Age 60?

[m80drvr]

Anyone know whats up with age 60. It has been quiet lately on the congress front.

 

[GuppyWN]

Senate is out of town until after the November 7th elections so it'll be at least a month before anything happens - if then.

Gup

 

[m80drvr]

I thought that was it. Is there any truth that some congress man pulled their support for the bill/adendum to a bill, or was that wishful thinking.

 

[calfo]

fwiw, from flight standards:

"Age 60 rule appears as though it will be voted upon in November. It is being attached to the Transportation Spending Bill and expected to pass. ALPA and the ATA and the FAA are meeting to determine how the rule will be written in the FARs. It is expected that they will have the rule ready to go, if and when the bill is made law. There are many implications, and at this point this is all speculation because we do not know what the final language of the bill will be - assuming it is even approved. But here is the situation as best we know it right now:

Only pilots who are on the CAL seniority list upon the effective date will be allowed to continue flying past age 60.

Since the A fund is frozen, you will not incur a penalty if you choose to retire between 60 to 65. Your B plan is not affected at all by the rule change. Since your lump sum is calculated based on the value of your annuity, it will be slightly lower at 65 than it would be at 60. This is because the annuity assumes that you will only live on this income until an average age of death. When you retire 5 years later, you will not be drawing benefits during those 5 years making the annuity worth less. By taking a lump sum you are basically receiving the value of the annuity which is now less. If you chose to take the annuity instead of the lump sum, there will be no penalty. The good news is that whatever amount you lose in this calculation, you will more than make up for with the money being put into your B fund.

You can expect your LTD payments to go up to cover the cost of an aging pilot group. One thing to consider - if you were planning on retiring at 60 and now will be staying longer, is that you may not need the LTD insurance. Your sick bank will be used first and if you have an extensive sick bank, you can go a year or so just using that. If your financial plans were to retire at age 60, any income after that ae would be gravy anyway. Something to think about."

 

[Tejas-Jet]

I thought that was it. Is there any truth that some congress man pulled their support for the bill/adendum to a bill, or was that wishful thinking.

Seems that there were about 3 congressmen that changed their minds on co-sponsoring HR 65. In fact, it wasn't even on the Transportation spending bill that was sent to the Senate.

However, the Senate did attach S. 65 to that very same spending bill. Since then Senator James Inhofe has asked that the FAA put a team together to look at the age issues....and the FAA has agreed. In fact, Duane Woerth is one of the people selected to be on that team.

...and so it goes....

Tejas
Tejas

 

[Andy]

Congress is currently adjourned for elections; they'll be back in session on 9 Nov in a lame duck session.

HR 65/S 65 is dead. However, Sen Stevens slipped the text of S 65 into the DOT appropriation bill, HR 5576. It had passed the House without the change in it. The latest version of HR 5576, HR 5576.RS has S 65 attached.

HR 5576.RS may or may not ever be voted on in this session of Congress. If Congress passes a CR (continuing resolution) through the 109th session, then it won't come up for a vote until the 110th Congress.

If the appropriations bill goes to the Senate floor, it can be stripped from the appropriations bill as long as a Senator makes a point of order and it is sustained (requires 60% to overrule the point of order). HR 5576 WILL pass the Senate if it comes up for a vote; it's just a question of whether or not S 65 gets stripped from the bill.

Congress can also do an omnibus appropriations bill, where multiple appropriations bills are combined. If that happens, nothing can be removed from the omnibus bill.

If you oppose S 65, you can PM me and I can send you a bunch of information on how to get that message across to your representatives.

On the number of Congressmen that are cosponsors of the bill; 25 Senators cosponsor S 65 and 83 Congressmen cosponsor HR 65. There were a couple who pulled their support, but there have been additional cosponsors.

 

[Andy]

Age 60 rule appears as though it will be voted upon in November. It is being attached to the Transportation Spending Bill and expected to pass.

Flight standards sounds a bit biased toward it passing.

