Klako
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Posts
- 171
You seriously want there to be no age rule in place at all?
YES, That worked just fine before 1960.
If it is appropriate, Increase the medical standards for ALL pilots.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You seriously want there to be no age rule in place at all?
Changing the rule will not make the skies less safe. I've spent 8+ years on furlough, plus many more very junior so I understand where the opposition to the change is coming from. The two things that make it a perfect storm for change is the failed pensions plus the ICAO change. The age 65 limit is still bogus, the one pilot under age 60 is also bogus, but that is what has been proposed and I expect that is what we will have. The idea that this change will push all the junior people back five years is also bogus. Some will only go a few months past age 60, some a few year, and some to age 65 or older if that number is eliminated. I do believe at some future date the world will go the way of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand with no upper limit.
I would hope that everyone would have the luck in this industry that I have had. I can also say that there were many times that I thought I was having no luck at all, but in hind sight I know I was wrong. I enjoy my job, enjoy going to work. If I thought I was slipping I would quit tomorrow.
I continue to see an AME who has the reputation for being the most strict Class I examiner in town. He will not compromise the current FAA standards.
I can honestly say that I have been continiously active in fighting to change the age 60 rule since I was 18 years old. In 1965, I remember helping my then next door neighbor, who was then a Western Airlines Captain and a Western ALPA Executive Council member. I helped him stuff envelopes for a campaign to repeal the age 60 rule then and I have been at it ever since.
The Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) at first fought hard to repeal the age 60 rule. Click here to see: The Chronology of the "Age 60 Rule"
http://www.ppf.org/chrono.htm
In 1968 this was ALPA’s official stance on the Age 60 Rule:
“ALPA CONTINUES OPPOSITION TO AGE 60 RETIREMENT RULE . The Air Line Pilots Association strongly advocates that the Federal Air Regulation in its arbitrary age 60 retirement provision is unreasonably discriminating against all of the air line pilots. Shortening a pilots career with no realistic justification is cheating the public as well as the industry. ALPA has expended and continues to expend its utmost efforts in attempting to overcome this highly dissatisfying and unfair federal regulation.”
Sadly, ALPA turned traitor to it’s senior members after supporting a change in the rule for over twenty years. ALPA has now institutionalized age discrimination as an accelerated job advancement scheme for its junior pilots. One would have to beg answers these questions:
When did younger pilots became more valuable than experienced pilots?
Why would ALPA, a labor union, actively support a rule that discriminates against its own members, forces them to leave their workplaces and leave them with reduced benefits?
I recall this WAL captain 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.
It appears that the problem you describe is not the result of aging but that of a sick airline and sick union.
I continue to see an AME who has the reputation for being the most strict Class I examiner in town. He will not compromise the current FAA standards.
I can honestly say that I have been continiously active in fighting to change the age 60 rule since I was 18 years old.
if this passes and you are over 60...let's just say the trips won't be treats. happy halloween old timers. you are going to be the persona non grata of the industry.
Most important, I truely love my job and I am dang good at it.
I chose to work at my present airline job 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, it was a very a stable Part 135 carrier 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 was promoted to Captain through expansion not attrition.
I fly for the best regional airline in the world. What made us the best is the work ethic of our employees.
DO NOT FORCE YOUR DIRTY APA/ALPA UNION POLITICS OF AGE DISCRIMINATION ON ME.
It appears that the problem you describe is not the result of aging but that of a sick airline and sick union.
It is becoming clear that as a result of recent actions by the ALPA and APA, the so-called legacy carriers like United, American, Northwest and Delta are condemned to the death throws of extinction. Greed, ineptness and blindness to reality will also destroy the likes of the ALPA and APA. The old guard pioneers of the golden age of aviation should be raging mad in their graves at the miss deeds of today’s big union politics.
KLAKO had a statement to make and soon guys in his position will be still flying.I thought this was a MAJORS thread.....