Age 60 informal poll

[UndauntedFlyer]

Cyclone: Greed is not a good reason to change a rule that keeps us safe.

If age 60 isn't an issue why are we going to adopt a rule that allows only one pilot to be over age 60...the other must be less than 60. that is not logical.

I oftentimes wonder if you guys really believe all this B.S. about safety and the age 60 rule. To me as I read this stuff that's written here it sounds just like ALPA did 35-years ago arguing for a “3rd man” on the 737 and the railroads arguing for a "fireman" on a diesel locomotive. It's really all just featherbedding.

Safety: That has nothing to do with any of these issues. It’s all just job protection.

 

[Klako]

Oh yeah, then there is the matter of the thousands of furloughed guys/gals who finally stand a chance of being recalled now that the industry is making a comeback of sorts. Try explaining to them how they have to sit on the sidelines another 5 years so the over 60 guys can take advantage of thier windfall. That too is unfair, as the over 60 guys benefited from the rule their whole career and now when its time to move aside they don't want to.

I have offered this compromise before but I will post it again.


Here is the solution for all the junior pilots out there who say that extending the retirement age to 65 would be unfair to them by slowing upgrades and causing seniority stagnation. I say then make it mandatory for all pilots, regardless of age, to retire after serving no more than 20 years with a company or age 65 whichever comes first. If you hire on with a company at age 25, then you are kicked out of the cockpit when you turn age 45 or if you hire on at 45, you retire at 65. This would be equally fair for all and give everyone equal an opportunity to build their 401K to a level that they can retire on.

 

[Falconjet]

Or, you could leave it alone.

Wow, that is way too fair and simple.

FJ

 

[Freight Dog]

If it ain't broke.....

Besides... shouldn't the fight be with the Republicans who don't want to offer the maximum PBGC bennies to pilots who are forced out at 60?

 

[Andy]

Here is the solution for all the junior pilots out there who say that extending the retirement age to 65 would be unfair to them by slowing upgrades and causing seniority stagnation. I say then make it mandatory for all pilots, regardless of age, to retire after serving no more than 20 years with a company or age 65 whichever comes first. If you hire on with a company at age 25, then you are kicked out of the cockpit when you turn age 45 or if you hire on at 45, you retire at 65. This would be equally fair for all and give everyone equal an opportunity to build their 401K to a level that they can retire on.

Klako, I'm starting to like your proposal. Let's see ... you did 20+ years in the military. You shouldn't be flying; you've had your snout at the trough way too long. Get out of aviation so that an FO at Horizon can upgrade. Folks, get ready for the new Klako clause that military employment and flight time doesn't count.

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

Klitko,

May you form suction, oh never mind you forgot what that is like, you old sod!

 

[FoxHunter]

Full disclosure: I am 46 and have only been at FedEx for a little over 4 years. I won't make a full retirement at FedEx and I am ok with that, I will save now and won't cry in 2020 when it is my time to step aside and let the young turks rule. That is the way the game has been played, and I don't think there is any compelling argument to change the rules now.

Thanks for listening.

FJ

Hmm, so your saying you retired from the CG with a full secure pension. Now you want the old guys ahead of you out so you can assume your entitled place. Nice that you express so much concern about the furloughed guys since we have none at FedEx. I know based on Undaunted DOH he spent a number of years on furlough. I've spent 8+ years in that status. You in contrast have never spent one day on furlough, never will. Your concern about babysitting the old guy is also noted. Interesting when I consider your very limited flying experience, hence your title of scabie.

 

[fr8doggie]

I Was Wrong

Interesting when I consider your very limited flying experience, hence your title of scabie.

You probably would scab.

You are a total jerk. How miserable it must be to live your pitiful, lonely life. I'm sure your only friends are all NMB's.

My apologies to FJ he has you pegged.

 

[FoxHunter]

You probably would scab.

You are a total jerk. How miserable it must be to live your pitiful, lonely life. I'm sure your only friends are all NMB's.