From what I've heard, if the Dems capture more seats, age 65 is dead. You can almost bet that no omnibus appropriations bill will pass before the 109th recesses; the Dems will block an omnibus bill.
If HR 5576.RS comes up for a vote on the floor of the Senate, do not be surprised to see S 65 stripped from the bill.

 

[General Lee]

And all of you old farts can blame Ex Congressman Mark Foley!!! Go Hillary in 2008!!!! Vote NO on age 65!

Everyone also likes to say "if the Europeans are doing it, maybe we should too...." Well, in Britian there is a 900 hour limit to flying each year. Maybe we should follow them too.... We would all have to find extra jobs to pay the bills...

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Tejas-Jet]

And all of you old farts can blame Ex Congressman Mark Foley!!! Go Hillary in 2008!!!! Vote NO on age 65!

Everyone also likes to say "if the Europeans are doing it, maybe we should too...." Well, in Britian there is a 900 hour limit to flying each year. Maybe we should follow them too.... We would all have to find extra jobs to pay the bills...

I kinda like the 900 hr thing....where do we start?...But lets not doo everything the same as the Brits....after all, they do have bad teeth.

Tejas

 

[ultrarunner]

Only pilots who are on the CAL seniority list upon the effective date will be allowed to continue flying past age 60.

How can the company discriminate against new hires?

 

[michael707767]

How can the company discriminate against new hires?

I think what they meant was if you have already retired, you cannot come back even though you are younger than 65.

 

[sandman2122]

According to today's UPS-IPA media report ( I've got my sources everywhere) Sen. Inohof has speculated it will not pass the FAA directed adviory panel - you know, the one with Duane Worth.

 

[ultrarunner]

According to today's UPS-IPA media report ( I've got my sources everywhere) Sen. Inohof has speculated it will not pass.

And when on gods good earth has anyone ever believed a politician?

You did say Senator, right...

thank you.

 

[pipe]

If you are opposed - as I am - do not let up. As the Congress gets close to returning from the elections it is paramount that we send them a friendly reminder.

It is clear that those who oppose the change are a solid majority. DO NOT BE A SILENT MAJORITY! I have written my congressmen and other key congressmen several times and will continue to do so.

Do not let the genie out of the bottle - you will have to live with it for the rest of your career (and by the time you finally get to retire to the beach at 65 years old you'll have saggy man-boobs and be wearing a diaper).

PIPE

And before you greedy bast**ds tell me I don't HAVE to stay until 65, let me just preempt you: MY UPGRADE WILL BE DELAYED BY FIVE YEARS! This will not only reduce my real earnings, but also the compounding of my savings (a concept that seems to be foreign to many of the previous generation of pilots).

 

[The Prussian]

And before you greedy bast**ds tell me I don't HAVE to stay until 65, let me just preempt you: MY UPGRADE WILL BE DELAYED BY FIVE YEARS! This will not only reduce my real earnings, but also the compounding of my savings (a concept that seems to be foreign to many of the previous generation of pilots).

Pipe....May I suggest that you " pipe it" for your own good??? The more you suggest that we 'old f@rts' move aside for your benefit, the more you seal your own fate. Congress is very aware of age discrimination, all of its ramifications, and all the reasons it has surfaced over previous generations. You are not really bringing good arguments to the table.

PS...65 year olds don't have saggy boobs, wear diapers, or even have walkers, as previously suggested by your colleagues. If you really believe that, your local congressperson may want to take issue with your point of view.

 

[vetteracer]

I bet the old farts on here that are for the reform, would have been against it 20 years ago. Typical pilot mantality, "I GOT MINE" or "GIVE ME MINE".

 

[Andy]

I'll echo Pipe's sentiment. The number of cosponsors of HR 65 have increased by a net of 9 and a net of 1 for S 65. So, the pro-change side is winning.

