Age 60 informal poll

[b757driver]

But FAA instrument procedures are substantially different than ICAO instrument procedures. Are we in violation there since we don't use the ICAO standard in our country. There is an exemption to BATA. I don't think we are in violation of the treaty because we have a lower age.

Going to age 65 may allow foreign airlines a five year hiatus in hiring, then it will resume at the same pace as before. It's just all the junior pilots get the "privilege" of staying in their seat an additional 5 years.

This is a poor argument.

Actually, so is yours!
Another 5 years, so what? Some people are on furlough for 5 years, others have been looking for a "decent" job for twice that time! No one said it was a perfect world, let alone in this business.....
Your time will come, just try to be a little be patient - that's a virtue by the way.
Think of it this way, it ALSO gives you an extra 5 years at the end when you are earning the big paychecks.
All this "we want it and want it now, move over, it's my turn" is getting old .
It's coming and you might as well get used to it as we eventually get in line with the rest of the world.

 

[Gorilla]

I'd like to know when the guys that support age 65 went on record. Were they lobbying when they were 36? Maybe. More than likely, not.

I've got a funny feeling they happily moved up for decades due to the mandatory retirements at their carriers. Only when it became their turn did the rule magically become "unfair."

Someone lobbying out of altruism does so even when it does not apply to them. An example: caucasians who participated in the civil rights movements of the '50's and '60's. If you guys were working towards repeal of age 60 many, many years ago, then I honor and respect that. If not, I just find it a bit odd that this supposedly highly unfair and "evil" rule was ignored to your benefit. If the rule is flat-out wrong, you should have been working towards its repeal all your career.

 

[b757driver]

I've got a funny feeling they happily moved up for decades due to the mandatory retirements at their carriers. Only when it became their turn did the rule magically become "unfair."

If you guys were working towards repeal of age 60 many, many years ago, then I honor and respect that. If not, I just find it a bit odd that this supposedly highly unfair and "evil" rule was ignored to your benefit. If the rule is flat-out wrong, you should have been working towards its repeal all your career.

Of course you are also making a BIG assumption here in that each and everyone of us has been with the same carrier all our entire career with normal progression. While this may have been true a few decades ago, it is more the "norm" to have had many jobs and as we all know, it's to the bottom you go as you start over. Many are forced to work overseas to continue earning, never mind the age 60 rule, but just to support their families. It's not always about individual choices but almost always the company that they chose. You cannot get it right every time.

Happily moved up? Maybe for some, but a lot have never really moved at all!

 

[Sluggo_63]

Actually, so is yours!
Another 5 years, so what? Some people are on furlough for 5 years, others have been looking for a "decent" job for twice that time!

Yeah... I was and many of my close friends still are. I'm sure they would like to get back to their good jobs, and not five years from now, either.

No one said it was a perfect world, let alone in this business.....
Your time will come, just try to be a little be patient - that's a virtue by the way.

Yes, patience is a virtue. But avarice is a sin (a cardinal one, at that), and that's what the over-60 crowd is guilty of.

Think of it this way, it ALSO gives you an extra 5 years at the end when you are earning the big paychecks.

No it isn't. This is the biggest fallacy that you over-60 people throw around. It gives YOU an extra 5 years at the end. It gives me an extra 5 years in my seat.
I'll give you an example. Let's say that without the over-60 law changing, I was hired at my carrier at 35 and can expect to be a captain in 10 years, at 45. Then I can spend 15 years as a captain and retire at 60.
Now... I get hired at 35 and expect to be a captain in 10 years. Five years into my employment, the age-60 law changes to 65. So now I'm 40 and everyone senior to me retires at 65. There is now a 5 year pause in movement. Those who are captains remain so for 5 additional years. I remain a first or second officer for the additional 5. After the five year stop, everyone starts hitting 65. I'm now 45 years old, and start moving up the list again (old rules, I would have been a captain now). Now when I'm 50, I get to upgrade. So let's see... I get to be a captain for... that's right! Fifteen years! Same as before the age 60 rule, but the difference is I amassed additional pay as a first officer, not at the end with "the big paycheck" as you said. All the while you and your ilk got it at the captain's rate.
Add to this that I don't want to work until 60. I want to spend some time with my family. And don't tell me "you'll still be able to retire at 60 if you want," because you KNOW that'll change. Plus, then I get five less years as a captain (ten less than you).

All this "we want it and want it now, move over, it's my turn" is getting old .
It's coming and you might as well get used to it as we eventually get in line with the rest of the world.