My apologies to FJ he has you pegged.

I'll miss your friendship.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

I wonder how many of you guys who are citing "safety" as your main reason for maintaining the age 60 rule plan to surrender your drivers licenses at that age? Surely you wouldn't risk your lives and the lives of your children and grandchildren, to say nothing of the lives of others with whom you share the highway, by continuing to drive at a point in your life where your cognitive skills and reaction times are so impaired that you are no longer safe to fly an airplane?

I'm serious. If you honestly believe that the skies will be safer if pilots over 60 are banned from the cockpit, then wouldn't it follow that the highways and waterways would be similarly affected by such a ban? I don't want some 61-year-old geezer drifting across the double-yellow in his motorhome and taking out me or my kids. And I certainly don't want him becoming "incapacitated" at the yoke of his Commanche or J-3 or whatever, and coming through the roof of my house while we sleep.

If it's dangerous to fly beyond the age of 60, then by God, it's even more dangerous to drive or operate a pleasure boat beyond that age as well. As a rule, cars and boats don't offer the ability for a "co-driver" to take over control if the driver drops dead at the wheel.

On a serious note...

What really scares me about this topic is how many of my fellow airmen are willing to vote their aviation brethren out of a job, just to expedite their progression to his seat. I don't see a he11 of a lot of difference between voting a man out of his job, and planting contraband in his flight case or spiking his coffee with small amounts of cocaine. Either way, it costs somebody his job...a job some of you seem all too eager to step into.

ALPA leadership talks about "building unity," then asks half it's members how they feel about voting the other half out of their job! That they even bother to ask the question should be cause for concern for every ALPA member!

Talk about mismanagement and failure to build team spirit. No wonder airline managers thinks we're a bunch of whiney, overpaid, self-serving lackeys.

We ARE...

 

[Falconjet]

So now its "his" seat, even though the only way he got there was by having EVERYBODY before him retire at 60.

I see it so clearly now. You guys are right, I've changed my mind.

Not.

By the way, my chauffeur or 28 year old girlfriend will be driving me around when I'm 60.

FJ

 

[FoxHunter]

So now its "his" seat, even though the only way he got there was by having EVERYBODY before him retire at 60.

FJ

If ever retired pilot senior to me was still flying, up to age 96 I would still be in the same seat I'm in now. Growth, not retirements, drives movement.:beer:

 

[Falconjet]

This message is hidden because FoxHunter is on your ignore list.

Go stalk somebody else and call them a scab. I'm done with you.

FJ

 

[FoxHunter]

This message is hidden because FoxHunter is on your ignore list.

Go stalk somebody else and call them a scab. I'm done with you.

FJ

Not suprised that one that is quick to insult has such a sensitive side. :laugh:

 

[Longhorn]

Guys...knock off the name calling. To call someone a scab who is not is uncalled for. Please get the thread back on track.

thanks

 

[Cyclone]

growth and retirement

What drives moving up the seniority list growth or retirements?

In foxhunters world, there is a place where old guys have been there, done that, got the tee shirt; there live the omniscient captains of yesteryear. To these distinguished, wealthy, "to-be-revered" (mostly by themselves) captains the thing that drove moving up the list was growth.

Hello...Hello...Dear Mr. I Know Everything (IKE) Foxhunter...

Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe times have changed, and that now there could be other factors that are important to moving up?

For those lucky souls of Foxhunters generation...growth was the driver. For a generation of younger pilots the growth just isn't there. I don't know if you noticed there IKEster but the last five years have left this industry with just a little turmoil. Poor you, poor Mr. MD-11 Captain...you think it impacted you the most...it has been rough for you huh...so you want to stay five more years. You sir need a random drug test. Poor you.

For many of us, now the biggest factor in moving up the list is retirements. For some airlines there is growth and that will help some...but it isn't going to be the same as it was in the 80s and 90s when the cranky old pilots started their major careers...this is especially true for the more mature airlines (the ones that have the good paying jobs). Growth will happen...but upgrades will slow more with a change to the age 60 rule...waiting for His Royal Highness to ride off into the sunset.

