Age 60/65 Compromise

[satpak77]

Klako

what are your plans in retirement in the event Age 60 rule is not abolished

 

[Deerkiller]

Not before we bring the thousands forced to retire back to their jobs, and providing for their families.

Really? And where is the cutoff for that? 65, 70, 75? What about the guys at CAL who were in effect forced to retire early b/c their lump sums were shrinking every six mos? Should we bring those guys back as well now that they MIGHT have another 5 yrs of flying? You might say those guys were informed and made their decision based on that knowledge. Well bud, you knew that at 60 you were going to be shown the door. Now you got yours hopes all up that you were going to get to torment your FOs for another 5 yrs. Sorry chief, time to hit the golf course. If you really want to keep flying go hit up Paul Allen, maybe he'll let you sling gear in his 75.

dk

 

[Klako]

Klako

what are your plans in retirement in the event Age 60 rule is not abolished

FAA, Aviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations

 

[satpak77]

FAA, Aviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations

hey that sounds good. what FAA Region you looking at

 

[Gottafly74]

Wow,

Making some of these guys go back to the right seat after 60. There might be some hell to pay. Especially if they are gear slinging for some of the F/Os they treated like crap in the past. Im almost ready to make up my mind about the whole thing if they have to be F/Os again. Who says there is no justice in this world?

 

[Klako]

Well bud, you knew that at 60 you were going to be shown the door. Now you got yours hopes all up that you were going to get to torment your FOs for another 5 yrs. Sorry chief, time to hit the golf course. If you really want to keep flying go hit up Paul Allen, maybe he'll let you sling gear in his 75.

dk

Torment my FOs, how could you be so crass? Perhaps that sort of stuff goes on in your company, I would hope not mine.

BTW, my up-grade to Captain was a result of company expansion and not as a result of even one pilot being forced to retire.

I chose to work at Horizon Air in 1989 over flying for a major airline for two reasons. First, is my desire to live in my hometown and not have to commute. Second, I chose my airline company because at that time, we had a very a stable Part 135 operation and I was counting on flying until retiring at age 65. Then in 1995 the FAA forced us to convert to Part 121, thus destroying my plans of flying to 65.

I have been active in trying to change the age 60 rule since I was 18 years old. In 1965, I remember helping my then next door neighbor, Jack Hilbert who was then a Western Airlines Captain and a Western ALPA EXCO member. I stuffed envelopes for a campaign to repeal the age 60 rule. I recall Jack Hilbert often saying, “ this age 60 rule will be a thing of the past long before you reach age 60”. I cannot believe that it is still here over 40 years later.

 

[Deerkiller]

Kids in Kansas can get their drivers license at age 14 because some live in far off farms and need to drive to school. Why can't all kids get their licenses at age 14? Those kids in Kansas seem to do fine? Could it be a general safety issue? Even kids in Wichita can do it, and that isn't a small city. Someone made the rule, but it sticks everywhere else. It is all about overall safety.

Bye Bye--General Lee

General, i like reading your posts, but i'm getting tired of this one. It's gotta be like the 5th time you've posted this....oh well, even the greats have to mail it in sometimes

dk

 

[av8instyle]

Kids in Kansas can get their drivers license at age 14 because some live in far off farms and need to drive to school. Why can't all kids get their licenses at age 14? Those kids in Kansas seem to do fine? Could it be a general safety issue? Even kids in Wichita can do it, and that isn't a small city. Someone made the rule, but it sticks everywhere else. It is all about overall safety.

And, Klako knew the rules getting into this job. Time to go hit the golf course pal.

Bye Bye--General Lee

You talking to me? Because if so, this simple mind didn't smell what you're stepping in. Just so we're clear, this guy (me) is AGAINST changing the rules at this time. But the part 135 comment was a very valid point.

 

[Deerkiller]

Torment my FOs, how could you be so crass? Perhaps that sort of stuff goes on in your company, I would hope not mine.

BTW, my up-grade to Captain was a result of company expansion and not as a result of even one pilot being forced to retire.

