Corporate policy...

[seahorse3]

Just looking for some information: Does anyone work for a corporate flight department that has in its FOPM a statement regarding a mandatory retirement age? If so, what age is it and what sort of justification was used to come up with that age?

Thanks for any insight.....

 

[ditchpilot]

I know Chevron had one along the gulf coast with both fixed and rotor wing. Most olld-timers never minded the age limit due to the great retirement.

 

[Iflewjetz]

At Wachovia, we didnt have one. I interviewed at a large chemical company in Delaware last year, they sponsor a rainbow colored car in Nascar and their driver's name rhymes with Heff Jordan. Theirs is 60. Dont know how they came up with that. I know another company that has 65.

 

[LongBoarder]

Dupont followed the 121 requirements at the time... After a high profile accident in Jakarta, they had a massive overhaul of the flight department procedures. Actually very pro-active given it was reactive to an accident.

LB

 

[TransMach]

Corporate Flight Department Manditory Retirement Age

I don't work there, but have learned first hand that Northrop Grumman has instituted an age 65 policy. They went from no policy to age 65 tossing a couple of their best guys out on the street.

TransMach

 

[waddawurld]

I used to fly for Goodyear and in the 80's they changed their retirement age (mandatory) to 62. One of the pilots challenged it in court and won (he claimed they were denying him 3 years compensation) They ended up changing it back to 65....

 

[semperfido]

I used to work for big pharma Co that had 60, but they dropped it. Like everywhere else, that program is falling by the wayside. Pretty hard to justify now. Fewer and fewer all the time. Where I am now, no policy.

 

[jet2work]

I only know of one corporate pilot who has ever retired. The rest have eventually lost their medicals (the Long Term Disability Pension Plan), been victims of a department closure and couldn't get hired anywhere because of age, or gone out in a pine box.

A 70 year old pilot on a 10-12 hour international flight or an 18 hour day? Some can handle it, most I would think cannot. It's hard on everyone. Everyone tap danced around this issue of taking Grampa's Car keys from him when he turned 80, when he probably should have given up driving 5 years earlier.

It would be nice to see corporations properly incentivize pilots to retire at age 65. Say like, we will give you a lump sum payment of three years salary if you retire now, if you lose your medical going forward, all you get is long term disability. I love my job, but I cannot imagine that most 65 year olds are sticking around by choice, but rather out of financial necessity or boredom. You could solve both those problems with the payoff.

Not trying to start an intergenerational flame war. Hell I wish my employer would incentivize me to retire at age 60. I would like to enjoy a retirement with my family while I have my health.

 

[SansPlane]

It would be nice to see corporations properly incentivize pilots to retire at age 65.

It's hard for me to not be sarcastic here. What is the corporations interest in this proposed policy? What is the benefit to a corporation who is presumably already paying a decent salary & benefits? I am glad you think these corporations have the wherewithal to do so. Would you extend this policy to others in the corporation such as secretaries and janitors? The whole flight department or just pilots...

 

[semperfido]

The last place I worked actually had a pretty good deal for pilots. They required retirement at 60 so they paid Soc Sec to the pilot until 62 (the gap), plus pension, plus 1 extra yr pension credit for every 5 yrs employed, plus whatever was in your 401K. In my 17 yrs there I saw quite a few retire normally at 60. Course all that is gone now, but it was good for some.

 

[jet2work]

It's hard for me to not be sarcastic here. What is the corporations interest in this proposed policy? What is the benefit to a corporation who is presumably already paying a decent salary & benefits? I am glad you think these corporations have the wherewithal to do so. Would you extend this policy to others in the corporation such as secretaries and janitors? The whole flight department or just pilots...

Well lets see...(end of sarcasm). You want to send a 70 year old out on a 7 day trip to remote parts of the world, because his pride won't let him admit that his skills might degrade after 10 hours of flying? Even a 30 year olds skills degrade after 10 hours of flying. Now do it back to back for 7 days across multiple time zones.

What is in the corporation's best interest? Hmmm I don't know...Safety?