Besides...this isn't really about what's good for you Foxhunter...it's about what is good for the American public...and seeing you retire will be a welcome sight in that regard.

Status Quo.

 

[FoxHunter]

What drives moving up the seniority list growth or retirements?

In foxhunters world, there is a place where old guys have been there, done that, got the tee shirt; there live the omniscient captains of yesteryear. To these distinguished, wealthy, "to-be-revered" (mostly by themselves) captains the thing that drove moving up the list was growth.

Hello...Hello...Dear Mr. I Know Everything (IKE) Foxhunter...

Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe times have changed, and that now there could be other factors that are important to moving up?

For those lucky souls of Foxhunters generation...growth was the driver. For a generation of younger pilots the growth just isn't there. I don't know if you noticed there IKEster but the last five years have left this industry with just a little turmoil. Poor you, poor Mr. MD-11 Captain...you think it impacted you the most...it has been rough for you huh...so you want to stay five more years. You sir need a random drug test. Poor you.

For many of us, now the biggest factor in moving up the list is retirements. For some airlines there is growth and that will help some...but it isn't going to be the same as it was in the 80s and 90s when the cranky old pilots started their major careers...this is especially true for the more mature airlines (the ones that have the good paying jobs). Growth will happen...but upgrades will slow more with a change to the age 60 rule...waiting for His Royal Highness to ride off into the sunset.

Besides...this isn't really about what's good for you Foxhunter...it's about what is good for the American public...and seeing you retire will be a welcome sight in that regard.

Status Quo.

Yes Cyclone, I've been lucky. Pure dumb luck happens to be the most important thing in this aviation business.The lucky souls of my generation did not feel so lucky in the early 70s when most were on furlough. I upgraded to Captain after 16 years as a F/O first chance available. Met a TWA guy at a AOPA CFI reval course about the same time that was thrilled because he had just upgraded for the first time, from 727 S/O to 727 F/O after 15 years on the back seat. Now the young guys think they should be widebody Captains in less than five years.

Now the vast majority of my generation has had their pensions cut by up to 80%. Lucky guys!

I flew with over 60 guys in while on furlough in the early 70s. Most of the DC8 Captains at AirJamaica were over 60, retired EAL, until the FAA changed the rules.

You may not like the rules to change when it has a negative impact on you but rules change all the time. You will see the rule change in the very near future.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

For many of us, now the biggest factor in moving up the list is retirements.

That may be true for "moving up," but an even larger factor...the one that determines what seat you hold and how much you make throughout your career, is how old you were when you were hired. Obviously, a talented and highly-motivated civilian guy in his early 20's can, under the right circumstances, capitalize on that fact. If you're not coming on to the job market until your mid-30's-40's, there may be no amount of growth or retirements that will allow you to hold a left seat on your companies senior equipment.

I appreciate the sacrifices made by military pilots. It's a career path I often wish I'd chosen for myself. But that monthly retirement check and the expedited hiring process that many ex-military pilots enjoy comes at a price, that price being that the Captain you fly with may be the same age as you, but have 20 years of seniority. It's not realistic to expect him to retire at 60 just so you can have a shot at his seat.

Growth will happen...but upgrades will slow more with a change to the age 60 rule...waiting for His Royal Highness to ride off into the sunset.

Lots of things will affect how fast you upgrade. Without question changing the age 60 rule will do so. Some estimates say upgrades will slow by 3-4 years (not every pilot will be physically able to fly to 60. Others will choose not to do so) But if making the left seat is that important to you, you might be better off to focus your career aspirations on an airline that is, or is about to embark upon, significant growth. I'm not talking about the ones who have grown over the last 10 years...there's only so many places you can reach from Texas with a 737, and so many people who "absolutely, positively" need a box on their doorstep by morning. Those companies are probably at, or are rapidly approaching, the apogee of their growth. On the other hand, there are still a LOT of people out there who would love to fly, they're just waiting for some airline to make it both fun and affordable. Some of the LCC's seem to be doing a good job of that.