Right... and all this, I'm going to get mine, to heck with you is getting old, too

 

[Sluggo_63]

Of course you are also making a BIG assumption here in that each and everyone of us has been with the same carrier all our entire career with normal progression.

To quote a "wise" person on this thread (look above) while talking to a furloughee...

No one said it was a perfect world, let alone in this business.....

While this may have been true a few decades ago, it is more the "norm" to have had many jobs and as we all know, it's to the bottom you go as you start over.

Again...

No one said it was a perfect world, let alone in this business.....

Many are forced to work overseas to continue earning, never mind the age 60 rule, but just to support their families. It's not always about individual choices but almost always the company that they chose. You cannot get it right every time.

Happily moved up? Maybe for some, but a lot have never really moved at all!

And one more time... let's all say it together...

No one said it was a perfect world, let alone in this business.....

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

[/font][/color]
Why does the ICAO rule (and the proposed FAA law) require that one person up front has to be under 60. I have not heard a good argument for that that doesn't mention safety.

The answer is simple and obvious. Change is always done in steps. First it was the ICAO rule that only the SIC could be over age 60 with the PIC under age 60. Then, when there no problems or issues with that order, the next change is logical, so as to allow the PIC to be over age 60 as long as the SIC is under age 60. Next, assuming there are no issues with that step, both pilots will be allowed to be over age 60.

THAT WAS EASY. HIT THE EASY BUTTON.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

[/font][/color]We have been patient. You have had your turn (in your case for 37 years). Now it's time to let others have the same opportunity you have had.

This is as good one. You mentioned this because I guess you were unaware that the grass isn't as green on the other side of the fence as you think. Maybe it's just Astroturf, it only looks that green to you from a distance.

All of the complainers like to suggest their careers will be so bad and it will take so long for them to become captains and so forth. And they like to suggest that everyone age 59 has had it so great all their careers. Well the fact of the matter is that those who are 59 now went through lots of big problems and recessions. Many of us went through several airlines or had to endure Vietnam.

Now in my case, my airline career may look good when you look at where I am now, but it is also true that in my seniority position at UAL all of my newhire class was furloughed twice, once for once year and once for 3 years. Progress was also slow with minimum upgrade to F/O from the back seat at 15-years. And to 737 captain in a total from date of hire of about 20plus years, and to 777 captain at 30 years.

Of course now, the upgrade to F/O is instant because there are no F/E's and the upgrade to Capt will be much less than the 20-years it was for those in my group.

Now I hear people talk of "5-more years." This just is not going to be the case. Many who want to fly past age-60 will quit (retire) at say 62 and others may develop some kind a medical condition that will disqualify them from the Class I medical.

So again, it's patience in this career that is a virtue, just as most all those age-59 have had to have. All things will come to those who can wait. Everyone's time will come. This is fact I have had to believe and I have found it to be true.

 

[Klako]

The disturbing idea that forced retirement is essential to promoting the welfare of the majority has an eerie foreshadowing of ageism themes illustrated in movies like Soylent Green and Logan's Run, where a person's maximum age is strictly legislated. These movies protray a society where when people reach an age limit, they are executed by a dystopian future society in which population and the consumption of resources becomes a managed equilibrium through the simple expediency of killing everyone upon reaching a particular age, thus neatly avoiding the issue of overpopulation and competition for employment and food. Young people vehemently support their system of eliminating old people until they approach their own termination age.

 

[miles otoole]

Now in my case, my airline career may look good when you look at where I am now, but it is also true that in my seniority position at UAL all of my newhire class was furloughed twice, once for once year and once for 3 years. Progress was also slow with minimum upgrade to F/O from the back seat at 15-years. And to 737 captain in a total from date of hire of about 20plus years, and to 777 captain at 30 years.

Of course now, the upgrade to F/O is instant because there are no F/E's and the upgrade to Capt will be much less than the 20-years it was for those in my group.

If this is true, it kinda defeats Sluggos argument. Upgrade to CA at WN and CAL, for example is 7 years conservatively. Heck, it's 3 at Airtran and JBLU. UAL today must certainly be less than 20 years. If you in fact earn an additional 5 years of F/O pay, you can add that to the 15 years of much higher CA pay. I guess the real argument isn't about safety, it's about wanting to retire at 60 (which you can still do with a 65 age cap).
If in Sluggos case, he is unable to retire comfortably at 60 with the next 15 years as an F/O (worse case) and the following 10 as a CA, someone has too many toys or girlfriends at home.

