Age 65 2007

[thor2j]

Best thing to do is if they want to stay they go to the right seat, otherwise MOVE out of my seat!

 

[Freight Dog]

Gotta love these old windbags... they sure are persistant.

Retirement to most of them means death. As sad as it is... flying is all they have. Truly sad...

 

[Phaedrus]

...completely qualified one day and completely worthless the next

What a sad, sad statement. Do you wear your high school letter sweater to your reunions?

 

[General Lee]

FREEDOM TO FLY ACT-TO END AGE DISCRIMINATION FOR COMMERCIAL AIRLINE PILOTS
Senator James Inhofe
January 4, 2007

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I rise today, as an experienced pilot over age 60, along with my colleagues, Senator Stevens, Senator Lieberman and Senator Feingold, to once again introduce a bill that will help end age discrimination among commercial airline pilots. Our bill will abolish the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) arcane Age 60 Rule—a regulation that has unjustly forced the retirement of airline pilots the day they turn 60 for more than 45 years.

Our bipartisan bill called the “Freedom to Fly Act” would replace the dated FAA rule with a new international standard adopted this past November by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) which allows pilots to fly to 65 as long as the copilot is under 60.

Since the adoption of the ICAO standard in November of this year, foreign pilots have been flying and working in U.S. Airspace under this new standard up to 65 years of age—a privilege the FAA has not been willing to grant to American pilots flying the same aircraft in the same airspace.

This bill may seem familiar; I have introduced similar legislation in the past two Congresses and I am dedicated to ensuring its passage this year. And it has never been more urgent.

Mr. President, we cannot continue to allow our FAA to force the retirement of America’s most experienced commercial pilots at the ripe young age of 60 while they say to their counterparts flying for foreign flags “Welcome to our airspace.

Many of these great American pilots are veterans who have served our country and the flying public for decades. Many of them have suffered wage concessions and lost their pensions as the airline industry has faced hard times and bankruptcies. But these American pilots are not asking for a handout.

They are just saying to the FAA; “Give me the same right you granted our foreign counterparts with the stroke of a pen this November. Let us continue to fly, to work, to continue to contribute to the tax rolls for an additional 5 years.” We join them and echo their sentiments to Administrator Blakey. Mr.
President, as far as we are concerned, that is the least we can do for America’s pilots, who are considered the best and the safest pilots in the world.

Most nations have abolished mandatory age 60 retirement rules. Many countries, including Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have no upper age limit at all and consider an age-based retirement rule discriminatory. Sadly though, the United States was one of only four member countries of ICAO, along with Pakistan, Colombia, and France, to dissent to the ICAO decision to increase the retirement age to 65 last year.

The Age 60 Rule has no basis in science or safety and never has. The Aerospace Medical Association says that “There is insufficient medical evidence to support restriction of pilot certification based upon age alone.” Similarly, the American Association of Retired Persons, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Seniors Coalition, and the National Institute of Aging of NIH all agree that the Age 60 Rule is simply age discrimination and should end. My colleagues and I agree.

When the rule was implemented in 1960 life expectancies were much lower—at just over 69 and a half years. Today they are much higher at over 77 years. The FAA’s own data shows that pilots over age 60 are as safe as, and in some cases safer than, their younger counterparts. In the process of adopting
the new international standard, ICAO studied more than 3,000 over-60 pilots from 64 nations, totaling at least 15,000 pilot-years of flying experience and found the risk of medical incapacitation “a risk so low that it can be safely disregarded.”

Furthermore, a recent economic study shows that allowing pilots to fly to age 65 would save almost $1 billion per year in added Social Security, Medicare, and tax payments and delayed Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC) payments.

I am encouraged by the progress that has been made. In the 109th Congress, the Senate Commerce Committee reported the modified bill with the ICAO standard favorably and the Senate Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Committee included a version of S. 65 in their bill. The FAA recently convened and Aviation Rulemaking Committee to study the issue of forced retirement. We have yet to see that report but it is our understanding the report was persuasive enough that the Administrator is considering a change in the rule now.

We are encouraged by that, but we also know that legislation will be needed to direct the FAA to pursue these changes in a timely manner and in a way that will protect companies and their unions from new lawsuits that might arise as a result of the changes. Our bill accomplishes that. Whether the FAA decides to change the rule on its own or not, Congress needs to do the right thing and pass S. 65 to fully ensure that our own American pilots have the same rights and privileges to work at least until Age 65 that were accorded to foreign pilots over the age of 60 this fall.

