Age 65 2007

[Phaedrus]

Discrimination again....sheesh.

 

[Guitar Guy]

Somebody please explain to me how 65 is not discrimination and 60 is. It is still a fixed age that you MUST stop working.

Conversely, how is 61.153(a) also not age discrimination? That's the age limit for an ATP.

I think your point is quite salient, thor2j.

 

[FoxHunter]

Conversely, how is 61.153(a) also not age discrimination? That's the age limit for an ATP.

I think your point is quite salient, thor2j.

The only current federal law that protects persons from age discrimination applies only for those age 40 or older. Sorry

 

[Dash Power]

It is all about money, otherwise, why don't these captains go to 135 fractionals and start from scratch, oh yeah, they only want to keep flying as long as they are captains making at least 150K or better. AGE 60 should stay in place.

.

I agree its about money. But it is for both sides of this debate. It is both unfair to force retirement at an age that has no reasonable evidence to support, and force other pilots waiting for upgrade that others did not have to wait for in the same way.

Saying that your opinion is not about the financial impact that it would have on yourself is nothing more than fooling yourself.

On a practical note, this is fundimental discrimination. The real question is whether or not its justified. And so far there has not been any real evidence to support the issue. Only individual opinion.

 

[Guitar Guy]

The only current federal law that protects persons from age discrimination applies only for those age 40 or older. Sorry

I went and checked it out and you are correct that with regards to the ADEA, age discrimination only applies to persons 40 years or older.

However, back to thor2j's point, raising the limit from 60 to 65 would still be tantamount to age discrimination, would it not?

 

[Hobiehawker]

I agree its about money. But it is for both sides of this debate. It is both unfair to force retirement at an age that has no reasonable evidence to support, and force other pilots waiting for upgrade that others did not have to wait for in the same way.

Saying that your opinion is not about the financial impact that it would have on yourself is nothing more than fooling yourself.

On a practical note, this is fundimental discrimination. The real question is whether or not its justified. And so far there has not been any real evidence to support the issue. Only individual opinion.

Are reasonable statements allowed on this board?? I'll have to check the code of conduct!

Seriously, well said. Well said.:beer:

 

[pipe]

Oh shut up.... those senior pilot didn't have pensions and retirements yanked from them... or lose up to 60-70% of their pay. This isn't about money, it's about discrimination. I for one completely support it.

Discrimination is not treating everyone equally. I would like to be treated to the same upgrade opportunities that these guys were treated to.

Fixing your perceived age discrimination just causes my perceived age discrimination.

PIPE

 

[Andy]

Yawn.

Sen Inouye will NEVER let this bill get out of committee. If it never gets out of committee, it never gets voted on. End of story.

Sen Inouye is the new Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

 

[FoxHunter]

I went and checked it out and you are correct that with regards to the ADEA, age discrimination only applies to persons 40 years or older.

However, back to thor2j's point, raising the limit from 60 to 65 would still be tantamount to age discrimination, would it not?

Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have no age limit because it has been ruled discrimination there. Here in the USA the age 60 was able to survive even though the EEOC said it was age discrimination. The Courts and many in Congress defered to the FAA because they are the experts. That all changed on November 23, 2006 when the ICAO standard changed and the FAA authorized all pilots to fly as Captain up to the age of 65.

Go back and read what the reporter for the WSJ wrote on December 11, 2006. He said the FAA has now already decided to change the rule Congress or not. They would like Congress to take the lead on the issue because they know that legal freight train running down the track is going to hurt the FAA, airline companies, and the pilot unions. If you read between the lines on the release about the legislation it will offer some protection to those parties.

You should also note that the legistation is being offered by both Republicans and Democrats. Almost one year ago a Legislative Assistant for a Senate Democrat made a comment that S.65 should have been introduced by a Democrat. Fixing problems with discrimination has always been a Democrat issue never Republican.

Those out there that expect the Democrats to block the change are in for a reality check.

 

[ferlo]

blah blah blah blah...If it's so F'in safe, why is the other guy MANDATED to be under age 60? This is about the billion dollars saved in social security not the altruistic leanings of these D-bags.