 

[b757driver]

This is as good one. You mentioned this because I guess you were unaware that the grass isn't as green on the other side of the fence as you think. Maybe it's just Astroturf, it only looks that green to you from a distance.

All of the complainers like to suggest their careers will be so bad and it will take so long for them to become captains and so forth. And they like to suggest that everyone age 59 has had it so great all their careers. Well the fact of the matter is that those who are 59 now went through lots of big problems and recessions. Many of us went through several airlines or had to endure Vietnam.

Now in my case, my airline career may look good when you look at where I am now, but it is also true that in my seniority position at UAL all of my newhire class was furloughed twice, once for once year and once for 3 years. Progress was also slow with minimum upgrade to F/O from the back seat at 15-years. And to 737 captain in a total from date of hire of about 20plus years, and to 777 captain at 30 years.

Of course now, the upgrade to F/O is instant because there are no F/E's and the upgrade to Capt will be much less than the 20-years it was for those in my group.

Now I hear people talk of "5-more years." This just is not going to be the case. Many who want to fly past age-60 will quit (retire) at say 62 and others may develop some kind a medical condition that will disqualify them from the Class I medical.

So again, it's patience in this career that is a virtue, just as most all those age-59 have had to have. All things will come to those who can wait. Everyone's time will come. This is fact I have had to believe and I have found it to be true.

So true!
Many assumptions that all is, or has been rosey, for everyone at the higher end of the scale.
Like Undaunted, I know many captains (and FOs) who have not had an easy ride in their career and if there is a law in the offing that will enable them to continue for a while longer, then so be it. Far from me to deny a person their right to work solely based on age. I believe that is called age discrimination and is against the law in the US, is it not?
And.....if you want to retire at 60 or even 55 or anywhere in between and feel you have amassed enough wealth to be able to do that, then good luck to you. But never forget, not everyone is in the same situation and I would never suggest to a person.
You do what you feel is right for you, but please do not foist an outdated, soon-to-be-changed law onto those that don't share your views.
Regardless whatever the argument, it's coming, so you might as well get used to it.

 

[Phaedrus]

Boo hoo.
Gimme mine.
Be patient.
It's good for everyone.
***Synopsis compliments of Phaedrus, INC.***

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Much of what I have earned has been given to ALPA, as well as the ALPA PAC so you (and your colleagues) can have a better career. How much have you given to the PAC? Also much of my money has been given to the furlough fund to pay for the health insurance for the furloughees like you when they left and needed help. I would guess that you were a beneficiary of this assistance? And if so I would think a nice thank you is appropriate.

Andy, I'm still waiting for an answer as to how much money you have given to ALPA and the ALPA-PAC.

And how about a thank you for the large amount of money my senority group voted to give to the furloughees like you for the much needed health insurance for you and your family. Many of your group have said thank you for the help. I have seen the thank you notes posted on the ALPA board, I but all I hear from you is "quit now old man so I can get promoted."

Do you have any comment on this?

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

Like I said, if this POS law passes, then it’s “back of the bus” for the over 60 crowd. It’s the only fair integration for those of us hired under the Age 60 retirement rule. For those over age 60 that are working on their 3rd marriage and are sending kids through college, you would still have a job and some money coming in, but you do it from the FE or FO seat.

See, you guys that want Age 65, you want your cake and eat it too -- all at the junior’s guy’s expense. You want the windfall coming from retaining your seat an additional five years. Again – stealing money right out of the pockets of those junior.

Some knucklehead was even talking about upgrading directly to the right seat as being some sort of extra perk. The guys that are retiring now, most were at the highest pay (A scale) for many years and they still don’t have enough pay to retire. Many junior guys now are stuck with low pay and stagnation. There are still thousand of furlough pilots on the street. Talk about eating your young.

This is just a selfish scam from the older guys. Don’t buy into it. This is nothing more than abrogation of seniority.

AA767AV8TOR

 

[miles otoole]

I'll give you an example. Let's say that without the over-60 law changing, I was hired at my carrier at 35 and can expect to be a captain in 10 years, at 45. Then I can spend 15 years as a captain and retire at 60.
Now... I get hired at 35 and expect to be a captain in 10 years. Five years into my employment, the age-60 law changes to 65. So now I'm 40 and everyone senior to me retires at 65. There is now a 5 year pause in movement. Those who are captains remain so for 5 additional years. I remain a first or second officer for the additional 5. After the five year stop, everyone starts hitting 65. I'm now 45 years old, and start moving up the list again (old rules, I would have been a captain now). Now when I'm 50, I get to upgrade. So let's see... I get to be a captain for... that's right! Fifteen years! Same as before the age 60 rule, but the difference is I amassed additional pay as a first officer, not at the end with "the big paycheck" as you said. All the while you and your ilk got it at the captain's rate.
Add to this that I don't want to work until 60. I want to spend some time with my family. And don't tell me "you'll still be able to retire at 60 if you want," because you KNOW that'll change. Plus, then I get five less years as a captain (ten less than you).