I chose to work at Horizon Air in 1989 over flying for a major airline for two reasons. First, is my desire to live in my hometown and not have to commute. Second, I chose my airline company because at that time, we had a very a stable Part 135 operation and I was counting on flying until retiring at age 65. Then in 1995 the FAA forced us to convert to Part 121, thus destroying my plans of flying to 65.

I have been active in trying to change the age 60 rule since I was 18 years old. In 1965, I remember helping my then next door neighbor, Jack Hilbert who was then a Western Airlines Captain and a Western ALPA EXCO member. I stuffed envelopes for a campaign to repeal the age 60 rule. I recall Jack Hilbert often saying, “ this age 60 rule will be a thing of the past long before you reach age 60”. I cannot believe that it is still here over 40 years later.

I'm crass? Go re-read your posts. I respect the fact that you've been trying to effect change. I respect anyone who is driven towards a goal. However, spouting off that those of us who don't have a desire to work past 60 should get out now, or Go to He!! for being excited about potential upgrades. C'mon, seriously. What am i supposed to do, be upset that you're being retired before you want to go? I'm sorry, I haven't yet heard an argument that convinces me that a change is needed. Like previous posters have said, the majority is against this.

As far as the tormenting FOs comment, I was being facetious.

dk

 

[Jonny Sacko]

I earned my left seat and no one has the right to take that away from me. I earned my up-grade to Captain as a result of company expansion and not as a result of even one pilot being forced to retire.

I love my current job and if you really believe that I should be forced out just so some junior pilot can get promoted earlier, I will say to you, GO TO H%#& !

If you have no interest in flying past age 60, then I believe that you are in the wrong profession, get out now.

GO BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS OLD MAN. DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THAT SAME ASS ON THE WAY OUT, YOU ARROGANT PRICK. PS I BET YOUR FLYING IS PATHETIC AND SCARY ALREADY. ******************** OFF

 

[Falconjet]

Not before we bring the thousands forced to retire back to their jobs, and providing for their families.

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that pilots on furlough were allowed to participate in the ALPA survey. If you included the pilots that were forced to retire in the survey, as they should, your numbers would have been very different. Since when do furloughed pilots have more rights that forced to retire pilots?

I'll be the second to correct you. ALPA did not include furloughed OR probationary members to voice their opinion in the "survey". They did, however, allow CANADIAN pilots (who already can fly past 60) participate in the "survey". When asked directly by me and many others, why probationary and furloughed members were not included, the union reps answered that they weren't allowed to vote. Here I was thinking it was a survey, not a vote.

ALPA leadership did everything they could to slant the "survey" in the direction of changing the rule. The MAJORITY of ALPA members still overwhelmingly endorsed the current rule.

This is an incredibly important fact about the "survey" that isn't stated often enough in my opinion. With the number of new hires at FedEx alone that majority would surely have been even higher if the probationary pilots were allowed to participate.

I am a proud member of ALPA but I think that they intentionally tried to rig the "survey" and to me that was very underhanded. I wrote them several emails telling them so as well.

FJ

 

[two(2)%]

FAA, Aviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations

Klako:

You're dangerous, dangerous and foolish. That's because everytime you go up in the air you're unsafe. I don't care what your BP/Pulse/cholesterol/PSA numbers are... You're still closer to sudden unexplained death than a younger man (like myself). That's what this is all about. The reason people on this forum hold little sympathy for your crusade is because you marginalize junior crewmembers. You earned your seat, that's some funny shiite there. Every 121 op. I've yanked gear for SIC training was same standard as PIC. We all earned it. Why don't you put yourself in their socks for once.

Andy: Thanks for the update.

 

[Freight Dog]

Why 135/91 pilots are allowed to fly past 60?

Because they can't kill 150 people in the back of their plane... on top of that, if Mr. John Q. CEO WANTS to hire an old crustation to fly him, that's his prerogative. General public doesn't have that luxury.

 

[Cobra]

We will soon see about that. Get ready, the age 60 rule will change and soon.

Maybe, then again maybe not... But, if you keep hoping really really hard it just might. The again maybe not.

