Age 60 informal poll

[UndauntedFlyer]

ALPA may have changed their position on this because of a change in the feeling of their collective membership, new medical studies, or both. Positions change. PIPE

ALPA has lost its credibility from all unions over this issue and this will be their downfall. No union makes up such lies so as to get rid of their most senior members, and then sends these members out with no pension.

Lies are transparent so they fail in time. Take the 737 3rd man or the fireman on locomotives. All (featherbeding) lies under a hoax of safety and they failed.

From the words of Abraham Lincoln,
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
I believe this union cannot endure, permanently half of one mind and half of another - I do expect it will cease to be divided.
It will become all one thing or all the other.

This law will change. If it doesn't what can we expect next year, harmony? I think not.

 

[pipe]

This law will change. If it doesn't what can we expect next year, harmony? I think not.

Yeah, and the harmony when it does change will usher in an era of peace and unity the likes of which the cockpit has never before seen.

PIPE

 

[Andy]

Aerospace Medical Association Position Paper, Age 60 Rule

Klako, I'm assuming that you read the paper. If that is your justification for increasing the maximum age for pilots, it's weak at best. I suggest that you reread the paper.
One quote that I love:
"It is important to remember that the decision to use 60 years of age as an upper limit for commercial air transport operations was arbitrary. Currently, there is equal lack of justification for setting the age limit at 55 years or at 65 years." (page 13)

The paper continually cites research papers that confirm age related declines in performance. Yet the paper concludes that the age should be raised to 65. I've got to wonder who paid to have that 'gem' of a report written by the Aerospace Medical Association (and they are? ... some very thinly staffed 'Association' located in Alexandria, VA. Smells like a few individuals who take money to espouse any view you want to hear; no morals or scruples to get in the way).

 

[pipe]

From the words of Abraham Lincoln,
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
I believe this union cannot endure, permanently half of one mind and half of another - I do expect it will cease to be divided.
It will become all one thing or all the other.

This law will change. If it doesn't what can we expect next year, harmony? I think not.

All one thing or all the other.

As long as it's the one thing you want?? It already is all one thing. All age 60.

You know, I think there are a lot of younger guys out there who are reasonable and would entertain options. Phase it in. Make it 61, wait a few years, make it 62, etc..

Nobody in the age raising crowd wants to hear about that though. Why? Because it isn't about age discrimination - it's about immediate personal financial gain at the present and future expense of others.

PIPE

 

[Laughing_Jakal]

Fukc No!

 

[pipe]

On second thought, I'm so sick of all the B.S. arguments that I'm with Jackal.

PIPE

 

[Klako]

One quote that I love:
"It is important to remember that the decision to use 60 years of age as an upper limit for commercial air transport operations was arbitrary. Currently, there is equal lack of justification for setting the age limit at 55 years or at 65 years."

A person’s age must not be the sole determination of one’s ability to safely perform the duties of an airline pilot. The federal law mandating that all airline pilots must retire at the arbitrary age of 60 was never intended to be a vehicle to enhance aviation safety. Safety is the ruse that the FAA has used to deflect criticism of it’s “Age 60 Rule” as being discriminatory and unfair to older pilots. The FAA defends the “Age 60 Rule” solely on the grounds that no one has come up with a study proving that pilots will be safer beyond their 60th birthday. The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Marion Blakey, says that the available safety data and latest medical research are insufficient for the agency to begin the steps necessary to change the age 60 rule. Thus the FAA's official position is that, in spite of numerous scientific studies, it has insufficient evidence to prove that an airline pilot would be as safe or safer if allowed to fly beyond age 60 and therefore all airline pilots must be grounded on their 60th birthday. What a pitiful distortion of logic that the FAA uses to deprive otherwise qualified persons their right to perform in their lifelong career. If the Federal government wants a law that denies an otherwise qualified person to practice in their profession, then that government must prove that there are enough scientific reasons for such a law to exist. It is the federal government’s burden to prove that all airline pilots suffer an unacceptable decline in their ability to fly beyond age 60 which poses an unacceptable safety risk to the flying public. This proof is something that Congress has repeatedly directed the FAA to come up with for over 20 years but the FAA has failed produce such proof. That proof simply dose not exist.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

You know, I think there are a lot of younger guys out there who are reasonable and would entertain options. Phase it in. Make it 61, wait a few years, make it 62, etc..

Nobody in the age raising crowd wants to hear about that though. Why? Because it isn't about age discrimination - it's about immediate personal financial gain at the present and future expense of others.PIPE

Pipe: You have not read the proposed change. This change is a one way street. Those who are already retired will not be able to return, as unfair as that is. There will be exceptions for those who are on LOA or have downbid to S/O. So for the most part this is really an age 61, 62, etc. to age 65 change. There is a provision for a report to the NTSB after two years. At that time changes may again be made.

What with the ICAO age-65 rule in place there is no way that a change would be anything other than age 65 with the provisions I have stated.

Will this change this year or next? I don't know. If it changes this year that's what I need to keep working. If its next year I plan to become a "Redneck" and learn to drive an 18-wheeler.

If you mow your yard and find an car, you might be a redneck too.

 

[pipe]

So Klako, if the burden of proof is on the FAA, what should the age be?

As has been pointed out countless times, determining an age is arbitrary. One thing, however, is certain - the higher that age goes, the more stringent the exams must become for everyone. They won't make the exam more thorough just for the old guys - that would be age discrimination.

Bottom line, you're looking at a logistics nightmare to arbitrarily change an arbitrary rule to another arbitrary rule. Doesn't really seem to pass the sensibility test.

PIPE

 

[pipe]

Will this change this year or next? I don't know. If it changes this year thats what I need to keep working. If its next year I plan to become a "Redneck" and learn to drive an 18-wheeler.

If you mow your yard and find an car, you might be a redneck too.

You must really like to drive stuff. You're like Ricky Bobby.