Age 60 informal poll

[AA767AV8TOR]

ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION REFUTES STUDY CLAIMING ECONOMIC BENEFIT WOULD RESULT FROM RAISING PILOT RETIREMENT AGE​

‘Study sidesteps real reason for age 60 retirement—the safety of the traveling public’

​

Fort Worth, Texas (September 29, 2006)—The Allied Pilots Association (APA), collective bargaining agent for the 13,000 pilots of American Airlines (NYSE: AMR), has published an analytical review rebutting “A Cost Benefit Analysis of S.65 and Reforming the Age 60 Rule on the Federal Government” by Darryl Jenkins. To review APA’s rebuttal, visit www.alliedpilots.org and click on the link entitled “Fatal Flaws Invalidate Conclusions of Jenkins Report on the Age 60 Rule” in the “Issue Watch” section.

The Jenkins document, dated July 24, 2006, was circulated among members of Congress and other interested parties. Pending legislation in Congress calls for raising the mandatory pilot retirement age, which has long been age 60.

“Mr. Jenkins’ work erroneously assumes that the federal government loses Social Security and income tax revenue when a pilot retires at age 60. When one pilot retires, another pilot replaces him—just as in any other industry when workers retire,” said Captain Ralph Hunter, APA president. “The job itself doesn’t go away. After all, when was the last time anyone saw an airliner flying around with an empty cockpit seat?”

Hunter noted that Jenkins’ analysis ignores the fact that it’s irrelevant to the Social Security Administration whether a retiree begins receiving Social Security benefits at age 62 and a half or waits until age 65. If the retiree elects to receive benefits as soon as they’re eligible—at age 62 and a half—the Social Security Administration reduces their monthly benefit accordingly. The Social Security Administration’s total obligation does not increase.

“Many pilots who retire at age 60 work in some other capacity after retirement, resulting in a net positive for the federal government, versus the deficit Mr. Jenkins purports,” Hunter said. “The retired pilot continues earning income and continues to pay Social Security tax and federal income tax.”

According to Hunter, Jenkins completely sidesteps the overriding reason behind age 60 retirement—the safety of the traveling public. Since the Federal Aviation Administration’s 1959 introduction of mandatory retirement at age 60 for airline pilots, not one single airline accident has been attributed to the sudden or subtle effects of aging. The FAA does not support any increase in the mandatory retirement age.

“We sympathize with those pilots who wish to extend their working careers, but public safety must take precedence over financial considerations,” he said. “Other safety-sensitive occupations in the United States also have mandatory retirement ages, including air traffic controllers, who must retire at age 56.

“As firsthand observers of the very real impact of aging on pilot skills, the majority of our nation’s commercial airline pilots support the existing policy,” Hunter said.

Recent proposals by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase the mandatory retirement age for non-U.S. pilots require that one pilot in the cockpit be under the age of 60.

“Despite its support for raising pilot retirement age, even ICAO evidently has questions about how old is too old,” Hunter added.

Founded in 1963, APA is headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. There are currently 2,852 American Airlines pilots on furlough. The furloughs began shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Also, several hundred American Airlines pilots are on full-time military leave of absence serving in the armed forces. The union’s Web site address is www.alliedpilots.org. American Airlines is the nation’s largest passenger carrier.

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

Debate on Age 60 Rule Continues

Today, APA published an analytical review rebutting "A Cost Benefit Analysis of S. 65 and Reforming the Age 60 Rule on the Federal Government" by Darryl Jenkins. The document -- which was circulated among members of Congress and other interested parties -- erroneously assumes that the government loses Social Security and income tax revenue when a pilot retires at age 60.

It also ignores the fact that it's irrelevant to the Social Security Administration whether a retiree begins receiving benefits at age 62 and a half or waits until age 65. The report also sidesteps the overriding reason behind the age 60 retirement rule -- the safety of the traveling public.

Also this week, the Federal Aviation Administration announced the formation of the Age 60 Aviation Rulemaking Committee to review the International Civil Aviation Organization revised standard for pilot retirement age.

