Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Age 60 informal poll

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Abolish the Age 60 Rule for other that Part 91 pilots?

  • Yea

    Votes: 668 35.5%
  • Nay

    Votes: 1,214 64.5%

  • Total voters
    1,882
UndauntedFlyer said:
There is no point in talking about changing all the rules. It has taken 48 years to change just one rule, and so the age-60 is changing. So now lets just deal with it as it's going to be. It is a total waist of everybody’s time to talk about extreme changes in the seniority system. Such changes have no chance of happening. The change in the verbiage for the new FAR will be exactly the same as the ICAO rule.

OK, so it would be extreme to suggest the profession evolve in a way that might goof up the windfall for a very few like you...but perfectly OK to see furloughs stay on the street for 5 more years? I promise you, this will be EXTREME for a furlough.

You'll buy another house, get divorced/married again, have more kids, and buy a Baron. Furloughs will be indigent!
 
You're pinging the wrong target there Flopgut.
 
Flopgut said:
OK, so it would be extreme to suggest the profession evolve in a way that might goof up the windfall for a very few like you...but perfectly OK to see furloughs stay on the street for 5 more years? I promise you, this will be EXTREME for a furlough.

You'll buy another house, get divorced/married again, have more kids, and buy a Baron. Furloughs will be indigent!

We all love the extremest views--those that categorize everyone into one simple, neat category. Yup, everyone who is in favor of removing Age 60 has 3 wives, mucho houses to support, boats, and no savings.

Get real.

Some are not even near 50 who support the removal of age 60!

Me thinks you do protest too much.
 
Flopgut said:
OK, so it would be extreme to suggest the profession evolve in a way that might goof up the windfall for a very few like you...but perfectly OK to see furloughs stay on the street for 5 more years? I promise you, this will be EXTREME for a furlough.

You'll buy another house, get divorced/married again, have more kids, and buy a Baron. Furloughs will be indigent!
Life sucks man. Get over it. This isn't a socialist country where everyone works for the good of the masses. If this job didn't turn out like you wanted or expected, go find a different career. Don't expect others to sacrifice because you feel you're getting a raw deal. Grow up.
 
lostplnetairman said:
We all love the extremest views--those that categorize everyone into one simple, neat category. Yup, everyone who is in favor of removing Age 60 has 3 wives, mucho houses to support, boats, and no savings.

Get real.

Some are not even near 50 who support the removal of age 60!

Me thinks you do protest too much.

OK, Maybe I generalized things a bit for the windfall crowd, and maybe this guy is not culpable.

However, what do you think pilots, who were otherwise somewhat ready to retire at 60, will do with the extra 750k-1mil? Trust me, it won't be pretty when you contrast it with a furlough's lifestyle who was counting on SOMETHING and got NOTHING! If you can feel completely "OK" about that, there's something wrong with you.

Is this the HR DIVA or the pilot? Question for the Diva: What do you think of abandoning seniority as part of this change? Have I asked you that before? From an HR standpoint, Do you want to place your best employees where you want or is this of more use as a divide and conquer tactic?
 
Flybynite said:
This isn't a socialist country where everyone works for the good of the masses.

Hold on, if seniority isn't a form of socialism, what is it? I think it is. You may disagree, but, you have to admit that rostering and assignments would better emulate a free market. It probably wouldn't be good for me personally, but since everyone wants to be like ICAO lets finish the deal. What's not grown up about that?
 
Last edited:
Flopgut said:
Hold on, if seniority isn't a form of socialism, what is it? I think it is. You may disagree, but, you have to admit that rostering and assignments would better emulate a free market.

Ok, work as much or as little as you want, all pay goes into a pot then divvy it up equally among those who work and those who don't. Sounds like a great system.

Whatever happened to the idea that those who want more, work more or work harder to achieve. There are no guarantees for anyone. If you take a job with a comapny that goes sour or you get hired at the end of a hiring boom why do you feel you should safeguarded by others for your misfortune. We all take a gamble when we hire on, if it doesn't work for you move on. There is no indentured servitude, find something else.
 
Flybynite said:
Ok, work as much or as little as you want, all pay goes into a pot then divvy it up equally among those who work and those who don't. Sounds like a great system.

Whatever happened to the idea that those who want more, work more or work harder to achieve. There are no guarantees for anyone. If you take a job with a comapny that goes sour or you get hired at the end of a hiring boom why do you feel you should safeguarded by others for your misfortune. We all take a gamble when we hire on, if it doesn't work for you move on. There is no indentured servitude, find something else.

Hold on, do you even know what the rostering and assignment method is? Seniority IS a safeguard; it IS a guarantee! Why should you or I be able to pull the seniority ladder up on another? Pick a side my friend. Defend seniority and oppose the age change or seek to abandon the system entirely.
 
Flopgut said:
Whistler: I don't care so much about what the law reads. I care about the agreement made between all of us that is seniority.

What is this agreement you have and who is it with? Your seniority tells you where you rank among the crew force at a particular airline, it doesn't guarantee anything. The success of your company determines your advancement and survivability. You must have been wearing blinders if you entered this business thinking that you were exempt from any changes that may come down in the next thirty years.
 
Flopgut said:
Hold on, do you even know what the rostering and assignment method is? Seniority IS a safeguard; it IS a guarantee! Why should you or I be able to pull the seniority ladder up on another? Pick a side my friend. Defend seniority and oppose the age change or seek to abandon the system entirely.

No I don't know and I don't care. I work under a seniority system, if you want something different work inside your company for change. Oh thats right, you are against change.

When you started in this profession no one guaranteed you that age 60 wouldn't change or that 3 man cockpits would go away. Change happens.

Once again seniority gaurantees you nothing - my friend
 

Latest resources

Back
Top