Wherewithal to pay for it?...... Hmm you got a $50million dollar jet and 8 million dollar a year budget. You don't think that you could find $450K give one of your employees a nice sendoff before he damages your aircraft? I'm not the one who invented the age 60 rule (or the age 65 rule), but you can bet that in this PC climate that every HR manager in the country is afraid to confront a pilot who is over age 60.

So what do you do? You let a guy fly around when he is not up to the task? Risk a lawsuit? Offer an incentive that statistically would improve safety (maybe even reduce cost long term), and allow a dedicated worker to retire comfortably? Or hope that he loses his medical before someone gets hurt?

The flipside to this is that employers are now adverse to hiring anyone in their 50's for fear that they will have to deal with this issue sooner rather than later. Ultimately I think this hurts older pilots who have not reached retirement age.

Would I extend it to everyone??? If they were a plant manager in charge of a $50 million dollar building capable of traveling to far off lands, slightly below the speed of sound with the company's executive team inside I would. Could the Janitor kill the CEO by forgetting to dust the credenza? Could the secretary kill the CEO by forgetting to arrange a conference room? So your answer is no. Just pilots. Lifes not fair. Boo Friggin Hoo.

The only other reason to keep flying past your prime (other than the aforementioned financial necessity and boredom - which we already solved with a big check) is EGO. For that there is no cure other than embarassment.

I've seen Bob Hoover fly when he was in his late 70's and he was better then than I will ever be, so I will concede that it can be done. When I retire, (hopefully at age 60) if the flying bug is still in me, I will buy my own plane again, it would be nice if my employer helped me make the downpayment.

 

[jet2work]

The last place I worked actually had a pretty good deal for pilots. They required retirement at 60 so they paid Soc Sec to the pilot until 62 (the gap), plus pension, plus 1 extra yr pension credit for every 5 yrs employed, plus whatever was in your 401K. In my 17 yrs there I saw quite a few retire normally at 60. Course all that is gone now, but it was good for some.

Thanks Fido. A perfect example. Really, who would not want this kind of benefit? Instead we pilots will play Russian Roulette with the flight surgeon every 6 months. I for one would take the retirement. And don't get me wrong, I love flying, but the only thing my family gets out of it is a paycheck and some souvenirs from the road.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

I have seen quite a few corporate pilots retire comfortably at 62-65....some with help from company pensions, military pensions, stock gifts, 401k and self investing etc....but mostly a combination of a few of these. Some have also turned the recent downturn over the last few years into early retirement w employer incentive/packages. They were lucky.

One may be very disappointed if one expects ANY employer today to give them a retirement. I consider myself on my own, hell Social Security may very well not even be there.

Fatigue and age is a huge factor in corp aviation IMO, especially as the range on newer planes just keeps getting longer and longer..I have met very, very few guys over 50 who really WANT to be hauling 12+ hrs in a Gxxx/Glex/DA etc..

 

[2EASYPilot]

The last I heard from the legal folks is a mandatory retirement age will not stand up in a court of law these days. The only way to accomplish this is to offer incentives for early retirement.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Jet2Work: A-Frickin-Men

What he said.

 

[semperfido]

I have met very, very few guys over 50 who really WANT to be hauling 12+ hrs in a Gxxx/Glex/DA etc..

I am good with it, as long as I have a week to recover

 

[2EASYPilot]

I am good with it, as long as I have a week to recover

It's all about the destination..warm, good beer and eye candy...or any one of the three!

 

[seahorse3]

Corporate policy....

Thanks to all--great responses!!

Like "2EASYpilot" my research would lead me to believe that it is not legal to state any age....ADEA makes it illegal to discriminate on account of age in hiring OR RETENTION for anyone over the age of 40....no reasoning given from our company leadership for the initiation of an age 65 policy....lots of ramifications for social security benefits....

Thanks again!

 

[semperfido]

yeah, they are just following the airlines

 

[jet2work]

I am good with it, as long as I have a week to recover

Yeah, but you were (I guess ARE "once a Marine....) a jarhead. Keep your head down and keep moving forward.

A week to recover? Did it take you a week to recover when you were 20? I rest my case! :laugh: The science is settled!

We work with some real dainty folks out there.