Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Age 60 rule may soon be history....

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web


Jun 21, 2002

Age-60 Rule May Soon Be History
FAA To Drop Mandatory Retirement Age For Airline Pilots...
For decades, the FAA has required airline pilots to end their careers the day before their 60th birthday. But late last week, the FAA Office of the General Counsel issued a policy statement indicating that the forced retirement was arguably a violation of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 USC 6101ff), and recommended that the agency not fight the burgeoning array of lawsuits that have been filed by retired pilots. The General Counsel's statement said that actual lifting of the "Age-60 Rule" will require an order signed by the Administrator, and suggested that such an order could be expected shortly. Given the large number of qualified pilots who are expected to return to airline cockpits as a result of this change, the FAA is considering a temporary suspension of Part 91 recency-of-experience requirements for air carrier pilots between age 60 and 65 during the first 90 days following the Administrator's order.

AVweb contacted several major U.S. airlines to find out their reaction to the policy change. None were willing to be quoted, but most told us off-the-record they welcomed the experience of the returning pilots and would most likely hire them back immediately and restore their previous seniority numbers. When asked if this meant there would be furloughs for some of their younger pilots, one industry spokesman said that would seem inevitable.

...Possibly Impacting Airport Security Programs
In recent months, the U.S. government has hired a large number of retired airline pilots as airport security screeners, due to their experience at airport operations. AVweb interviewed a number of these recently hired screeners and asked their reaction to the impending cancellation of the Age-60 Rule. The ex-pilot screeners we talked to were evenly split on the question of whether to return to the cockpit or to remain as security screeners. Captain George Spelvin, recently retired from TWA, said he was happy to be working at a steady job with no travel and excellent job security, and there was no way he'd be returning to piloting duties. Other ex-pilot screeners who said they would return to the cockpit expressed regret at having to leave their new careers as security screeners after only a few weeks on the job, but indicated that the opportunity to get back in the air was just too good to turn down.

Just some extra info for all of us job seekers.
Please note for the record that this came from AvWeb's 2002 April Fool's Day edition!
Yea sure, same BS I have been hearing since 78.

If it were to happen, the legal nightmare about rehiring folks who retired would be interesting.

Any attorneys want to take a position with comments?
Now look what you've done. You got the old cogers hopes up and then dashed them. Lucky if they didn't have heart attacks. You probably had 50 guys choke on their martinis and 150 ex-wives start get hot flashes at the thought of yet more settlement money.
April Fool indeed

It won't happen, at least not over Pete Quesada's dead body. ADEA notwithstanding, I've heard of a number of court cases that trump the act.
Last edited:
age 63

had a fed tell one of our captains that the age 63 was just about in the NMPR stage and would go out for comment soon
Actually, Senate Bill 361 is the closest I have seen this thing get to seeing the light of day. It was introduced in this Congress in Feb 2001 and sent to committee. Committee hearings were held in March 2001 and it was ammended there to put the ceiling at 63 (instead of the original porposed limit of 65) and referred to be reported favorably. There it sat for over a year. May 22nd of this year, it was finally reported to the full Senate and put on the calendar for consideration. We'll see how far it gets. It would still have to be passed by the Senate, referred to the House and go through the same rigamorol over there before they adjourn for the year. I'm not counting on it getting very much further.
Age 63 Bill

I don't recall all the forces that acted upon Pete Quesada to impose the Age 60 Rule forty years ago. Somehow, I am sure the same forces are still present, i.e., Republicans in control of the White House and the House, and the 50-50 split in the Senate. History shows that Republicans are favorably disposed toward companies. So, in my .02, I can't see how this bill can pass.

Raising the retirement age is sort of a double-edged sword. Plenty of pilots are in fine health at age 60 and have all that experience. Age 60 now means a more youthful person than Age 60 did in 1960. It's a shame to force them into retirement when they might be at the peak of their abilities (I realize there is no mandatory retirement age for 135, 91, etc.). On the other hand, the younger people might oppose raising the retirement age because it might hold back their advancement - although once they get there they can enjoy it longer than their predecessors.

Latest resources