OK, point taken. One thing you have on your side is time. 25-years to age 60, to be exact. Plenty of time to be able to retire comfortably. I'll even prove it to you. With an average annual salary over the next 25 years of $100,000 (conservatively low), if you contribute $15k with a 3% match to your 401K and earn 9% a year and don't save another dime, you'll see $1,600,000. Not too shabby. Heck, save another 10K a year, on average, and you'll be able to squeeze by with much more. Put your 2nd wife to work and heck, you just may even be able to retire at 55.

 

[Sluggo_63]

OK, point taken. One thing you have on your side is time. 25-years to age 60, to be exact. Plenty of time to be able to retire comfortably. I'll even prove it to you. With an average annual salary over the next 25 years of $100,000 (conservatively low), if you contribute $15k with a 3% match to your 401K and earn 9% a year and don't save another dime, you'll see $1,600,000. Not too shabby. Heck, save another 10K a year, on average, and you'll be able to squeeze by with much more. Put your 2nd wife to work and heck, you just may even be able to retire at 55.

That hired at 35 number was just an example. I'm a furloughed United guy. I've had the last 5+ years off. Also, first house/first wife. Hopefully it'll stay that way (okay, I have plans to buy another house. I'm trying to keep the wife, though)
I'm not too good with the math. Can you work out how much I'd have in the bank if I had UndauntedFlyers career. Hired at United at 22, so that's 38 years there. The last 18 as a captain (I think that's pretty conservative). So let's use an average salary of $75,000 for the first 20 years and $200,000 for the last 18 (average). What does that come out to... approximately.

 

[Sluggo_63]

Andy, I'm still waiting for an answer as to how much money you have given to ALPA and the ALPA-PAC.

And how about a thank you for the large amount of money my senority group voted to give to the furloughees like you for the much needed health insurance for you and your family. Many of your group have said thank you for the help. I have seen the thank you notes posted on the ALPA board, I but all I hear from you is "quit now old man so I can get promoted."

Do you have any comment on this?

Yes, on behalf of my fellow furloughees, thank you for your contribution to the health care fund. Personally, I didn't need it, but I know there are many who did. So, seriously, thank you (I posted on Boyle's my thanks long ago). I don't know if you know this, but it did took over a year for the UAL MEC to get that passed. In the meantime, a lot of furloughees were paying COBRA rates (have you seen them). DAL, AMR, NWA etc had their healthcare costs paid for within a month or so.

 

[Sluggo_63]

Now in my case, my airline career may look good when you look at where I am now, but it is also true that in my seniority position at UAL all of my newhire class was furloughed twice, once for once year and once for 3 years. Progress was also slow with minimum upgrade to F/O from the back seat at 15-years. And to 737 captain in a total from date of hire of about 20plus years, and to 777 captain at 30 years.

Really... four years of furlough. Double that, and that's what a lot of us are facing.
It took you 30 years to get to the left seat of the 777? If you were hired in 1969 at 22, You only got to be a 777 captain in 1999? When I was there, I seem to remember that seat going much junior than guys with 30 years on property. Me thinks there is some exaggeration going on.
Let's see... I was hired in 2000 as a flight engineer, maybe get recalled in 2008 (not going to take it, but just for arguments sake) when should I make captain. Do they still have that seniority calculator? Let me know.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Really... four years of furlough. Double that, and that's what a lot of us are facing.
Fifteen years to go from S/O to F/O? I have a feeling that might be a bit of an exaggeration, maybe ten years, but for now, I'll accept it.
Let's see... I was hired in 2000 as a flight engineer, maybe get recalled in 2008 (not going to take it, but just for arguments sake) when should I make captain. Do they still have that seniority calculator? Let me know.

FYI, many of my group who were a little junior to me were furloughed for 7-years, and the upgrade time to F/O was 15-years at a minumum and for those hired in 69 that were junior to me it was longer. That is fact. Believe it because it is true.