The Age 60 ARC will provide a forum for the U.S. aviation community to discuss the new ICAO standard, make recommendations as to whether the U.S. should adopt that standard, and determine what actions would be necessary if FAA were to change the regulation to meet the new ICAO standard. It is strictly an advisory body. The FAA will ultimately decide what, if any, changes to the regulations will be made.

Legislative Affairs Committee Chairman First Officer Keith Champion will serve as APA's representative on the committee. Manager Flight Operations Quality Control Jim Kaiser will represent American Airlines on the committee.

ICAO's revised standard, which increases the "upper age limit" for airline pilots to age 65, will be implemented in November. The standard also specifies that only one pilot in any crew may be over age 60. While the ICAO standard is non-binding and individual countries set their own regulations regarding the operational age limit, certain members of Congress have set the stage for action this year to direct the FAA to adopt the ICAO standard.

Other ARC members include airline, union and medical representatives and signify a cross section of the industry. The committee is co-chaired by heads of the Air Transport Association and the Air Line Pilots Association.

The ARC, which has been tasked to complete its work within 60 days, will reconvene in late October to review work group progress and begin formulation of its final report.

 

[Flopgut]

Undaunted: You can't say the medical standards won't change and you know it! I'm also just too sure that you could care less! Age 60+ types will just go on LTD. Afterall, it's in place for the most part and it is still easy money. I'm afraid you're going to eventually BK all forms of LTD, premiums will go to $600-800/mo for those of us still working. All part of the plan, right?

No one is asking/talking about it yet so maybe you could answer this for us: What is the origin of B plans for pilot retirements? What has UAL said they wish to do in the event age 65 is the new retirement age?

 

[b757driver]

ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION REFUTES STUDY CLAIMING ECONOMIC BENEFIT WOULD RESULT FROM RAISING PILOT RETIREMENT AGE​

‘Study sidesteps real reason for age 60 retirement—the safety of the traveling public’​

Fort Worth, Texas (September 29, 2006)—The Allied Pilots Association (APA), collective bargaining agent for the 13,000 pilots of American Airlines (NYSE: AMR), has published an analytical review rebutting “A Cost Benefit Analysis of S.65 and Reforming the Age 60 Rule on the Federal Government” by Darryl Jenkins. To review APA’s rebuttal, visit www.alliedpilots.org and click on the link entitled “Fatal Flaws Invalidate Conclusions of Jenkins Report on the Age 60 Rule” in the “Issue Watch” section.

The Jenkins document, dated July 24, 2006, was circulated among members of Congress and other interested parties. Pending legislation in Congress calls for raising the mandatory pilot retirement age, which has long been age 60.

“Mr. Jenkins’ work erroneously assumes that the federal government loses Social Security and income tax revenue when a pilot retires at age 60. When one pilot retires, another pilot replaces him—just as in any other industry when workers retire,” said Captain Ralph Hunter, APA president. “The job itself doesn’t go away. After all, when was the last time anyone saw an airliner flying around with an empty cockpit seat?”

Hunter noted that Jenkins’ analysis ignores the fact that it’s irrelevant to the Social Security Administration whether a retiree begins receiving Social Security benefits at age 62 and a half or waits until age 65. If the retiree elects to receive benefits as soon as they’re eligible—at age 62 and a half—the Social Security Administration reduces their monthly benefit accordingly. The Social Security Administration’s total obligation does not increase.

“Many pilots who retire at age 60 work in some other capacity after retirement, resulting in a net positive for the federal government, versus the deficit Mr. Jenkins purports,” Hunter said. “The retired pilot continues earning income and continues to pay Social Security tax and federal income tax.”

According to Hunter, Jenkins completely sidesteps the overriding reason behind age 60 retirement—the safety of the traveling public. Since the Federal Aviation Administration’s 1959 introduction of mandatory retirement at age 60 for airline pilots, not one single airline accident has been attributed to the sudden or subtle effects of aging. The FAA does not support any increase in the mandatory retirement age.

“We sympathize with those pilots who wish to extend their working careers, but public safety must take precedence over financial considerations,” he said. “Other safety-sensitive occupations in the United States also have mandatory retirement ages, including air traffic controllers, who must retire at age 56.

“As firsthand observers of the very real impact of aging on pilot skills, the majority of our nation’s commercial airline pilots support the existing policy,” Hunter said.

