Age 60 informal poll

[Freight Dog]

I just read that report in its entirety.

Wow!

Same hash/rehash we had here. I'm surprised there's no more talk about any implementation of this and the cost associated with changing this rule. I can assure you the cost would come from our own pockets in forms of paycuts. But hey, who cares about everyone else, right Fox? As long as you get to keep lining your pocket at the expense of everyone else... life is good!

Amazing... simply amazing.

 

[Phaedrus]

Head, meet wall.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

I probably will not make the cut, but it's clear that change is coming sooner rather than later.

"A house divided against itself can not stand."

Change will probably come in a form not expected. And sooner than expected.

 

[Freight Dog]

UF... if you really want to keep working, I'm sure there's some ex-pat work flying 777 in one of ICAO countries where they have a true pilot shortage we were discussing earlier.

I'm thinking Emirates or Eva or another entity like that.

Might be a way to augment your retirement.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

UF... if you really want to keep working, I'm sure there's some ex-pat work flying 777 in one of ICAO countries where they have a true pilot shortage we were discussing earlier.

I'm thinking Emirates or Eva or another entity like that.

Might be a way to augment your retirement.

Thanks for your suggestion but I'm really not interested in being based overseas. My home is here and that's where I'll be.

There are still many angles to this issue.

My primary interest is flying for my company if there will be an 11th hour call from the FAA. But in any case, I have placed my order for my last crew meal before termination.

 

[Sluggo_63]

I realize you're very upset that is changing but you will benefit in later years.

How so?

 

[Flopgut]

Thanks for your suggestion but I'm really not interested in being based overseas. My home is here and that's where I'll be.

There are still many angles to this issue.

My primary interest is flying for my company if there will be an 11th hour call from the FAA. But in any case, I have placed my order for my last crew meal before termination.

You're not being terminated, you are retiring normally and that is a privilege. You've had a great career.

 

[Flopgut]

Finally, we agree with medical and flight safety experts who have studied the Age 60 Rule and have conclusively found that experience is the best indicator of how a pilot will perform when there is a crisis in the cockpit. Therefore, the ICAO standard improves safety by keeping the most experienced pilots in the air for up to an additional 5 years.​

We are all part of a large system and the system is safe. Don't get too carried away with the experience factor. The pilots waiting to fill your shoes have plenty of experince; they may even posses skill levels you don't have. You should be glad that seniority progression afforded you so much and ashamed you want to deny others the same.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Amen Flopgut.

Without a Safety Assessment Risk study, any age change is dangerous. The ICAO change was done politically with a survey. The ARC committee pointed out that such a practice has no basis in safety. The FAA is now officially aware of these facts which are without dispute and will be considered as this issue moves forward.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

The safety argument may float if this rule was originally enacted based upon some safety data to support it. If no rule existed today, I have seen no data to support placing a limit at 60. Many who argue safety, when challenged, will quickly go back to the "you knew the rules" or " you had your chance to make the big dough, now it is my turn" arguments. If you a safety concern, you should be happy that the age limit effectively goes up by one day per day and there will always be a youngster under 60 in the cockpit.

 

[Flopgut]

The safety argument may float if this rule was originally enacted based upon some safety data to support it. If no rule existed today, I have seen no data to support placing a limit at 60. Many who argue safety, when challenged, will quickly go back to the "you knew the rules" or " you had your chance to make the big dough, now it is my turn" arguments. If you a safety concern, you should be happy that the age limit effectively goes up by one day per day and there will always be a youngster under 60 in the cockpit.

Well Chest, The safety arguement floats better than the discrimination arguement. You can't say age 60 hasn't worked as a safe retirement age, while age 65 is just as perfectly discriminatory as 60. ANY age will always be discriminatory, ANY age will not always be safe (you can't have a 7 year old ATP!) You can not EXCLUDE the possibility this will be less safe (acknowledged by the FACT that one pilot must be <60), you CAN EXCLUDE the possibility that this is less discriminatory.

What I'm also concerned about, if this is not done right, guys like you are going to want to work until age 70. I'm monitoring the process and resisting any change that will enable an arguement for perpetual increases.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Well Chest, The safety arguement floats better than the discrimination arguement. You can't say age 60 hasn't worked as a safe retirement age, while age 65 is just as perfectly discriminatory as 60. ANY age will always be discriminatory, ANY age will not always be safe (you can't have a 7 year old ATP!) You can not EXCLUDE the possibility this will be less safe (acknowledged by the FACT that one pilot must be <60), you CAN EXCLUDE the possibility that this is less discriminatory.

What I'm also concerned about, if this is not done right, guys like you are going to want to work until age 70. I'm monitoring the process and resisting any change that will enable an arguement for perpetual increases.

I totally agree that the discrimination arguement is not on firm ground either. Any limit can be argued as discrimination. I think that 65 is less so due to my belief that most will retire on their own terms prior to reaching the limit. I do not believe that no limit is the answer, just that 60 is not correct.

Don't be concerned about me sticking around. I have been fortunate and I hope to go a little early but one never knows what life has in store.

I always look forward to your well thought out opinions, even if I disagree with them.

 

[pipe]

Thanks for your suggestion but I'm really not interested in being based overseas. My home is here and that's where I'll be.

There are still many angles to this issue.

My primary interest is flying for my company if there will be an 11th hour call from the FAA. But in any case, I have placed my order for my last crew meal before termination.[/quote]


Dead man walkin'.

 

[Flopgut]

Likewise Chest. Neither one of us is wrong, that's the problem we have.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Age 60 and merging

"While Northwest officials declined to comment on the reports of a merger with Delta, Wall Street analysts say the Minnesota-based carrier signaled its willingness to partner up when it hired Evercore Partners (EVR) last December to explore "broad strategic alternatives" on its behalf. "Northwest would sell under the right terms," says Ray Neidl, an airline analyst for Calyon Securities in New York. "And strategically, Delta and Northwest are a good fit."
For one, analysts note that Northwest has an aging workforce that is poised to retire in coming years, making the task of cutting labor costs that much easier. "A lot of those Northwest workers are going to drop off the rolls," says Roger King, airline analyst for CreditSights, a New York-based institutional research firm. "

Since the judicial questions of age 60 and discrimination have already been decided, the only two remaining options are regulator and legislative.

The FAA has been unwilling to act so regulatory. Legislatively age 60 will be a factor in merging as the politics weight job loss risks. And what legislator wants to put workers on the streets because of a last minute change that has stood for 50 years?

Seniority integration is going to be a supporter of AGE 60 as it is today.