1261 days to go!

[livin'thesim]

;-)
Omg, lol.

 

[hammer2]

Teed up!!!

 

[727gm]

This is still a sticky because........?

Because of the need to wait around and see if all the crybabies retire when thay reach 60 like they think their elders should.

If nothing else their "concern for safety" should prompt them to get out at 60 so as not to be a burden to those younger or more junior to them, and turn over the left seat that rightly belongs to their copilots.

As a sticky, we can remember who whined the loudest....

 

[flyboyike]

If nothing else their "concern for safety" should prompt them to get out at 60 so as not to be a burden to those younger or more junior to them, and turn over the left seat that rightly belongs to their copilots.

Which is exactly what I'm going to do, because it's the right thing. Of course, it will be easier for me, since I've pretty much given up on the very concept of ever seeing the left seat. Anywhere.

 

[BushwickBill]

Which is exactly what I'm going to do, because it's the right thing. Of course, it will be easier for me, since I've pretty much given up on the very concept of ever seeing the left seat. Anywhere.

 

[scoreboardII]

Because of the need to wait around and see if all the crybabies retire when thay reach 60 like they think their elders should.

If nothing else their "concern for safety" should prompt them to get out at 60 so as not to be a burden to those younger or more junior to them, and turn over the left seat that rightly belongs to their copilots.

As a sticky, we can remember who whined the loudest....

sorry, but age 60 forced me to work to 65 just make five more years of FO pay, not captain pay.

 

[laker4284]

sorry, but age 60 forced me to work to 65 just make five more years of FO pay, not captain pay.

But if it's UNSAFE to fly to 65! You just CAN'T fly to 65. Think about te DANGER involved; think about your disregard for public safety! I mean, just look around you at all the crashes by older pilots - just as was predicted by the "no change" crowd. Clearly, flying to 65 would be the height of irresponsibility. You just cannot do it!

Oh. Wait. No crashes. No uptick in incidents. No FAA or corporate alarm bells. No union safety committees waving red flags about pilots over 60. No public outcry.

Never mind. You're cleared to fly to 65.

 

[Flopgut]

Got news for you Laker: Pilots always could fly past 60, and they can fly past 65 now as well. This whole thing was never about that. This was a campaign by older pilots to deny others equal seat progression.

In this case, your actions happen to be attached to an age change effort. But pilots like you would have been perfectly happy taking from others in any number of ways. I'm glad this thread is still up. Serves a good reminder to us all.

 

[eaglesview]

Got news for you Laker: Pilots always could fly past 60, and they can fly past 65 now as well. This whole thing was never about that. This was a campaign by older pilots to deny others equal seat progression.

In this case, your actions happen to be attached to an age change effort. But pilots like you would have been perfectly happy taking from others in any number of ways. I'm glad this thread is still up. Serves a good reminder to us all.

On a different note.....What happened to your thread about the CO/UAL SLI progression. Did you delete it or did FI decide it's not about SW or DL so no need to have it??

 

[laker4284]

Got news for you Laker: Pilots always could fly past 60, and they can fly past 65 now as well. This whole thing was never about that. This was a campaign by older pilots to deny others equal seat progression.

In this case, your actions happen to be attached to an age change effort. But pilots like you would have been perfectly happy taking from others in any number of ways. I'm glad this thread is still up. Serves a good reminder to us all.

Ah, Flop. Try not to be disingenuous. You know all too well that my comments were about airline pilots flying over 60. You know - that pesky (and very bogus) rule foisted on airline pilots back in '59. It was ALWAYS a campaign to overturn a foolish and career restricting rule - first by ALPA ('60-'79), then SWA/SWAPA ('90-'07) and APAAD ('96-'07).

From '80 on the campaign was by the younger guys wanting to hold on to the restriction to preserve a method of advancement based on other pilot being "aged out", whether they were healthy or competent or not. The other half of the campaign was the charade that it was "all about safety" and that pilots over 60 were unsafe.

But you know all that.

Now it's been exposed for what it was - never about safety, all about advancement. Safety was a red herring; a way to deflect change and hang on to the status quo. If it was about safety for some, as some will try to maintain, then those folks have to ground themselves (when they reach 60) as unsafe. They won't. But they should. If they don't, they should admit they were wrong and flying (for airline pilots, Flop) was and is safe. They won't. But they should.

The PRINCIPLE of being able to work when qualified and healthy was the driving force for SWAPA, the PPF, APAAD and SWA. The principle (?) of climbing over someone else's back for advancement is far less lofty. ;-)

I read this the other day and saved it. It's quite valid in this case, re principle,etc: You're going to become more tolerant with time, and not only because you have more to tolerate in yourself. Because life will batter you and you'll have a surer sense of what's important and has meaning and is good.

Don't forget to ground yourself when you turn 60, Flop...lest you be a seen as a total hypocrite.