And you and your group are welcome for the help with the health insurance. We wanted to help because it was the right thing to do. Just like the strike of '85 to keep the "B" scale off the property which was successful.

So now our group needs help and all we hear is how we have had it made our whole career. This just is not true. Many of us need help just like many of the furloughees did when you went out. And of course we did help.

It might interest you to know that when I was furloughed there was no help at all and that is why we did what could be done to help the current furloughees. We remembered and now what we are getting from people like Andy is a kick in the butt and name calling. What kind of pilot group is this?

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

It took you 30 years to get to the left seat of the 777? If you were hired in 1969 at 22, You only got to be a 777 captain in 1999? When I was there, I seem to remember that seat going much junior than guys with 30 years on property. Me thinks there is some exaggeration going on.
Let's see... I was hired in 2000 as a flight engineer, maybe get recalled in 2008 (not going to take it, but just for arguments sake) when should I make captain. Do they still have that seniority calculator? Let me know.

I took took the first 777 captain bid available and completed training on Feb 2, 1999. I even bid out of my domicile to get the award. Almost 30 years less a few months. That is fact.

So you see many on this board and even those who were with UAL have much misunderstanding of the facts regarding our situation.

I'm in great health and enjoy my work as anyone on this board would. And to be honest, I do not believe you or anyone else would want to quit now if they were in my situation.

Is there a member who if they were in my situation would just want to throw everything they have worked for out the window and quit just because they are age 60? I don't think so.

 

[miles otoole]

Really... four years of furlough. Double that, and that's what a lot of us are facing.

Yeah, and most of your furloughed peers are firmly entrenched at CAL, WN, JBLU, FDX, NJA, FX, CS, and UPS with NO plans to come back. In fact, most are closer to upgrade than they are from their original furlough date. Talk about exaggeration. Apparently, you are implying that all your buds will have been furloughed 8 years when it's all said and done, however, where they are now is as good or better compared to the options furloughees had in the 70s and 80s. LOL.

 

[Sluggo_63]

Is there a member who if they were in my situation would just want to throw everything they have worked for out the window and quit just because they are age 60? I don't think so.

I think there are many. You must admit that the folks calling for change are a minority. I know that SWAPA is endorsing change, along with JetBlue and a few MECs, but overall I think that individuals wanting to work until they're 65 are relatively few (they're at least the minority). Tens (maybe even hundreds) of pilots retire every day with nary a peep. They relish the thought of taxiing under the water, hanging up their uniform, and getting to relax with their wife and children. They want to take the RV across the country or go get $100 hamburgers in their Archer. I fly with them, and they can't wait until the day when they can be lazy. God bless them... they've earned it.

 

[Sluggo_63]

Yeah, and most of your furloughed peers are firmly entrenched at CAL, WN, JBLU, FDX, NJA, FX, CS, and UPS with NO plans to come back. In fact, most are closer to upgrade than they are from their original furlough date. Talk about exaggeration. Apparently, you are implying that all your buds will have been furloughed 8 years when it's all said and done, however, where they are now is as good or better compared to the options furloughees had in the 70s and 80s. LOL.

I wouldn't say "firmly entrenched." Yes, some of us are fortunate enough to have been hired at on good companies. I was hired on early at FedEx for a furloughee (one of the first classes that furloughees were hired into), and that was only a little more than a year ago. CAL just started hiring again, and same with UPS and their furloughee policy. So after 4 plus years being furloughed, I was hired at a stable company. I'm not going. I know plenty who are waiting. They are flying RJs in a flowback agreement, or flying charter. Or checks. Or checking people out at Home Depot.

So to answer your point. Some have great jobs, and not going back, but saying "most" is a stretch, and you know it. LOL.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

I think there are many. You must admit that the folks calling for change are a minority. I know that SWAPA is endorsing change, along with JetBlue and a few MECs, but overall I think that individuals wanting to work until they're 65 are relatively few (they're at least the minority). Tens (maybe even hundreds) of pilots retire every day with nary a peep. They relish the thought of taxiing under the water, hanging up their uniform, and getting to relax with their wife and children. They want to take the RV across the country or go get $100 hamburgers in their Archer. I fly with them, and they can't wait until the day when they can be lazy. God bless them... they've earned it.

There were always a few who, even with the big pensions, wanted to work. I thought that should be their right. But my personal feeling was, as was the feeling of most others in that same situation: If they (the pilot group through the contract) want to pay me that big pension to retire, then OK I’ll retire and that will be fine.