 

[Andy]

when it comes down to civility, you are nothing more than a poor excuse for a human being.

Pot, meet kettle.

I started this thread to offer those pilots who want to change the rule an opportunity, an opening. Instead, you want everything. YOUR seat for an additional five years. Like you own it. Unbridled greed on your part.

And yes, I have not been civil toward you. If you want to start a civil discourse on this subject, you should try being civil yourself. I have no problem being civil on these boards. I also have no problems wrestling in the mud with those so inclined. You've enjoyed the mudslinging, but you're too much of a priss to handle mud being thrown at you.

 

[Andy]

Andy: Thanks for the update.

Thanks; I've enjoyed rallying those who are opposed to a change.
The pro-change crowd is much more organized than us. Hopefully, my posts here resulted in a couple hundred anti-change comments for the ARC on the DOT website and a few letters/faxes/phone calls to our representatives in Washington.

Thanks to everyone who took the time to write their opposition to any change.
But my biggest thanks goes out to Mark Foley, Tom DeLay, George Allen, Conrad Burns, Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and W. They're the ones who ensured that this change won't pass - for now.
Funny, Conrad Burns and Rick Santorum were two of the dozen Senators who signed that letter to FAA Administrator Blakey.

 

[zonker]

But my biggest thanks goes out to Mark Foley, Tom DeLay, George Allen, Conrad Burns, Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and W. They're the ones who ensured that this change won't pass - for now.
Funny, Conrad Burns and Rick Santorum were two of the dozen Senators who signed that letter to FAA Administrator Blakey.

:laugh:

I couldn't agree more! Thanks for all the info Andy. It's much appreciated.

Someone should start a website. Get the Pro 60 crowd as organized as much as the Pro Change crowd is.

 

[Klako]

Pot, meet kettle.

I started this thread to offer those pilots who want to change the rule an opportunity, an opening. Instead, you want everything. YOUR seat for an additional five years. Like you own it. Unbridled greed on your part..

Who is the greedy one? Just ask the majority of the public who are used to waiting their turn in life's real world. Where is the real greed in the age 60 rule debate?

From a disinterested point of view, a reasonable person would view the junior pilot coveting what does not belong to him as the greedy one. Possession is nine tenths of the law. Promotions should not be gained at the expense of others.

The reasonable man on the street could only conclude that the FAA's current age 60 rule is just plain wrong. That conclusion is obvious because there is the overwhelming evidence that a person’s age is not the sole determination of one’s ability to safely perform the duties of an airline pilot, that physical and mental decline cannot be measured by age alone, that we have all observed that some people decline in their physical and mental abilities faster that others but the experience factor has to be considered. Everyone since the Wright Brothers has observed that the more experienced pilot is likely to be the safer pilot. Though highly experienced pilots may suffer some varying amount decline in physical abilities as they age, their experience could more than compensate for any slight physical decline in performance.

The reasonable man on the street will see the junior pilot's exaggerated claim that all pilots over age 60 are unsafe as merely a smoke screen, that their real motive is institutionalized age discrimination and an accelerated job advancement scheme for junior pilots.

 

[rtmcfi]

Who is the greedy one? Just ask the majority of the public who are used to waiting their turn in life's real world. Where is the real greed in the age 60 rule debate?

The reasonable man on the street will see the junior pilot's exaggerated claim that all pilots over age 60 are unsafe as merely a smoke screen, that their real motive is institutionalized age discrimination and an accelerated job advancement scheme for junior pilots.

First off, shouldn't you be in bed Grandpa??

The real greed here is coming from the infirm, elderly crowd. The pro-65 folks are trying to change the rules at the end of the game. The only scheming here is being done by the likes of you and your codger cronies. You can still go to the fracs...

 

[Klako]

First off, shouldn't you be in bed Grandpa??

The real greed here is coming from the infirm, elderly crowd. The pro-65 folks are trying to change the rules at the end of the game. The only scheming here is being done by the likes of you and your codger cronies. You can still go to the fracs...

Thank you for proving my point.