Age 60 legislation is moving fast as of today

[Yuppyguppy]

Such a typical SWAPA response...you just don't get it do you?

 

[Bringupthebird]

I don't like discussing the economics of this issue, because it should only be about safety. And I've already clearly demonstrated through safety data that accident rates increase above the age of 55. Does that mean that 55-59 is unsafe? No; it just means that it is less safe than the 45-55 age bracket. And the accident rate takes an increasingly sharp upward turn approaching 60.

Oh, really? You have volumes of accident data on airline pilots in their 50's and 60's and all signs point to rapidly increasing accident rates for these pilots especially as they approach their 60th birthday? If it's that blatanly obvious, then why are they being allowed anywhere near an airplane after they're 35? And are passengers of 135 fractional jets deserving of any less protection from the FAA than airline passengers? Whose keeping the grey menace at bay. You alone? Compare apples to apples and not GA stats to airline stats; you make yourself look foolish by doing any less.

As for the economics of it, let's keep it in macroeconomic terms. The increase in retirement age will cause a sudden supply-demand imbalance due to the surplus supply of pilots. Over time, this will result in lower wages in order to increase pilot demand. It's Econ 101.

If you learned that in college, you ought to get your money back. By the way how is ERAU's econ course? There will be a slight decrease in the demand for pilots caused by SOME pilots electing to continue beyond 60. This will be offset by the growth in pilot hiring (as much as you may want to deny that). The only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage that will allow foreign carriers to operate with foreign crews on domestic US routes at much lower pay scales. Keep your boogeymen straight.

One should also keep in mind that these top pilots will be the least efficient for the company, causing the company to increase the number of pilots in order to achieve the same number of block hours flown. Since the total size of the pilot wages pie is only so big, all pilots will lose due to this rule change. The only ones to benefit from such change are in the mid-50s to 59 age bracket.

Nothing in this paragraph makes any sense, so I can't even begin to comment.

Long story short: Eliminating Age 60 provides opportunity for All at a small cost to some. If you need further protection, negotiate it into your next contract.

 

[Bringupthebird]

OK...after looking at all the comments on Flightinfo.com....I've decided to get on the SWAPA website and vote....No...on the age 65....

Nahhhh....just kidding....But, I promise, I won't call in sick for multiple trips monthly after I turn age 60....I'll just put them in "Trip trade/Give away"...if they go...they go...if they don't...I'll fly them.

Deal? OK, deal....

Tejas

These guys have to have somebody to blame for all their troubles. It must be pretty depressing to be so young and so hopeless. It's funny how as you mature you realize there really AREN'T monsters in the closet after all.

 

[Andy]

Oh, really? You have volumes of accident data on airline pilots in their 50's and 60's and all signs point to rapidly increasing accident rates for these pilots especially as they approach their 60th birthday? If it's that blatanly obvious, then why are they being allowed anywhere near an airplane after they're 35? And are passengers of 135 fractional jets deserving of any less protection from the FAA than airline passengers? Whose keeping the grey menace at bay. You alone? Compare apples to apples and not GA stats to airline stats; you make yourself look foolish by doing any less.

Yep, you know better than Dr Jordan and the CAMI reports. Funny, Dr Jordan and the CAMI reports only addressed airline stats. But I'm sure that it was some sort of conspiracy to keep the grey man down.
BTW, it's who's, not whose.

If you learned that in college, you ought to get your money back. By the way how is ERAU's econ course? There will be a slight decrease in the demand for pilots caused by SOME pilots electing to continue beyond 60. This will be offset by the growth in pilot hiring (as much as you may want to deny that). The only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage that will allow foreign carriers to operate with foreign crews on domestic US routes at much lower pay scales. Keep your boogeymen straight.

So you're saying that pilot demand will decrease due to pilots continuing past 60 but that there is no effect on the supply curve? Please elaborate. And please explain to me what curve shifts and in which direction due to 'growth in pilot hiring' (you got that info from Kit Darby, eh?). This should be amusing.
Once you're done talking about that, please discuss in detail how the 'only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage.' No other economic factor will effect pilot wages -is that what you're saying?
I can't comment on ERAU's econ course; I have never had an econ course, or any course for that matter, at ERAU. However, I did major in Economics. But I'm sure that you know all them thar economic concepts much better than me.

 

[Bake]

These guys have to have somebody to blame for all their troubles. It must be pretty depressing to be so young and so hopeless. It's funny how as you mature you realize there really AREN'T monsters in the closet after all.

Young and Hopeless??? I'm thinking your old and hopeless which sucks alot worse. You can't make it on what you got so you need more time. That will come I'm sure but if you screwed it up once you probably will again. Tell us the truth, you need the money to get young (you know what) because the ole one eyed milk man can get it without the $$$$$.

 

[SWA/FO]

Yeah, but you have to live to age 65 to spend the money. I voted today also...... should be interesting to see the results.

 

[Bringupthebird]

So you're saying that pilot demand will decrease due to pilots continuing past 60 but that there is no effect on the supply curve? Please elaborate. And please explain to me what curve shifts and in which direction due to 'growth in pilot hiring'

What are you really trying to ask? Do you know? Do you grasp the connection between pilot hiring of 10-20% per year and 20%+/- retention of pilots in the first few years of Age 65 implementation.