At that time I really didn't realize how selfish this was to the small airlines with only a 401k type of retirement plan. My actions of going along with the age 60-rule and not fighting it was OK only because I didn't understand the situation for the pilots at the smaller airlines where they had no pension as I did. Of course, this is how the AA guys feel now. They just don't understand the situation that they may find themselves in very soon.

But now, with the loss of the pensions and most everyone in the 401k boat, it's a totally different situation where you never know if you have enough money to retire. And unfortunately, most pilots do not think they have it.

So I believe you are very wrong about those others who are age 59 wanting to retire now and happy about it. (Maybe they was true 2-years ago) By even the ALPA survey it showed that 85% of the age 58- 59 pilots wanted to change the age 60 rule. And I would guess that that number by now (2-years after the survey) is that 95% want to change the age 60 rule. The other 5% are still in denial of their situation.

Many younger pilots think that a 60-year old guy wants to travel around the country on passes or in an RV with his wife and go fishing, play golf or become a FI junkie all day. I may have thought that too when I was 35, but just for your information, that is totally wrong. We want to continue doing all the things we have always done. People do not change when they are age 60 unless they become sick. President Bush is age 60 and does he seem to want to sit around and relax? No way.

People age 60 want to continue with their lives just as you do. Now in some cases if a person has some horrible double commute to work to fly for a Regional job, then maybe they would want to retire (quit) if they even think they may have the money to establish themselves in their local area. But such a situation is understandable in that case. And I’m sure these people are happy to live where they want, doing something in the local area even if it’s not flying.

So if you will, please understand, we are not being selfish, we just need to work because we should have a right to provide for our families and our future retirements, when we can really afford to do that.



.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

I wouldn't say "firmly entrenched."
So to answer your point. Some have great jobs, and not going back, but saying "most" is a stretch, and you know it. LOL.

It is my understanding that 50% have passed up on the recall at UAL. That certainly says they like where they are. And I would guess that you will definitely not come back to UAL. The future of the big bucks is FE and UPS. No F/A's but that may be better except no ladies at the Captain's layover parties.

Sluggo: Congratulations on your new job, but please be more understanding of our situation. You have your future set now, so why shouldn't we all have a chance to earn a living too, just like you and Andy.
.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Tens (maybe even hundreds) of pilots retire every day with nary a peep. They relish the thought of taxiing under the water, hanging up their uniform, and getting to relax with their wife and children. They want to take the RV across the country or go get $100 hamburgers in their Archer. I fly with them, and they can't wait until the day when they can be lazy. God bless them... they've earned it.

I wish to comment further on this quote by Sluggo.

The fact is that there are about 10 pilots reaching age-60 and “retiring” each day, about half of those are with the Regionals. Now add it up, how many of the Regional guys can possibly have enough cash on hand to retire at anything like the standard of living they were when they were working. It is almost impossible. Most of the Regional pilots that I talk to say they can hardly make enough money to live much less save for retirement. And please consider the likelihood of a divorce or two along the way to divide the 401k money once or twice. And this is also true for the guys with the majors. Unfortunately in our society divorce is all too common and for pilots because of many factors, the divorce rate is about twice the rate of the general public.

Now it is true that when there are delays and cancellations pilots do complain and say how glad they will be to retire and go fishing. Well let me tell you that that is all just talk at the time. And when the reality of the situation really hits, the water cannons are not welcome. Most all of those guys want to work and they definitely can not afford an Archer to fly to get the $100 hamburgers any more. Of course there are always exceptions to this but don't be mislead by the constant complainers who say they can not wait for retirement. Complaining is just something that we all do for some reason. Whether you're an F/O or a senior captain, everyone complains.

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

That hired at 35 number was just an example. I'm a furloughed United guy. I've had the last 5+ years off. Also, first house/first wife. Hopefully it'll stay that way (okay, I have plans to buy another house. I'm trying to keep the wife, though)
I'm not too good with the math. Can you work out how much I'd have in the bank if I had UndauntedFlyers career. Hired at United at 22, so that's 38 years there. The last 18 as a captain (I think that's pretty conservative). So let's use an average salary of $75,000 for the first 20 years and $200,000 for the last 18 (average). What does that come out to... approximately.

Sluggo_63,

Another area these guys don't want to touch is how badly this profession has degraded over the years. A UPS friend of mine whose father flew at Continental in the 70’s said his Dad was making $120,000 in 1976. That translates into $427,000 in 2006.