Voting one of your brothers out of a job is like killing one of your kids, so you can afford to send the other to college. I'm seeing some very bizarre logic here...

 

[Cyclone]

The real reason to not change the law

The vast number who want this changed are trying to pad their 401s, retirement benefits, etc OK. Why do we have the rule?

It's not changing because it is the right thing to do it is changing because it is the most politically expedient thing to do. Bad idea.

Age 60 is the rule. Age 65 is a similar rule with a different number and a caveat that you have to have someone under 60 with the someone over 60. This is acknowledgement that age is an issue. We all know it is an issue.

If it isn't an issue then Foxhunter should quit his MD-11 job and play wide reciever in the NFL or go out and win a tennis championship at Wimbledon. Fact is no one under 30 has ever won the men's championship at Wimbledon. This is because the venue favors youth...reflexes, quickness.

Our profession favors pilots with the right mix of youth and experience. We need pilots who have enough time to have developed skills and more importantly judgement and decisionmaking...that is the experience side. The thing youth brings us is energy and sharpness. That is also essential (and mostly lost on the pro 60+ guys). The reality is that not enough experience is very bad. Not enough youth is also very bad. It's the old man's disease that all of us have seen "huh...was that 270...can you have him repeat that...are we cleared to land...dozing off."

All of us, not some of us will feel the effects as we age from 60 to 65. These effects will not make us safer. Sure we will become more experienced...the law of diminishing returns...nevermind...that experience gained just isn't helping anymore. This is because there is a much stronger force at work here...downside risk with age...no way does experience offset the age issue.

Age 60 protects us. I predict that if the law changes there will be an air disaster that is directly caused by someone flying who was "older" than they should have been trying to do the job. This will happen. When it does the accident will be on the front page of the paper. What will not be on the front page is an apology from the arrogant old-timers who got the law changed. Don't expect Ted Stevens to come out with his cane and say he was wrong.

This is about safety. This is about erring on the safe side. The only other alternative is to develop a comprehensive screening process that would test for things to make sure we are really fit. Don't tell me the PC/physical currently does this because it doesn't address my concerns. The PC does not replicate line flying and the FAA physical is a joke...huh? IF we did have more thorough screening, many of us would have to hang it up long before 60. That would probably be a good thing too.

Anyway, I really think we are making a mistake if we change this law. I believe the skies will be less safe.

Please write to your lawmakers:

http://www.senate.gov
http://www.house.gov
write to the FAA/DOT and tell them your concerns

Ask them "do you really want blood on your hands?" It will happen.

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

To All,

It’s a waste of time trying to convince these greedy pilots of what they are really doing – stealing money and seniority numbers from the junior pilots. Their reasoning is irrational. They are not changing a contract. They are trying to alter a Federal law. One that has been in place for over 40 years and which we were all hired under. We all based our career decisions on retiring at age 60 – all of us.

Write your reps in Congress and let the FAA know your desires. I’m down in Texas and Kay Bailey Hutchison is moving her position from a definite yes to one of a definite maybe. The tide is switching due to your involvement and letters. The older greedy pilots have been very vocal on this – let’s beat them at their own game.

Let the FAA know that if this POS does pass, then all pilots over the age of 60 must go to the end of the seniority list. It’s the fairest and safest way.

Ask yourself how safe a 64 ½ year old pilot would be flying 6 legs in one day with the last one down to mins, on a short wet runway, with 30 knots of crosswind. Would you trust your family on this flight? Where is the data suggesting this is safe? I give you a hint – there is none. They also don’t own their seats or seniority numbers. If the age changes, our contracts will have to be renegotiated. Don’t let their greed overcome safety and hurt your career.

It’s your seniority number and your careers they are trying to alter. Don’t let them do it!

AA767AV8TOR