Recent proposals by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase the mandatory retirement age for non-U.S. pilots require that one pilot in the cockpit be under the age of 60.

“Despite its support for raising pilot retirement age, even ICAO evidently has questions about how old is too old,” Hunter added.

Founded in 1963, APA is headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. There are currently 2,852 American Airlines pilots on furlough. The furloughs began shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Also, several hundred American Airlines pilots are on full-time military leave of absence serving in the armed forces. The union’s Web site address is www.alliedpilots.org. American Airlines is the nation’s largest passenger carrier.

I can understand your position seeing as it was AA's very own A. R. Smith in cahoots with his buddy at the then CAB that bought in this "rule" some 40 years ago.

However, times change and so do rules & regs. Not always for the best and especially in this industry. That's the sad reality.

I feel for those AA guys on furlough but don't forget, they're NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE HAD BAD "LUCK" IN THEIR CAREERS. The highlighting of that statement in your post insinuates that sympathy is required for these folks and that a reversal of Age 60 would further adversely affect them. Maybe, maybe not.

Like I have said many times before, this is a brutal profession with NO guarantees. That includes career progression as well as longevity with any particular company. That is a fact of life. I have forgotten how many times I've been furloughed and/or laid off. Each time I have had to pick up the pieces and start over, yes over! I was never helped by any union or politician. I just dusted myself off each and every time and got on with it. Was it my fault that the carriers I chose could not cut the mustard? Even if the company was in the solid black when hired on, it was no guarantee it would remain that way forever more. The irony is that I now have to work overseas making TWICE as much as I ever would back home with the all attendant sacrfices - no pension, no benefits, no seniority and no chance of ever working for a US carrier again (unless it's a start-up, maybe?). That's one hell of a price to pay. Think of that devastating effect on one's career before you even get to age discrimination or indeed, anything else. This is now all too common in this industry.

What we have today is a VERY different world from 40 years ago. Indeed, from even a decade ago. I for one would be glad to be able to continue flying for as long as I'm able and not have to pander to some politician (who has a nice, guaranteed pension on which they voted themselves and most of whom are invariably older than 60!!!) or some flip-flop union. Where were they when I needed them in the past??

No, I'm all done with politics and politicians. Heard all the sound bites before.
I'd much rather have control over MY future than give it away to some pen-pusher.

The final irony will be (assuming the bill passes) when I eventually get my upgrade (not guaranteed) with the foreign carrier and be allowed to fly into the US while American pilots over 60 will not. Great justice and equality there, right?

 

[miles otoole]

Have 7 buds who were furloughed from AA and know a few more. While not a statistically broad sample, every single one said getting furloughed at this point in their career was the best thing that could have happened to them. I doubt that many are worse off than those at the bottom of the active list right now.

 

[pilotyip]

AA767 Age 60 was forced on the pilots back in 1958. ALPA was still fighting to get it repealed up until about 1970. This rule had nothing to do with safety; it was a deal between two W.W.II USAF Generals, AAL's C.R. Smith and Pete Quesada (sp.?) the first head of the FAA. It was to get rid of high paid pilots at the top of AAL the seniority list. 121 pilots were flying up until age 69 in the year 2000 due to the grandfather rule under the elimination of 135 scheduled commuter. It was done in the name of safety, because who can be against safety. It is like motherhood and patriotism.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Undaunted:
No one is asking/talking about it yet so maybe you could answer this for us: What is the origin of B plans for pilot retirements? What has UAL said they wish to do in the event age 65 is the new retirement age?

The B plan at UAL is just like a 401k. When you think you have enough money then you can retire. There is no IRS penalty for withdrawing money after a person is 59.5 years old as it is with all 401k type plans. If the pilot retirement age goes to 65 then pilots may or may not work until that age. As I said, when you have enough money you can retire. Personally I think there are many pilots who will not go to 65. They may retire at 62 they say.

Of course a defined contribution plan such as a 401k is the future of all retirement plans in America. It is also called work until you can no longer work because you never know if you have enough cash socked away unless you know how long you will live. This country will not permit defined benefit (pension) plans to continue. Personally, I think there will be big problems for legacy corporations like GM where an employee can start working at 18 and work for 30 years, retiring at 48 years old on 80% of their salary and receive that for 32 years if they live be be 80. So how can any company possibly continure to compete when 50% of their payrole goes to retired unproductive ex-employees? They can not.