Bombard your reps, but you're going to get the most bang for the buck by targeting Dems. It's important to educate the Dems' staffs with these letters.
As an example, ToThePain posted a letter he got from Sen Santorum (R-PA). In the letter, it stated:
"Over 40 years ago, as the face of world transportation was rapidly changing, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) instituted a mandatory retirement age of 60 for all commercial pilots. However, the FAA instituted this rule without the benefit of medical or scientific studies or public comment."

This tells me that Senate staffers are sucking up the pro-change side's lies. First, there was a commission formed in 1959 to study pilot aging; they recommended age 60 as the max age. It consisted of Maj Gen Caldara, director USAF Flight Safety Research; RADM Hogan, Chief USN Bureau of Medicine and Surgery; Dr Schwichtenberg, Head of Department of Aviation and Space Medicine for the Lovelace Foundation for Medical Education and Research; Dr McFarland, Director of Harvard-Guggenheim Center for Aviation Health and Safety; Dr Birren, Chief of Section on Aging at the National Institute of Mental Health,, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; Dr Kidera, Medical Director at United Airlines; Dr Ashe, Chairman of Department of Preventive Medicine, Ohio State University; and Dr Goddard, Chief, Accident Prevention Program, Division of Special Health Services, Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Even before that, Pres Truman appointed the Dolittle Commision to look at airline safety. One of their recommendations was to conduct a study on pilot aging. The Aero Medical Association formed a committee on pilot aging in 1953 based on the recommendations of the Doolittle Commission.
So there were medical studies and medical committees formed well before the law was enacted.
As for no public comment, one merely needs to check the 27 June 1959 Federal Register to see that a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was posted and public comments were solicited.

The problem is that the pro-change side has told the same lies to Senate staffers for so long that they don't bother to check the facts. If you don't want the age to change, you've got to get the truth to Senate staffers.

Why did the rule come to the forefront when it did? The increased aviation accidents along with an aging pilot population. In 1947, there were no active commercial pilots over the age of 60; in 1959, it was predicted that there would be at least 80 pilots over 60.

I'll be happy to PM any additional material to help keep age 60. It's about safety.

 

[General Lee]

Pipe....May I suggest that you " pipe it" for your own good??? The more you suggest that we 'old f@rts' move aside for your benefit, the more you seal your own fate. Congress is very aware of age discrimination, all of its ramifications, and all the reasons it has surfaced over previous generations. You are not really bringing good arguments to the table.

PS...65 year olds don't have saggy boobs, wear diapers, or even have walkers, as previously suggested by your colleagues. If you really believe that, your local congressperson may want to take issue with your point of view.

So, you don't mind 65 year old policemen and firemen? You want an old fireman carrying you down a burning stairwell? You do? Ok there chief.... Oh, but wait, you don't think an age 60 pilot has lost any of his/her hearing, situational awareness, or depth perception? That's right, all of the medicals we take are soooooo stringent..... They would easily say NO to someone who shouldn't be there.....riiiiiiight. Get lost and follow the rules. Next thing you want to change is the right to marry your sister.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[The Prussian]

You want an old fireman carrying you down a burning stairwell?

As I've mentioned to you before....don't believe I've seen the need for a pilot to carry anybody down an airstair.

 

[Flybynite]

PIPE

And before you greedy bast**ds tell me I don't HAVE to stay until 65, let me just preempt you: MY UPGRADE WILL BE DELAYED BY FIVE YEARS! This will not only reduce my real earnings, but also the compounding of my savings (a concept that seems to be foreign to many of the previous generation of pilots).

WAH WAH WAH

Come up with a better reason than personal greed. Admit it, it's all about you and your perceived slight. Not about safety or what is right but all about you being cheated. Once again the GREEDY entitlement generation has spoken.

 

[Cobra]

PS...65 year olds don't have saggy boobs, wear diapers, or even have walkers, as previously suggested by your colleagues. If you really believe that, your local congressperson may want to take issue with your point of view.

Says who?

 

[General Lee]

As I've mentioned to you before....don't believe I've seen the need for a pilot to carry anybody down an airstair.

