Age 60 informal poll

[Andy]

ICAO's new Nov ruling will start the change. Can you imagine every country except US can land at JFK with a 61 year old captain?

The FAA will issue an exception to the ICAO ruling. No one over 60 will be legally captaining a commercial airliner into JFK in Nov.

 

[Klako]

Howz about 'cuz it's stoopid? Why would we want to lower safety standards just so pilots over 60 can continue to fly? The increased risk of having pilots with decreased physical and cognitive abilities is not worth it. Just look how many times I've told you that this law won't pass before you hit age 60? Just look at where the bill is at in the House. It's as good as dead.

Now Klako, how about a comment on this:

Stupid only to hypocritical twerps like you. Please do us a favor and stay away from the airline industry. Go back to playing with your skate board and watching MTV. Airline flying is for pros, something you are obviously not.

On TRICARE. This is off the subject but relevant to military retirees. Most doctors will not accept TRICARE as it simply does not pay enough to doctors as they loose money in the system. Our family doctor for over 15 years said that he could no longer provide medical services to us if I should substitute TRICARE for my current employer provided medical plan. The few TRICARE providers in my area will now not accept new patients. TRICARE for life does not begin until age 65.

Congress has been trying to up the cost of TRICARE for retirees. What is now $400 for a family will become $1000 if Congress gets their way.

Military retirees are getting screwed on the medical care that was promised
for years of loyal service.

 

[Andy]

On TRICARE. This is off the subject but relevant to military retirees. Most doctors will not accept TRICARE as it simply does not pay enough to doctors as they loose money in the system. Our family doctor for over 15 years said that he could no longer provide medical services to us if I should substitute TRICARE for my current employer provided medical plan. The few TRICARE providers in my area will now not accept new patients. TRICARE for life does not begin until age 65.

I had no problems finding a civilian provider to accept Tricare, and my wife has had no problems. In fact, the orthopedic surgeon who did knee reconstruction on me last Dec was a former team physician for the New York Mets.

As for your proposal of 65 or 20 years in the business, that is likely crafted to fit your unique circumstances. How many years have you been working at your company?
You can ramble on about how safety is not impacted, but the sad reality is that, in spite of there being less smokers, we are in much worse shape than we were 40 years ago. Just take a look at a chart of historic obesity rates. As a nation, we are a massive coronary just waiting to happen. At least with lung cancer, you can see the end; with a coronary, it's very sudden. I wouldn't want to see you keel over on short final, Klako.

 

[Klako]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy
I've told you that this law won't pass before you hit age 60? Just look at where the bill is at in the House. It's as good as dead.


True, The companion bill to Senate Bill S.65 in the House of Representatives, H.R.65, is still stuck in Committee without any sign of action. H.R.65 may become a moot point as the Senate bill has already been approved by committee and is ready for vote in the full Senate.
Senate Bill S.65, which was first, introduced on 24 January 2005, currently has 24 Cosponsors and has been placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar No. 382. There are now 60 Senators who have said they would vote in favor of S.65 and only 50 YES votes are needed for it to pass. A vote is expected at any time. If and when S.65 passes in the Senate it is expected to pass easily and rapidly in the House of Representatives.

 

[Andy]

If and when S.65 passes in the Senate it is expected to pass easily and rapidly in the House of Representatives.

Um, OK. That'd be why it's bottled up in subcommitte. You may want to learn how the legislative process works before you comment on it.

 

[Klako]

You can ramble on about how safety is not impacted, but the sad reality is that, in spite of there being less smokers, we are in much worse shape than we were 40 years ago. Just take a look at a chart of historic obesity rates. As a nation, we are a massive coronary just waiting to happen. At least with lung cancer, you can see the end; with a coronary, it's very sudden. I wouldn't want to see you keel over on short final, Klako.

I would be willing to bet that I am in much better physical shape than you are.

Why do people like you continue to spout the safety thing. No one has ever proven that age by itself degrades safety. If one can pass the Class I physical, age should be irrelivant.

The FAA's own modification of its air traffic controller retirement age demonstrates that the FAA no longer considers age as a safety issue. The agency has long held that 56 was a required age due to safety but this year granted age-waivers to the age of 61. At the latest Senate hearing on the Age 60 Rule, the FAA's Dr. Jordan could not construct a valid response when asked by Senator Stevens why pilots were not granted waivers based on proficiency if controllers were. When FAA Administrator Blakey was asked at a news conference if waivers would be granted pilots, she commented there was no need as there "is no pilot shortage", mentioning nothing about safety. With those words she turned the Age 60 Rule into a jobs program.

Safety is an exaggerated smokescreen that opponents of amending the rule use to subvert the truth. Opponents of a change have routinely waived the red flag of ‘safety’ in order to score debate points. Who, after all, can be against safety? Interestingly, the FAA grants exemptions for pilots who have had head injuries, seizures, alcohol and drug dependency, heart attacks and bypass surgery. All of these can be and are forgiven after cognitive testing but NEVER has there been an exemption for the simple fact of being one day older than 59, that magic age of 60 that somehow means a seasoned pilot no is longer fit to perform in a lifelong skill.

The International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) committee studying the amendment of the world retirement age standard for pilots has recently voted 27-4 to raise the pilot mandatory retirement age standard to 65. This decision was 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 ICAO now recognizes the harm of the current age 60 rule standard and is amending the international standard to age 65, which will become applicable on 23 November 2006. The U.S. Senate Bill S. 65, if voted into law by the U.S. Congress, would direct the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary to adopt the ICAO standard or recommended practice within 30 days after the ICAO acts on the matter. The world standard will change on 23 November 2006 and if the United States does not change also, it will be increasingly apparent that the United States is holding back for reasons unrelated to safety, i.e. AGE DISCRIMINATION.

 

[Klako]

Um, OK. That'd be why it's bottled up in subcommitte. You may want to learn how the legislative process works before you comment on it.

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation has now approved S.65 with an amendment offered by Senators Conrad Burns (R-Montana) and Ted Stevens (R-Arkansas). That means that S.65 is out of committee, it has been approved for a vote on the full Senate floor. That vote could come about as early as the first week in September.

 

[miles otoole]

I had no problems finding a civilian provider to accept Tricare, and my wife has had no problems. In fact, the orthopedic surgeon who did knee reconstruction on me last Dec was a former team physician for the New York Mets.

Was this Dr. D. A.? If so, I know him well, FWIW. He's the best known orthopod in NYC.

 

[N1kawotg]

Andy, doesn't JAZZ have over 60 captains flying in the US now, so why would the FAA limit a ICAO when that rule changes?

 

[Klako]

Andy, doesn't JAZZ have over 60 captains flying in the US now, so why would the FAA limit a ICAO when that rule changes?

Good point!
ALPA no longer has any credibility in telling Congress that the "Age 60 Rule" must not change. This is because the Airline Pilots Association's (ALPA) signed Canadian air carrier “Jazz” to a contract allowing pilots to fly to age 65. ALPA represents Jazz and has approved a contract that set pensions at age 60 and allows flight to age 65. Additionally, ALPA's President Duane Woerth publicly stated that he would sign any ALPA over age 60 contract for a United States carrier if the Age 60 Rule were to be changed in the United States.


Andy, Please show us information that says the FAA would limit over age 60 pilots of foreign carriers in U.S airspace when the ICAO rule changes.