Look out if you're on a pension of any type.

So as far as an airline pilot is concerned, how can a typical pilot possibly save enough money to last them a lifetime by age 60 when the wages are so low that there is nothing left to put away for retirement. Just work the numbers, pilots need to work to age 65 to even have a chance of retiring.

 

[pipe]

If S.65 doesn't pass, Undaunted Flyer should go into politics. His responses to direct questions are typically longwinded diatribes that never actually answer the direct question - just more rumination and opinion.

PIPE

 

[Phaedrus]

Yeah, but at least it's not cut and paste...

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Undaunted: You can't say the medical standards won't change and you know it!

No one can answer as to what the future is but we do know that the highest authority in the FAA medical department has said that there will be no changes.

Now I would like to comment about those that think our medicals are too easy and that is to suggest that some pilots are currently certified that should not be flying. I suppose this may be true in the case of a few private pilots but not many at the 1st Class level. Remember while the office visit is routine and looks easy, it should be for a healthy person. But please consider that the self disclosure portion is serious. Any falsification is grounds for revocation of all pilot certificates plus a large fine. If you lie about doctor visits that would have been negative regarding certification or about medication being used that can be the end of a career. And in this day and age of computer searches a person just can not lie and expect to get away with it.

So the bottom line, in the opinion of the FAA there is no need to increase the medical standards for pilots in the USA whether or not the age goes to age 65.

Of course, all forecasts are off if there is some kind of an accident that is blamed on a pilots illness but the chances of that happening in a multipilot crew is astronomically small.

SO NO CHANGES FOR ANYONE IF THE AGE GOES TO AGE 65.

 

[General Lee]

The B plan at UAL is just like a 401k. When you think you have enough money then you can retire. There is no IRS penalty for withdrawing money after a person is 59.5 years old as it is with all 401k type plans. If the pilot retirement age goes to 65 then pilots may or may not work until that age. As I said, when you have enough money you can retire. Personally I think there are many pilots who will not go to 65. They may retire at 62 they say.

Of course a defined contribution plan such as a 401k is the future of all retirement plans in America. It is also called work until you can no longer work because you never know if you have enough cash socked away unless you know how long you will live. This country will not permit defined benefit (pension) plans to continue. Personally, I think there will be big problems for legacy corporations like GM where an employee can start working at 18 and work for 30 years, retiring at 48 years old on 80% of their salary and receive that for 32 years if they live be be 80. So how can any company possibly continure to compete when 50% of their payrole goes to retired unproductive ex-employees? They can not.

Look out if you're on a pension of any type.

So as far as an airline pilot is concerned, how can a typical pilot possibly save enough money to last them a lifetime by age 60 when the wages are so low that there is nothing left to put away for retirement. Just work the numbers, pilots need to work to age 65 to even have a chance of retiring.

Well, you should have married a rich girl. Like my Mamma always told me, it is just as easy to fall in love with a rich girl as it is with a poor one. You chose WRONG.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[b757driver]

Well, you should have married a rich girl. Like my Mamma always told me, it is just as easy to fall in love with a rich girl as it is with a poor one. You chose WRONG.


Bye Bye--General Lee

That's a pretty dumb statement coming from the likes of you! And you know it.
Could have, should have, would have......
The whoile thing (pilot career) is a total crap-shoot. I've said it before and I'll say i again, in this industry, there are NO guarantees!!! That's FACT. How on earth can you even bein to plan for a reasonable future when that future keeps changing and usually for the worst every few years.
Answer that, my financial whizz?? Because my guru is having problems doing it as financial models are based on a steady, increasing income over time - the exact opposite of what has been happening to a lot of pilots out there. And before you mention it, most pilots do have savings and have been careful with their money. But sometimes there are factors outside of your control, no matter what you do.
Have you ever been laid off or furloughed for a while ie. more than 3 years in your career? If not, try it. I'm told it's "character-building"...........B.S.

 

[vetrider]

Who knows, after the advisory committee finalizes its work, the FAA may decide to fall in line with ICAO regardless of what Congress does or does not do. It would not surprise me.

