1261 days to go!

[Flopgut]

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??

Ha! Too true. I didn't delete it.

 

[Flopgut]

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.

The only thing that has been exposed is the clear fact that old guys only wanted to stay for the chance to be super senior. The rule was changed to allow the return of retired guys, and they didn't. All the old guys who said they would leave at 62, didn't. That's what has been exposed.

It is now, as it has always been. Sharp pilots will have a spot (if they want it) when the airline music stops. The marginal types, with the high water pants who can't stop digging in their noses, will not. They will continue to huddle in the corner of the crew room and scheme because life has been unfair to them. Truth is, if they were half as good as they envision themselves, they would have something lined up.

 

[pilotyip]

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.

good to see pure "Get out of my seat" is still alive:smash:

 

[Flopgut]

good to see pure "Get out of my seat" is still alive:smash:

No, It's good to see old pilots leaving. It would be nice, if after such a huge windfall, at least ONE could tip their hat and say "thanks".

 

[pilotyip]

No, It's good to see old pilots leaving. It would be nice, if after such a huge windfall, at least ONE could tip their hat and say "thanks".

Remember at union airlines old guys run the show, someday if things work out you too may be old and have a chance to run the show with your fellow old piltos pushing for age 80 retirement

 

[Flopgut]

I've never been without a non-airline flying job at the ready. Never had to campaign for another's opportunities. And I don't plan on it.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

It is an ugly reality that some of the advancement in this business is driven by forced retirement. Moving that age from 60 to 65 allows many more to go when they choose or closer to an age they would choose. It is still an age determined retirement/term-limit, which doesn't really make much sense, but it is less intrusive on those who are fit and capable of flying longer. Yes, there is a cost (retirement driven advancement slowed for 5 years).

The "everyone knew the rules when you got into this business" rant doesn't hold water. This is aviation folks; the rules have been changing since day one, and will continue to do so. For that matter, one of us will enjoy the same social security benefits (if any) that our parents will.

If you think we need to bring age 60 back, make a good argument for it. Educate, organize, and get it changed.

 

[flyboyike]

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.

For me time has (so far) had the exact opposite effect. I'm becoming progressively more and more intolerant, including militantly intolerant of some things.

 

[flyboyike]

Yes, there is a cost (retirement driven advancement slowed for 5 years).

It didn't just slow for 5 years, for some it now won't happen at all. But hey, it's worth it, as long as Grandpa got that extra Corvette and another ex-wife. I'm sure he earned it.

 

[flyboyike]

The only thing that has been exposed is the clear fact that old guys only wanted to stay for the chance to be super senior.

I think that's a key point, the gummers only wanted the seniority, not the job itself.