Great come back! You dodge the issue continually. Well done. Do you want an old fireman to parallel park a fire truck? I bet he can't...... Do old pilots taxi planes around at night? Is that safe? Why would ICAO not allow 2 over age 60 pilots to fly together? I think that says something right there. IF age isn't an issue, then why apply that rule at ICAO? Got ya. And, since when do we follow the Europeans on anything? The reason they are extending the age is because there is a huge expansion over in Europe thanks to Ryanair, Easyjet, etc. They are running out of pilots. They didn't just wake up and say...."Hey, maybe we were unfair to the old farts...." Nope. And, we don't have that problem in the States. Sorry.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Flybynite]

. And, since when do we follow the Europeans on anything?

Bye Bye--General Lee

So what is the temp at ATL? Is it 68f or 20c. Seems we got that shoved down our throats.

 

[Sunnfun]

As I've mentioned to you before....don't believe I've seen the need for a pilot to carry anybody down an airstair.

Whatever. If you really think that the Airline lets you keep that top-of-the-line salary for 10 days of work a month all the way 'til retirement you are sadly mistaken.

Simple math tells me that they won't let senior pilots supposed to retire by the time they turn 60 to carry that same salary five more years.

Nope, won't happen.

if you pass HR/S.65 then you'd face more concessions. Safe bet. Current contracts were based on folk to retire by 60, if they retire by 65 the whole thing doesn't work anymore. The JFK-FRA turns doesn't turn more profitable just because it is being operated by a 59/64 pair.

 

[General Lee]

Whatever. If you really think that the Airline lets you keep that top-of-the-line salary for 10 days of work a month all the way 'til retirement you are sadly mistaken.

Simple math tells me that they won't let senior pilots supposed to retire by the time they turn 60 to carry that same salary five more years.

Nope, won't happen.

if you pass HR/S.65 then you'd face more concessions. Safe bet. Current contracts were based on folk to retire by 60, if they retire by 65 the whole thing doesn't work anymore. The JFK-FRA turns doesn't turn more profitable just because it is being operated by a 59/64 pair.

The problem with your statement is that most contracts have a limit to the years of service for salary purposes. At DL, the 12th year pay rate is the highest, even though most senior guys have more than 12 years. A 12th year Captain rate is the highest rate, regardless of anyone's age.

But, I will agree with you on one thing, the Airlines are NOT in favor of extending the age. They want younger pilots, and they want a turnover rate so they can bring up pilots with fewer years of serivice. If they can get a 10 year pilot to fly as a Captain on a MD88 instead of a senior guy on the 12th year rate, they would love it. It would save them some money in the long run.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Daddy]

I'm hearing some papers are reporting that age 60 change will die due to gov panel recommendations...Miami Herald was one...can anyone confirm?

 

[Andy]

I'm hearing some papers are reporting that age 60 change will die due to gov panel recommendations...Miami Herald was one...can anyone confirm?

I wouldn't call it dead yet. It's still attached to HR 5576.RS, which has yet to be voted on.
We'll have to see if HR 5576.RS goes to the Senate floor as a standalone bill or if it is rolled into an omnibus appropriations bill.

I can give you a bit better odds after the elections, but it is definitely not dead yet.

 

[Andy]

As I've mentioned to you before....don't believe I've seen the need for a pilot to carry anybody down an airstair.

How about fending off terrorists?

 

[Freight Dog]

The Prussian, that's a very nice picture of you from your military days.

All you old bags from the times before the earth cooled and Jesus was a lance corporal need to go play golf someplace and talk about how that sonofabitch Orville was hitting on your daughters.

Seriously though, some of you old guys are pretty scary to fly with at night when it's your leg. That hand-eye coordination goes whether you care to admit it or not. Time to hang it up.

 

[Flybynite]

Seriously though, some of you old guys are pretty scary to fly with at night when it's your leg. That hand-eye coordination goes whether you care to admit it or not. Time to hang it up.

Seriously though, some of you young guys are pretty scary to fly with day or night, your leg or not. Give me a break.