 

[ToThePain]

Dear Mr.XXXX:

Thank you for contacting me regarding age restrictions of pilots. I appreciate
hearing from you and having the benefit of your views.

Over 40 years ago, as the face of world transportation was rapidly changing, the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) instituted a mandatory retirement age of
60 for all commercial pilots. However, the FAA instituted this rule without the
benefit of medical or scientific studies or public comment. This policy was
brought into question after a 1993 study and data compiled by the FAA in 1999
found no correlation between age and accident rate as pilots approach 60.

Because of this lack of evidence to support the forced retirement of capable
pilots, I am proud to cosponsor S. 65 which would prohibit the FAA from denying
any person an airman or medical certificate for the operation of a commercial
aircraft solely based on an individual's age. S. 65 would also prohibit the FAA
from imposing restrictions or limitations on an airman or medical certificate
following an initial or periodic competency test because of an individual's age.
This is a responsible policy that ensures that our nation's skies are navigated
by qualified pilots, regardless of age.

S. 65 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation. As I am not a member of this committee, I will not have an
opportunity to vote on this bill in its current form. However, be assured that
I will urge my colleagues to pass this important piece of legislation that
abolishes a form of age discrimination against our nation's pilots.

Thank you again for contacting me. If I can be of further assistance in this or
any other matter, please do not hesitate to call on me.
Sincerely,

Rick Santorum
United States Senate

The response I got from my elected officials.

 

[Andy]

However, the FAA instituted this rule without the
benefit of medical or scientific studies or public comment. This policy was
brought into question after a 1993 study and data compiled by the FAA in 1999 found no correlation between age and accident rate as pilots approach 60.

Sen Santorum's staff failed to do their homework. The FAA formed a committee that reviewed scientific studies. There was an opportunity for public comment prior to the rule being implemented - the FAA only got somewhere around 100 comments.
Of course what do you expect from the GOP?

 

[Flopgut]

The B plan at UAL is just like a 401k. When you think you have enough money then you can retire. There is no IRS penalty for withdrawing money after a person is 59.5 years old as it is with all 401k type plans. If the pilot retirement age goes to 65 then pilots may or may not work until that age. As I said, when you have enough money you can retire. Personally I think there are many pilots who will not go to 65. They may retire at 62 they say.

Of course a defined contribution plan such as a 401k is the future of all retirement plans in America. It is also called work until you can no longer work because you never know if you have enough cash socked away unless you know how long you will live. This country will not permit defined benefit (pension) plans to continue. Personally, I think there will be big problems for legacy corporations like GM where an employee can start working at 18 and work for 30 years, retiring at 48 years old on 80% of their salary and receive that for 32 years if they live be be 80. So how can any company possibly continure to compete when 50% of their payrole goes to retired unproductive ex-employees? They can not.

Look out if you're on a pension of any type.

So as far as an airline pilot is concerned, how can a typical pilot possibly save enough money to last them a lifetime by age 60 when the wages are so low that there is nothing left to put away for retirement. Just work the numbers, pilots need to work to age 65 to even have a chance of retiring.

B plans were negotiated into existence based on the fact airline pilots quit working somewhat early at age 60. That is where they came from, and although that's about all anyone has left, look for legacy carriers [UAL] to cite the age change and seek to diminish the plans. Sound scary? You bet! Don't put anything past them.

I'm listening to you and B757driver ask the question: "how are we supposed to make this work?" Well, I think the answer is clear, we need to make about 400K/yr doing this job! If we're all supposed to get our pensions routinely horked and our CBAs rolled back to zero every 5 years then we're nothing more than itinerant workers! We need to be paid huge so we can sustain ourselves through tough times.

We do not need to work longer. We need a national contract for all of us, to serve as a baseline. A five year deal that cannot be abbrogated. And a bond-like financial device that puts lost monies back into the pockets of pilots like yourself who've been screwed. (and I do not mean a little, we could nearly get you all of it, it's not that hard) It's do-able. If the age change contingent had put half the effort into that, instead of trying to work longer, this sort of thing might be a reality.