Once you're done talking about that, please discuss in detail how the 'only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage.' No other economic factor will effect pilot wages -is that what you're saying?

The greatest threat to pilot wages is unchecked cabotage, not the ability of a portion of the current pilot group to continue working if they are qualified and capable. The wage gap between majors and regionals has diminshed to the point that aircraft such as the ERJ-190 are going to the mainlines and there is little credible threat that Boeing and Airbus aircraft will be shifted to contract affiliates either. A massive 9*11 type event would probably wash out the domestic airline industry at this point anyhow, so it is of little use to include it as a threat. No doubt you'd like to pin all the evils of airline economics on those who have suffered through the worst downturn in aviation's history and now are looking to eliminate an outdated rule. Unfortunately that won't fly. Those who are in a position to right this wrong can see through the safety straw man to the heart (if there is one) of the Age 65 opposition: featherbedding and greed, both of which have long since lost their place at the airline labor table.

However, I did major in Economics. But I'm sure that you know all them thar economic concepts much better than me.

I don't know about that, but you sure are having a tough time selling me, using your arguments.

 

[Andy]

If you learned that in college, you ought to get your money back. By the way how is ERAU's econ course? There will be a slight decrease in the demand for pilots caused by SOME pilots electing to continue beyond 60. This will be offset by the growth in pilot hiring (as much as you may want to deny that). The only thing that will cause pilot wages to decline further is cabotage that will allow foreign carriers to operate with foreign crews on domestic US routes at much lower pay scales. Keep your boogeymen straight.

Since you've failed to grasp the relatively simple concept of supply curve shift, I've supplied a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

Refer to: Supply curve shifts. Unfortunately, the text has an error; instead of reading S0 to S1, the text in the paragraph should read S1 to S2.
Pilots are the widgets. Quantity of pilots increases; price of pilots decreases. Econ 101 for dummies.

Too complex for you? That proves once again that you can't teach a geriatric dog new tricks.

 

[Andy]

What are you really trying to ask? Do you know? Do you grasp the connection between pilot hiring of 10-20% per year and 20%+/- retention of pilots in the first few years of Age 65 implementation.

20%+/-? ROTFLMAO! Where'd you dig up that laughably low number?
And pilot hiring 10-20% per year?
Explain how you came up with those figures.

A massive 9*11 type event would probably wash out the domestic airline industry at this point anyhow, so it is of little use to include it as a threat. No doubt you'd like to pin all the evils of airline economics on those who have suffered through the worst downturn in aviation's history and now are looking to eliminate an outdated rule.

Hmm. Long term memory failing. No mention of Gulf War I in the early 90s and it's impact; stagflation in the 80s; arab oil embargo in the 70s. All had the same magnitude on the airline industry as 911.

I don't know about that, but you sure are having a tough time selling me, using your arguments.

Yes; too complex for you. Now tell me what happens to cognitive abilities as we age.

 

[Flopgut]

Flop-
Rising wages will only come as a result of leverage given to the pilot group by a limited supply of pilots. Pushing out pilots unnecessarily at 60 doesn't solve the problem, it just allows them to shoulder it. ALL qualified pilots get the opportunity to work and earn an additional 5 years if they choose. Why don't you want 5 more years of top scale pay, especially if it means you only have to forego 2-3 years of bottom scale CA pay? Can you explain that to me (oh, and why this even matters to someone who has bypassed CA already)?

If you look back at any gains made by organized labor, they came when the demand for labor outstripped supply. Otherwise, things languished. You might want to wish it was solely the nerve of those willing to strike, but the reality was and is that they knew that supply and demand was on their side and the bet on a strike was hedged. This is true in the steel industry, coal industry, pilot industry and to a lesser extent the teaching industry (where the threat of screaming kids at home helps the teacher's case).

The bright spot of the regionals finding fewer capable applicants is dimmed by their acceptance of unqualified applicants.

I'm not sure I can contradict you any more than you did yourself, in your own post?! (is your mom, also you aunt?)

This issue CAN NOT be good for collective bargaining because a majority of pilots oppose it. If it's forced upon us it will divide us in a very awkward way. Supply and demand is not even half the equation. Our unity and the political climate is far more important. You have NO concept of unity and you would just as soon squander political advandage as long as YOU get paid. Being a captain wouldn't change my opinion. I want to see raises and overall increase for ALL airline pilots. I want to see a workforce of well paid airline professionals with fat retirements and happy families that don't have to worry. That is not the case now and I'm sick of it.

Retiring at maximum age limit should be the easiest thing a pilot has to deal with. If age 60 can't be respected then age 65 won't either. We will fight this forever and never see an honest pay raise, only a steady decrease as pilots like you take for themselves. I realize this current group has had to deal with a lot, but that has always been the case. Don't forget, I have that T shirt (so to speak). A majority of them got to do this at top pay for a long time. By and large, they enjoyed raises, top pay, and tasted overall increase. They watched others retire at 60 and they knew they were to retire at 60. But MORE importantly, they saw some get their retirements, and they saw some LOSE their retirements. They didn't plan accordingly.