Both Captain and F/O pay rates at the legacies have been decimated by pay cuts, bankruptcy, and inflation. Heck, a long distance truck with an 8th grade education is practically making what an F/O makes.

An increase to age 65 will be particularly devastating to those in the 35-50 age bracket who are stuck in the right seat an additional five years. Yes, you will make more at the end, but what difference does that make if you lost your home, wife, and can’t put your kids through college in your 30’s, 40’s, and early 50’s. What about the pilots stuck out in the street an additional five years at zero pay, how do you think that will work out for them??

At American the pay differentials between CA and FO are in the range of 30% -50%. See how that will impact your retirement funds especially with compounding interest.

Count on a movement at both ALPA and APA to put those who want to retire at age 65 behind all those who were hired under the AGE 60 RULE. It’s the only fair way. That way no one reaps an underserved windfall at the expense of those junior. It will also protect against any reinstatement of those now in the 60 - 65 bracket that will be doing a class action lawsuit to get back on the property.

AA767AV8TOR

 

[Andy]

Andy, I'm still waiting for an answer as to how much money you have given to ALPA and the ALPA-PAC.

Cool! We're gonna play 'answer my question, dammit!' OK, I'll bite. But please note ALL of the questions below that I've asked you that you haven't answered. Please return the favor and answer them.
First, you want to know total money that I've given to ALPA and ALPA-PAC. I was on probation until 1 Oct 2001, so I did not make any payments during my probationary year. Between 1 Oct 01 and 2 Mar 02 (my furlough date), I'd estimate that I paid ALPA ~$1000. I didn't donate to ALPA-PAC during my probation year; I was eating into savings during that time period and did not have discretionary income. I did not give to ALPA-PAC post-911 because it was obvious that I was going to lose my job and I needed to save every spare nickel that I could. I haven't given to ALPA-PAC during my furlough because I'm not an active ALPA member.

I find it rather interesting that you care so much about ALPA, considering that in post #466, you said:

So now the age 60 rule is being maintained (by ALPA/APA) for nothing but promotions, and at APA for "retirement" pay for no work and for promotions. This is really nothing more than typical union featherbedding, no different than ALPA’s 3rd man on the 737 from 1968 - 1978 and the "fireman" on a diesel locomotive.

And how about a thank you for the large amount of money my senority group voted to give to the furloughees like you for the much needed health insurance for you and your family. Many of your group have said thank you for the help. I have seen the thank you notes posted on the ALPA board, I but all I hear from you is "quit now old man so I can get promoted."
Do you have any comment on this?

Yeah, let’s talk about the “large amount of money my senority group voted to give to the furloughees.” IIRC, the max that any furloughee could receive is around $3K and those on property paid ~$30/mo for approximately 35 months … around $1050. I’m sure that you’ll correct me if I’m wrong on those figures.
The furlough fund was initiated very slowly; IIRC it wasn’t until after the Mar 03 furloughs. Now, let’s see what those on property also did for us furloughees. 1) Waived my rights under the no furlough clause. (horsetraded it to benefit those still on property) 2) Got rid of longevity pay for furloughees. . (horsetraded it to benefit those still on property) 3) Negotiated new work rules in C2003 where pilots on property would work an additional 15-20% block hours, effectively adding another couple of years to my furlough. This was done to reduce the paycut for those on property 4) Negotiated PBS in C2003, allowing the company to reduce pilot manning by ~5%, effectively adding another 6 mos to my furlough.
Gee, thanks a whole lot, Undaunted Flyer. I really appreciate all that you have done for us furloughees, but please, don’t do any more for us.

OK, now it’s my turn to play, ‘answer my question, dammit.’

Captain, you were #11 on the 2005 seniority list and you are #9 on the 2006 seniority list. You have been a 777 Captain for how long? Likely before your paycut under C2003 that brought you down to earning ~$180K/yr. What were you earning after C2K, $275K/yr? Where'd it all go?

Can you explain how you've been able to squander away such a huge salary?

You’ve answered that you’ve been a 777 captain since 1999. How about answering the other questions?

How many airlines have you seen go under during your career? Did you not learn from ALL of those ex-Easterners on United property who lost their entire pensions? (I flew with a lot of them; I heeded their advice to not live beyond a flight engineer's salary). Did you think that there was no possibility of meeting the same fate?

Why is 60 discriminatory, yet 65 is not discriminatory? Or do you advocate flying until you die?

Captain, please tell me two things:

1) Where did all of your money go? You've been earning a 6 figure salary for a LONG time.
2) Why didn't you spearhead this effort to change the retirement age 20 years ago? Why did you wait until you were 59?