Shoot, if we put half the effort that went into this thread, into that, we'd be close! (maybe) This is ridiculous! We're all fighting with each other and meanwhile UAL has 4 billion, AA has 7, CAL has 3.5. This is more money than they've ever had and here we are: squabbling.

 

[Klako]

The age 60 restriction in FAR Part 121.383(c) would treat me unfairly after I reach the age of 60. I am an experienced professional airline pilot but I have no other viable skills. The age 60 restriction in FAR Part 121.383(c) would deprive me my liberty and deny me equal protection of the law guaranteed to me under the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The age 60 restriction in FAR Part 121.383(c) abridges my privileges by denying me my liberty and ability to earn a living in my chosen profession. This violation of my civil liberty would likely cause me to suffer undo harm and severe financial hardship. At the very least, I need to pilot aircraft in FAR Part 121 operations to the age of 65 when I am eligible for Medicare and the Social Security.
I have been found to be qualified, proficient and medically fit by the FAA to perform pilot duties under in FAR Part 121. This is evidence by my Airline Transport Certificate and my current FAA Class One Medical Certificate. There is every reason to believe that I will continue to be found proficient and fit to perform the pilot duties required by FAR Part 121 after my 60th birthday. There is no credible information available that supports the notion that all FAR Part 121 pilots over age 60 pose more of a safety risk than younger pilots.

Most of the world is moving to a retirement age of 65 for airline pilots. Japan and the Netherlands, to name but two, have done extensive studies which showed raising an airline pilot’s age is not a risk. Countries such as Japan, Australia, those of the Joint Aviation Authority in Europe...all have raised their pilots’ retirement age. Some 45 nations now allow their airline pilots to fly past the age of 60. Some of these pilots do so in United States airspace. The International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO, Secretariat has now recommended a new upper age limit, with restriction to multi-crew, of 65 years. This recommendation is based on extensive studies, global experience (data compiled from 63 States) with older pilots, totaling 25,500 pilot-years, and the expressed wish of 93 States. The International Civil Aviation Organization—ICAO, now recognizes the harm done by the age 60 rule standard and will amend the international standard to age 65, which should become applicable on 23 November 2006.

A person’s age has never been proven to be the sole determination of one’s ability to safely perform the duties of a FAR Part 121 pilot. There is no evidence that proves that physical and mental decline can be measured by age alone. We have all observed that some people decline in their physical and mental abilities faster than others. There is the experience factor to be considered also. Since the Wright Brothers, the aviation industry has observed that the more experienced pilot is likely to be the safer pilot. Pilots may suffer some varying amounts of decline in physical and cognitive abilities as they age, however, their level of experience could compensate for any physical decline in performance.

If the United States Federal Government is to continue the age restriction in FAR Part 121-383, given that a pilot is otherwise qualified to practice in their profession, then that government must prove that there are enough reasons to deny pilots the full enjoyment of their profession. If pilots are denied piloting an aircraft for no reason other than because of age, then it is the Federal Government’s burden to first prove that all pilots suffer an unacceptable decline in my ability to fly beyond age 60 which poses an unacceptable safety risk to the flying public. The proof that age alone determines when a FAR Part 121 pilot must not operate aircraft in FAR Part 121 operations is something that Congress has directed the FAA to come up with but the FAA has failed to produce such proof. That proof simply dose not exist.

The age 60 restriction in FAR Part 121.383(c) should be extended or abolished until/unless it is proven that all Far Part 121 pilots suffer an unacceptable decline in ability to fly beyond age 60 which poses an unacceptable safety risk to the flying public,

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Klako: This is the greatest post ever on age 60. Very well said.

 

[§kyye Candy]

The bottom line

This is ridiculous! We're all fighting with each other and meanwhile UAL has 4 billion, AA has 7, CAL has 3.5. This is more money than they've ever had and here we are: squabbling.

Well stated, Flopgut. BRAVO!

And Klako... change your answering machine! You're wasting space.

 

[§kyye Candy]

P.s.

I have been found to be qualified, proficient and medically fit by the FAA...

Klako, if you were comparable to a younger mentality, then all of us younger chicks would be dating guys like YOU instead of guys like my YOUNGER , more "qualified, fit & proficient" man!

Actually, I take that back... I only date men who are financially responsible and have a viable plan for the future that they are capable of implementing.