Mr., President, I urge the rest of my colleagues to support this important legislation and help us keep America’s most experienced pilots in the air.

Age discrimination is in the Consitution, with an age limit on becoming President of the United States. (35 years old)

If we have to, let's put it to a vote. You would lose....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[typhoonpilot]

Everyone here seems to argue purely on what is best FOR THEM. That is only natural. The older pilots argue for an increase to an age 60 rule, while the younger pilots want to keep it in place. Both argue for financial reasons.

Any increase to the retirement age would be detrimental to me in the short term. I'm 41 and furloughed and I support any increase to the mandatory retirement age because it is the RIGHT thing to do.


Typhoonpilot

 

[warbirdfinder]

Kassel737 wrote:

"Oh shut up", that's not very nice. I guess these old farts never paid any attention the histories of Pan Am, Braniff, Eastern or countless others. Maybe these guys should have saved more of their money instead of buying boats, harleys, oversized houses and having five wives. I have heard to many stories while flying with capts of how they mismanaged their lives. Do I feel bad for these guys who made a a ton of money and squandered it away? HELLL NO. Move along.

Hopefully your stupidity does run in the family.
Do you honestly believe that these pilots could have looked into to the future to forecast their carrier's demise? That they could mysteriously predict the fall of stocks and bonds? That they could tell when their marriage will go bad; a child is born with a crippling disease or mental retardation; a spouse dies of a long term fight with cancer and leaves the family finances shattered; a tornado wipes out their home and all possessions? Or foretell when they would be hit with a 35 -50% pay cut or a loss of pension?
"I've heard many stories"... most of which are BS. Do you believe that people will mismanage and destroy their lives deliberately?
Please keep in contact, so that when you reach the age of 60, you can tell this forum how great and successful your life turned out.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Will the First class medical be more involved for those guys? Will there be any "strings" attached for the pilots that decide to fly past age 60?

I doubt it....Does any current "over age 60" pilot have to do anything special today for a 1st class medical?

If the rules change for a 1st class medical over this age change...you can expect AOPA/General Avition to be all over this.

Besides...what about waivers? ...for Cardiac bypass....valve replacements....pacemakers....cancer....artificial limbs? You must know that we have pilots in 121 ops flying with waivers for the aforementioned medical conditions...all in good health...Would that be gone forever for those over age 60? It's available now for those over age 60.

Tejas

 

[Tejas-Jet]

isn't that a nice group of countries to be grouped with, France, etc.

Like France/Hate France....doesn't matter. I don't know if you've noticed or not, but the Frnce is one of the US trade partners....and it seems that flights to/from the US - France are packed with passengers and cargo....

$$$ makes the world go round...and your congressman/senator probably spouts the anti-France rhetoric to get "Joe six-pack" riled up...but in reality, votesfor more trade agreements with that very country.

Tejas

 

[jetjockey#1]

If it's all about money, why do so many want to keep doing a job that has lost 70% of it's value? Maybe it has something to do with being completely qualified one day and completely worthless the next.

In that case, since "the job" has lost "70%" of its value, and they just want to fly, take the right seat @ a fractional. This rule doesn't keep pilots from flying airplanes, it keeps "older" pilots from flying for airlines, but I am sure you knew that. Also, I am sure you are going to say, screw that, I am 60 I don't want to start from the bottom, working 18-20 days a month, making 30-40K. I fully understand that, so the question is: is it about money or about flying?

The only reason anybody would want to keep flying past 60 is because most of them have put their time in, and they're enjoying the benefits of seniority. That's it. Just remember, you are enjoying those benefits, thanks to this rule.........

Retire, you had your time at the saddle.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

If the guy in the right seat must be under 60 with a Capt over 60, then shouldn't the guys in the right seat be entitled to a percentage of the Capts. pay? I mean if it wans't for the F/O the Capt couldn't be PIC.

New Bill!!!

Let them fly over 60 but I want 50% of his pay plus mine!!!!

I'll bet you can negotiate that with your airline. That management is probably a forward thiniking organization led by a CEO who has only the long term career prospects of the amployees at heart....and plans to be at that airline for years to come, passing up all extra stock/bonus options and passing that back to the employees that amke it all happen....

...sure, you'll get that negotiated and voted on...

ah-ha ha ha aha ha ha ha ha !!!!

Tejas