Help forstall the age 65 rule change

[Bally]

The FAA appropriations funding extension expires on November 19th. The change to the mandatory age 60 retirement for 121 pilots is included in the Bill. The general thought is that if the Senate and House version are not reconciled and sent to the President by the end of the year, it will not be passed until after the election in 2009. CALL YOUR REPRESENATIVE IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE AND TELL THEM TO VOTE NO ON THE BILL. While we know it will eventually change, if we can help forestall the bill until the end of the year, it will most likely be 2009 before the rule changes.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

great. lets hope it is delayed or killed.

 

[Ex737Driver]

What's the bill number or HR/SR?

 

[Bally]

H.R.2881 and S.1300

 

[Vastly Underemp]

So what's the point? If it's going to happen anyway, what do you gain by working to postpone? Will you get back any of the 5 years you claim you will lose? Or are you just close enough to upgrade that the year will make a difference for you, but f**k the guys behind you because you got yours. All of your arguements have become disquietingly similar to exactly what you accuse the "senior" guys of.

 

[PSL]

I think his point is exactly that ...

He would like to upgrade ... and to some degree enjoy the fruits of his labors.

This situation, when reduced to simplest terms, can be summed up this way:

Everyone has an agenda ... there will be winners and loosers ... end of story.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

The point perhaps is that those most desperate to derive advantage from the change to 65 will fail to benefit in direct proportion to the delay in its becoming law.

It would indeed be wonderful if the architects of this brave new world of past their prime geriatric pilots fail to realize any gain from their efforts.

In other words, if you're off the property don't come back and may the one-way door hit you in the rear end as delays in the legislative process take their due course.

I've yet to see a 60 yr old who should have stayed but have known many close to 60 using the First Officer as a babysitter for the final few years.

 

[zasca]

Most older captains I know want to retire at 60. My company pays you after retirement until you can collect social security. This is an amount similar to social security payments and on top of pension payments. That would go bye bye with the rule change.

 

[Pocono Pilot]

I hope the rule changes exactly one day before I turn 60.

So let's try to delay it for another 31 years and 8 months please.....LOL

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

Is there a thread for speeding up the age 65 change and/or getting a specific age abolished completely???

Thanx!

cliff
LRD

 

[whymeworry?]

You're wasting your time. The youth of today's airline pilots can't be bothered with completing an online ALPA survey. What makes you think they will take the time to track down their US Representatives phone number and make time for the call?

They will only take notice of this issue when therule changes. Good for the old guys, bad for the young.

 

[GoABX]

Why bother?

Because every month matters!

 

[curtis46]

There's a SOB commuting out of fll retiring in december.this guy shows up always at the last moment and takes the j/s away from guys who already signed for it, base on his own interpretation of the rule.we sure don't want him around for 5 more years.

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

So if these guys are already signed up, why dont they just tell him to go fcuk himself?

 

[82spukram]

You're wasting your time. The youth of today's airline pilots can't be bothered with completing an online ALPA survey. What makes you think they will take the time to track down their US Representatives phone number and make time for the call?

They will only take notice of this issue when therule changes. Good for the old guys, bad for the young.

I use to work for XJT and took about an hour to fill out the 65 survey. Signed my name to it and even asked to be called (mind you an anonymous survey, but I did not want to hide or say some tough things and not take ownership for my beliefs). I wrote it on MS word (because I can not spell very well and need to read things over two or three times in order to catch my mistakes) and it was almost 3 pages. My union never once called me about what I wrote and about a week later the blue ribbon committee changed it position of a union that did a survey 2 years before that said most of its members did not want a change. So please do not blame the youth of today, I will give you that some members do not look much past next month but some of us care and take a large interest in the future of aviation and most importantly the safety of aviation.

 

[Shrek]

Nice post 82.......

 

[curtis46]

So if these guys are already signed up, why dont they just tell him to go fcuk himself?

This SOB claims the j/s is his in front of the pax knowing guys would reither prevent a confrontation which would reflect poorly on the company.

 

[skywdriver]

The FAA appropriations funding extension expires on November 19th. The change to the mandatory age 60 retirement for 121 pilots is included in the Bill. The general thought is that if the Senate and House version are not reconciled and sent to the President by the end of the year, it will not be passed until after the election in 2009. CALL YOUR REPRESENATIVE IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE AND TELL THEM TO VOTE NO ON THE BILL. While we know it will eventually change, if we can help forestall the bill until the end of the year, it will most likely be 2009 before the rule changes.

whether for or against this thing, it is dead for the season. i doubt the houses will even be able to pass a similar version, but even if they do Bush said he will veto it. last i heard, there have been 0 appropriations bills signed into law.

 

[Shrek]

This SOB claims the j/s is his in front of the pax knowing guys would reither prevent a confrontation which would reflect poorly on the company.

Who does he work for........

 

[curtis46]

Who does he work for........

A/T for an other 60 days and counting. guys are working on a "surprise party "for him ;any ideas are welcome.

 

[Andy]

Bally, Bush has already said that he'd veto the bill if it ever crossed his desk. It's a mort until after the elections. The FAA's budget will be CR'd (continuing resolution) through the end of this fiscal year.

 

[GoABX]

Andy,

What is their chances of success if it tacked onto some unrelated bill?

 

[Shrek]

A/T for an other 60 days and counting. guys are working on a "surprise party "for him ;any ideas are welcome.

An "old school" tar and feather would work and it kinda has an aviation theme as well........

 

[Andy]

Andy,

What is their chances of success if it tacked onto some unrelated bill?