ZOIKS! What are figuring for an annual cash burn rate? $500K to $1 mil for five years??

Care to state publicly the amount of stock and bond money that you received? Ballpark from what I've read is that it's north of $500K.

If this is truly a 'cause' that you be fighting for, is it safe to assume that you will continue to champion this effort after January 28, or will you join the rest of the 59ers who have recently 'seen the light,' only to disappear once there is no personal benefit to them?

Have you noticed that everyone voicing a strong opinion on extending the retirement age is over 55?

 

[filejw]

This is what you all are yapping about.

Age limit for flight crew
Amendment 167 to Annex 1
The ICAO Council adopted on 10 March 2006 an amendment to Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing that increases by five years the upper age limit for commercial pilots operating two-pilot aircraft. The new provisions become applicable on 23 November 2006 and read as follows:
2.1.10.1 A Contracting State, having issued pilot licences, shall not permit the holders thereof to act as pilot-in-command of an aircraft engaged in international commercial air transport operations if the licence holders have attained their 60th birthday or, in the case of operations with more than one pilot where the other pilot is younger than 60 years of age, their 65th birthday.
2.1.10.2 Recommendation.— A Contracting State, having issued pilot licences, should not permit the holders thereof to act as co-pilot of an aircraft engaged in international commercial air transport operations if the licence holders have attained their 65th birthday.
Practical effects
Article 33 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (signed in Chicago, it is often quoted as the "Chicago Convention") limits the international recognition of flight crew licences to those who are in full compliance with the Standards of Annex 1 (note that paragraph 2.1.10.1 is a Standard). As a result, until 23 November 2006, even if an individual State authorizes a pilot-in-command (PIC) to fly in commercial air transport operations when over the age of 60 (65 from 23 November) that authorization can only be given for flights within that State's national airspace. This is because no State can force another State to accept its own deviation from an ICAO Standard. Article 33 does not apply to the co-pilot as paragraph 2.1.10.2 is a Recommendation, not a Standard.
Articles 39 and 40 of the Convention are also relevant to the age limit of pilots-in-command engaged in commercial air transport operations as they authorize international flights by flight crew who do not meet all international licensing Standards, provided that an authorization is given by each State into which the aircraft is operated.
In practice, this means that if a pilot in command is under the age specified in paragraph 2.1.10.1 (60 years at present and 65 from November 2006) he cannot be prevented by reason of age from operating into any ICAO Contracting State. Further, once he has reached the specified age, he may still operate as PIC, subject to certain conditions:
his/her national Licensing Authority permits it; and,
operations are undertaken only in national airspace; unless,
another State has given specific authorization that such flights are permitted in its airspace.
A State may wish to impose a lower maximum age limit than that specified by ICAO in 2.1.10.1. It may do this for the licenses it issues, but, as stated above, it cannot prevent an aircraft operated by a PIC holding a licence from another State, who is below the ICAO upper limit, from operating in its airspace.
For co-pilots, since paragraph 2.1.10.2 is a Recommendation, not a Standard, the upper age limit is set by the national Licensing Authority which can choose to impose any national age limit on the licenses it issues, as there are no international restrictions based on age for co-pilots.
When over 60, a six-monthly medical examination will be necessary (ICAO specifies an annual medical for those under 60 years who are engaged in two-pilot operations). For single-pilot commercial air transport operations, the upper age limit remains at 60 years.
Most of the States that have authorized their pilots to fly as pilot-in-command in commercial air transport operations after they reach the age specified in 2.1.10.1 also authorize pilots holding a license issued or validated by another States to fly in their own airspace under the same condition. However, ICAO does not collect information on States authorizing pilots to fly in their airspace after reaching the age of 60 and cannot provide information on the subject. Pilots seeking such information are advised to contact individual Civil Aviation Authorities.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

To Andy:

At least Sluggo had the common courtesy to sincerely thank me for the 3 plus years of assessments that I and the other ALPA members all paid so as to provide you, your family and you colleagues with health insurance.

So it seems like the amount you paid voluntarily to the ALPA PAC was ZERO. The only amount you paid to ALPA was involuntary (kicking and screaming from what you have written) as required dues. What a great guy you are.

Andy, do you ever question why you are the only FI member that has an attitude like you do?

And Andy: Just get used to it. The age 60 law will change soon. You should just relax and accept it. Age discrimination is wrong.

 

[rfresh]

It's hard to believe this topic is still being discussed after all these decades...