALPA is acting the way a MAJORITY of it's membership wants it to?



Wilco! I'm sending another "Atta Boy!" to my MEC Chairman....who is strongly opposed to any change to Age 60...just like most ALPA members.



Buh Bye, Tony! Blue skies, brother! Enjoy the retirement you knew would happen waaaay back when you entered this profession! I wish you health and happiness.



Alzheimers? Demetia? Other priorities? Ethical re-awakening? [Choose One]



Is this a great country...or what!



MY man! Jimmy Rocks! Woo Hoo! You go, Jimbo! Keep up the good work!

 

[gutshotdraw]

If this thing is going to become law anyway, can someone PLEASE add language to the bill that makes 65 the age cutoff for ALL compensated flying including 91, 91K, and 135? We've got some fossils in their SEVENTIES driving around the planet and they have got to GO. And now we really ARE talking a safety issue. At least if the age does go up to 65, a lot of these guys will have had enough by then and won't go looking for work in the 91, 91K or 135 world.

Please do not consider this an endorsement of the age change to 65. I just want ONE RULE for ALL COMPENSATED FLYING.

 

[Daddy]

What is going to happen when the age changes to 65 and pilots are forced to retire then. Is this AAPAD going to regroup and say that 65 is age discrimination as well?

Bingo!
You can count on it....Paul Emens is a greedy, self-serving SOB who will stop at nothing to prolong his time in the left seat...it will never be enough

 

[bubbers44]

Who has more greed, the pilot that wants to keep flying and continuing his career or the one that wants him fired because of his age so he can get his job?

 

[CaptBud330]

Reason I'm glad I retired at 60

1) No more hotels where the pillows smell like a French whore.
2) No more Gatwick Hilton beds with skid marks on the sheets.
3)No more BS from TSA
4)No more BS from the FAA
5)No more 6 month checks
6)NO MORE COMMUTING!
7)No more flying over the Atlantic at 4am.
8)No more putting up with stupid passengers.

Damn, I love retirement! I can't imagine doing it for 5 more years.

 

[PCL_128]

Who has more greed, the pilot that wants to keep flying and continuing his career or the one that wants him fired because of his age so he can get his job?

The one who wants to change the rules at the end of the game to benefit himself at the expense of everyone else.

 

[PsubS]

9) No more paycheck...

I hope you were ready financially for retirement--I really do. Assuming so, I simply note that not everyone is.

The odds are that age 60 will eventually change. But neither you nor I can speak with absolute certitude that it will or will not change. Nor can either of us give a concrete timeframe for instituting such a change.

Andy, your's is one of the sole voices of reason on this board. I'm not disagreeing with you; frankly, there is little doubt about the eventuality of this action, but the timing is just not a given.

What I'm really pissed about is the absolute "regional" mentality of this board. It's all about "me"--with a vengance. Very little discussion, very little reason (save your most recent, Andy). It is as if many of the posters here simply want to see guys pushed out of their profession, not for rational reasons, but because it is apparently...

...fun to watch someone lose their job.

I'm outta here for another board. Glad I could tweak your souls.

 

[srv141]

The real issue with the age 60/65 rule change is not retirement, working longer, or anything else but safety, period. Face it, after 60ish your reactions/skills take a marked downturn and thats that. I know that ICAO has raised the age limit but they also have a ballbuster physical that is VERY difficult to pass for a younger pilot let alone one who is 60+. I also understand this is a blanket statment and there are always exceptions, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Sorry, but I think changing the age 60 rule is a very, very bad idea.

 

[Flashbang]

Who has more greed, the pilot that wants to keep flying and continuing his career or the one that wants him fired because of his age so he can get his job?

I only want you fired if you're incompetent beyond repair or show up drunk/high to work. However, I want you RETIRED at 60 because you benefited from the same rule your entire career. Why should you get the windfall at my expense?

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Glad these guys were busy trying to change 60 back then instead of oh I don't know, fighting to get Herb's wallet open to fund a real retirement...

....like the retirement package at ...UAL...or US Air?

 

[Yuppyguppy]

JUST GO AWAY old farts!

 

[zonker]

9) No more paycheck...

I hope you were ready financially for retirement--I really do. Assuming so, I simply note that not everyone is.



Andy, your's is one of the sole voices of reason on this board. I'm not disagreeing with you; frankly, there is little doubt about the eventuality of this action, but the timing is just not a given.

What I'm really pissed about is the absolute "regional" mentality of this board. It's all about "me"--with a vengance. Very little discussion, very little reason (save your most recent, Andy). It is as if many of the posters here simply want to see guys pushed out of their profession, not for rational reasons, but because it is apparently...

...fun to watch someone lose their job.

I'm outta here for another board. Glad I could tweak your souls.

Or maybe some are just tired of the "I got mine, screw everyone else" routine.

Kind of like the attitudes of some of the senior jetblue captains.

 

[nimtz]

....like the retirement package at ...UAL...or US Air?

How about the guys who left in the mid 90's comfortably and often a few years early. Amazing what good planning, realistic lifestyle, and a real retirement plan could do instead of fighting to fly 5 legs/day for 5 more years. Granted the formula no longer works, but it sure as hell did when these elder heroes at SWA were content with getting paid 'peanuts'. If their solution back then was simply to fight the retirement age then their contribution to our future QOL is zilch.

 

[chris69]

I'm to lazy to write anything new. I posted this during the last argument on the issue. Contrary to some individuals imaginations, the SWA retirement has been pretty good to some people. My take from the SWA side:

Everyone has their own circumstances to consider. From my perpective, it becomes harder to sypathize with those forced to retire upon reaching age 60 when the more vocal among them berate those that don't agree with them in the union fish-rap. When I started at SWA in early 03, the union web-page had a "compare your balance" feature which graphically displayed general balances based upon longevity. As the age 60 push increased, that feature disapeared. Although it may have been a legal decision vice a political one, the legal argument seems too convenient. Before it went offline, I copied down a few numbers comparing 401k and profit sharing balances. This was before the rise in the market since then, and in general, the results were as follows - 25 yrs: $2 million, 27 yrs: $2.7 million, 30 yrs: $3.3 million. Around that time I flew with a senior 4000 number Capt out of PHX (great guy by the way) that was very forthright when discussing his balance. To paraphrase "It took me 18 years to earn my first million, another 4 to earn my second, and 18 more months to earn my third." Probably a savy investor, but not uncommon based on his seniority. Again, to each his own, just throwing this out to enlighted those 1,800 guys that have joined the company behind me on what they missed.
C