Doubtful to happen. Both Mica and Oberstar won't allow this to be cut loose from the FAA Reauthorization Bill. Which effectively kills it due to GW's veto.

With it being an election year, forget about any movement on a change to age 60.
When the elections are over and the dust settles, we'll probably knee deep in a recession, so this issue will continue to be back burner stuff. The pro-change crowd's best chance is through the FAA and their biggest advocate, Blakey, is gone.

I don't see this issue coming back to life until there is another perceived pilot shortage; likely not for another 5 years or so. Right around the time that pilots finally start getting decent payraises.

 

[IronCityBlue]

I hope you're right about the pilot shortage and raises Andy, but 95 dollar oil (and rising) and/or a looming recession could delay or prevent any sort of pilot shortage. We'll see.

 

[Yuppyguppy]

You're wasting your time. The youth of today's airline pilots can't be bothered with completing an online ALPA survey. What makes you think they will take the time to track down their US Representatives phone number and make time for the call?

They will only take notice of this issue when therule changes. Good for the old guys, bad for the young.

You are wrong the ALPA vote by the membership flatly said NO to changing the age 60 vote

 

[XJTAv8r]

Here's ALPA's latest update:

Age 60 UpdateA possible change to the FAA’s Age 60 Rule is still currently pending on two separate pieces of legislation.
The first track is the FAA reauthorization bill. The U.S. House of Representatives passed its version of this legislation on September 20. The House version includes language put in the bill by Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) to raise the age limit to 65, in addition to sections that would prohibit unilateral changes to labor agreements and benefit plans, clarification of non-retroactivity, protections from liability for collective bargaining units, elimination of the over/under split for domestic operations, and establishing the effective date as the date of enactment. ALPA was extensively involved in working with Congressman Oberstar in the development of this bill's language, which is consistent with the resolution that ALPA’s Executive Board passed in May.
The Senate FAA reauthorization bill was passed out of Committee on May 16 and included S.65, which is separate legislation to raise the age limit to 65; however, S.65 fails to address many of the concerns outlined by ALPA’s Executive Board resolution. As of this moment, agreement has yet to be reached by the Senate to bring the FAA reauthorization bill to the floor before the end of the year; but when that time comes, a consensus has emerged to strip S.65 from the bill and substitute it with the same language found in the House FAA reauthorization bill--or what is referred to as the House Oberstar language.
The second track is the Transportation Appropriations bill. When the Senate Appropriations Committee approved the 2008 Transportation Appropriations bill on July 12, it adopted S.65 as part of the measure. When the full Senate approved the 2008 Transportation Appropriations bill on Sept. 11, it unanimously agreed to the amendment of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). This amendment effectively removed S.65 from the bill and substituted it with the House Oberstar language.
Over in the House, the 2008 Transportation Appropriations bill was adopted on July 24, and consistent with the belief that the House bill should not allow legislating on an appropriations bill, the House did not include any language pertaining to raising the upper age limit.
The Senate and the House must now conference these two versions of the 2008 Transportation Appropriations bill and determine, among many other things, whether to include the Stevens amendment from the Senate bill.
The fate of the FAA reauthorization bill and the Transportation Appropriations bill could possibly be made clearer before the Thanksgiving recess. If both of these pieces of legislation are stalled and come to a standstill before the end of the year, the Oberstar language could potentially be attached to any number of other legislative vehicles, such as an extension to the current FAA authorization, a continuing resolution, an omnibus spending bill, or even be moved as a free-standing piece of legislation for expedited action. However, none of these developments can possibly materialize until the outcomes of the FAA reauthorization bill and the Transportation Appropriations bill are determined.

 

[redflyer65]

That makes my head hurt!

 

[SlipItIn]

The fate of the FAA reauthorization bill and the Transportation Appropriations bill could possibly be made clearer before the Thanksgiving recess. If both of these pieces of legislation are stalled and come to a standstill before the end of the year, the Oberstar language could potentially be attached to any number of other legislative vehicles, such as an extension to the current FAA authorization, a continuing resolution, an omnibus spending bill, or even be moved as a free-standing piece of legislation for expedited action. However, none of these developments can possibly materialize until the outcomes of the FAA reauthorization bill and the Transportation Appropriations bill are determined.

Is it just me or does this sound like ALPA is still doing everything it can to make sure this change will take place? Seems to me that there are enough political issues occuring (House/Senate delays, new FAA Administrator, GW's promised veto of the funding bill, etc.) that the ALPA leadership could once again be on the side of the majority of its membership and stop this minority supported age-change dead in its tracks. No longer can ALPA even try to stand on the "imminent change" clause of the survey and say this change is going to happen anyway so lets jump on-board. They could easily be shifting their efforts to stymie this thing and be holding true to the membership's wishes.

Every time ALPA puts out info on age 60 I feel like I am listening to a pathetic sales job full of half-truths and convenient fabrications. I wish I could see it differently.

 

[Andy]

Is it just me or does this sound like ALPA is still doing everything it can to make sure this change will take place?

No worries. This isn't a front burner political issue. It's not even back burner. With the election season starting to gear up, the only bills that will make their way through Congress are non-controversial bipartisan supported bills. In other words, we've got gridlock until after the elections.


I'm now starting to favor a change to the age 60 rule; just imagine how much safer the skies will be; we won't have over 60 year olds falling asleep after flying three redeyes in a row, unlike the F9 crew. You know, with the greater physical and cognitive abilities of our seniors, the skies will be much safer. :erm: