Age 60 informal poll

[UndauntedFlyer]

Cyclone: Greed is not a good reason to change a rule that keeps us safe.

If age 60 isn't an issue why are we going to adopt a rule that allows only one pilot to be over age 60...the other must be less than 60. that is not logical.

I oftentimes wonder if you guys really believe all this B.S. about safety and the age 60 rule. To me as I read this stuff that's written here it sounds just like ALPA did 35-years ago arguing for a “3rd man” on the 737 and the railroads arguing for a "fireman" on a diesel locomotive. It's really all just featherbedding.

Safety: That has nothing to do with any of these issues. It’s all just job protection.

 

[Klako]

Oh yeah, then there is the matter of the thousands of furloughed guys/gals who finally stand a chance of being recalled now that the industry is making a comeback of sorts. Try explaining to them how they have to sit on the sidelines another 5 years so the over 60 guys can take advantage of thier windfall. That too is unfair, as the over 60 guys benefited from the rule their whole career and now when its time to move aside they don't want to.

I have offered this compromise before but I will post it again.


Here is the solution for all the junior pilots out there who say that extending the retirement age to 65 would be unfair to them by slowing upgrades and causing seniority stagnation. I say then make it mandatory for all pilots, regardless of age, to retire after serving no more than 20 years with a company or age 65 whichever comes first. If you hire on with a company at age 25, then you are kicked out of the cockpit when you turn age 45 or if you hire on at 45, you retire at 65. This would be equally fair for all and give everyone equal an opportunity to build their 401K to a level that they can retire on.

 

[Falconjet]

Or, you could leave it alone.

Wow, that is way too fair and simple.

FJ

 

[Freight Dog]

If it ain't broke.....

Besides... shouldn't the fight be with the Republicans who don't want to offer the maximum PBGC bennies to pilots who are forced out at 60?

 

[Andy]

Here is the solution for all the junior pilots out there who say that extending the retirement age to 65 would be unfair to them by slowing upgrades and causing seniority stagnation. I say then make it mandatory for all pilots, regardless of age, to retire after serving no more than 20 years with a company or age 65 whichever comes first. If you hire on with a company at age 25, then you are kicked out of the cockpit when you turn age 45 or if you hire on at 45, you retire at 65. This would be equally fair for all and give everyone equal an opportunity to build their 401K to a level that they can retire on.

Klako, I'm starting to like your proposal. Let's see ... you did 20+ years in the military. You shouldn't be flying; you've had your snout at the trough way too long. Get out of aviation so that an FO at Horizon can upgrade. Folks, get ready for the new Klako clause that military employment and flight time doesn't count.

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

Klitko,

May you form suction, oh never mind you forgot what that is like, you old sod!

 

[FoxHunter]

Full disclosure: I am 46 and have only been at FedEx for a little over 4 years. I won't make a full retirement at FedEx and I am ok with that, I will save now and won't cry in 2020 when it is my time to step aside and let the young turks rule. That is the way the game has been played, and I don't think there is any compelling argument to change the rules now.

Thanks for listening.

FJ

Hmm, so your saying you retired from the CG with a full secure pension. Now you want the old guys ahead of you out so you can assume your entitled place. Nice that you express so much concern about the furloughed guys since we have none at FedEx. I know based on Undaunted DOH he spent a number of years on furlough. I've spent 8+ years in that status. You in contrast have never spent one day on furlough, never will. Your concern about babysitting the old guy is also noted. Interesting when I consider your very limited flying experience, hence your title of scabie.

 

[fr8doggie]

I Was Wrong

Interesting when I consider your very limited flying experience, hence your title of scabie.

You probably would scab.

You are a total jerk. How miserable it must be to live your pitiful, lonely life. I'm sure your only friends are all NMB's.

My apologies to FJ he has you pegged.

 

[FoxHunter]

You probably would scab.

You are a total jerk. How miserable it must be to live your pitiful, lonely life. I'm sure your only friends are all NMB's.

My apologies to FJ he has you pegged.

I'll miss your friendship.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

I wonder how many of you guys who are citing "safety" as your main reason for maintaining the age 60 rule plan to surrender your drivers licenses at that age? Surely you wouldn't risk your lives and the lives of your children and grandchildren, to say nothing of the lives of others with whom you share the highway, by continuing to drive at a point in your life where your cognitive skills and reaction times are so impaired that you are no longer safe to fly an airplane?

I'm serious. If you honestly believe that the skies will be safer if pilots over 60 are banned from the cockpit, then wouldn't it follow that the highways and waterways would be similarly affected by such a ban? I don't want some 61-year-old geezer drifting across the double-yellow in his motorhome and taking out me or my kids. And I certainly don't want him becoming "incapacitated" at the yoke of his Commanche or J-3 or whatever, and coming through the roof of my house while we sleep.

If it's dangerous to fly beyond the age of 60, then by God, it's even more dangerous to drive or operate a pleasure boat beyond that age as well. As a rule, cars and boats don't offer the ability for a "co-driver" to take over control if the driver drops dead at the wheel.

On a serious note...

What really scares me about this topic is how many of my fellow airmen are willing to vote their aviation brethren out of a job, just to expedite their progression to his seat. I don't see a he11 of a lot of difference between voting a man out of his job, and planting contraband in his flight case or spiking his coffee with small amounts of cocaine. Either way, it costs somebody his job...a job some of you seem all too eager to step into.

ALPA leadership talks about "building unity," then asks half it's members how they feel about voting the other half out of their job! That they even bother to ask the question should be cause for concern for every ALPA member!

Talk about mismanagement and failure to build team spirit. No wonder airline managers thinks we're a bunch of whiney, overpaid, self-serving lackeys.

We ARE...