Age 65 2007

[ivauir]

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

Just because it is legal to discriminate against the young doesn't make it ethiical.

 

[Bringupthebird]

How about change the rule such that the PIC must be under 60 but that one could act as SIC until 65? That would be the most equal compromise; preserves career expectations of younger pilots yet keeps over 60 pilots flying and earning a paycheck for another 5 years.

That would turn a bad rule into an unworkable solution. What about the mid-level or junior F/O's who stagnate as Capt.'s come back to take the top slots? And the point is that the 60+ PIC is fully qualified to continue in his current position. Why penalize him for turning one day older?

The one-pilot-under-60 rule is a stopgap and everyone knows that. It will allow a controlled environment where it can be proven that pilots are fully capable of flying beyond 60. Once the data is in, I see an end to forced retirement, but somewhat more stringent oversight of medical issuance.

If the opponents of change argue the safety aspect - they lose based on statistics. If they argue on the basis of entitlement to promotion - they lose based on a lack of public sympathy. Any way you cut it, opposing the change to Age 60 is a losing proposition. The world has had to adapt to new realities and the piloting profession is not immune.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

How about change the rule such that the PIC must be under 60 but that one could act as SIC until 65? That would be the most equal compromise; preserves career expectations of younger pilots yet keeps over 60 pilots flying and earning a paycheck for another 5 years.

Personally, I would be fine with that. It might be a contractual mess for some, but fixable.

 

[EWR_FO]

Any way you cut it, opposing the change to Age 60 is a losing proposition. The world has had to adapt to new realities and the piloting profession is not immune.

Unfortunately for the pro-change crowd, Washington D.C. disagrees with you.

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

Wait a second, what about the perfectly healthy 64 year-old. Why should he be penalized? Are you concerned about him? Do you think he poses a safety risk? Why not focus the attention on medical qualification instead of age? And I'm certain that the bulk of the accidents in the futuer, as in the past will still be the result of pilot error, not pilot incapacitation, regardless of age.

The retirement age restriction is written for the weakest chain in the link not the strongest. Having a set age for retirement prevents some subjective call on when a pilot should retire. It also prevents doctor shopping. Even with the age 60 retirement, everyone knows the “easy” AME to go to, now imagine if the age moves to 65. It will be sure madness. Age 60 was written for your safety and the safety of all our passengers. It has well served the flying public for over 40 years.

We were all hired under the same rule, have known the risks, and should have planned for it. There were other airlines in past years that went belly up and the rule was never changed. Do these current pilots think they are some sort of prima donnas that deserve to keep their high-paying job for another five years at our expense?

The age 65 crowd is concerned about one thing and one thing only – more money in their back pocket. The only pilots that truly win in any 65 ruling are those at the top of the seniority list or those in the 55 – 60 age bracket. It’s a million dollar plus windfall for them. The rest of us will find ourselves working in an already unstable industry for an extra five years for very little gain. Run the numbers.

If this group is successful in its quest for Age 65, it will be the worst thing to hit the airlines since B-scale in the 80’s. B-scale took almost 15 years to run its course. Age 65 will continue to harm the junior pilots for a similar length of time if it’s implemented.

AA767AV8TOR

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

The one-pilot-under-60 rule is a stopgap and everyone knows that. It will allow a controlled environment where it can be proven that pilots are fully capable of flying beyond 60. Once the data is in, I see an end to forced retirement, but somewhat more stringent oversight of medical issuance.

This has got to be one of the most selfish schemes yet on this thread. So now you want to conduct age tests with passengers on board. Do you think the flying public will approve of your idea?

ICAO along with the FAA is considering putting a pilot under the age of 60 along with a pilot above age 60 for one reason and one reason only -- SAFETY – everyone knows that!!!! What a deal for the junior guys, we get to baby-sit this selfish generation of pilots and guess what – we get to do it at 30% - 40% less pay plus the stagnation it will cause. How fair is that????!!!!

You’re living in a dream world.

AA767AV8TOR

 

[Bringupthebird]

The retirement age restriction is written for the weakest chain in the link not the strongest. Having a set age for retirement prevents some subjective call on when a pilot should retire. It also prevents doctor shopping. Even with the age 60 retirement, everyone knows the “easy” AME to go to, now imagine if the age moves to 65. It will be sure madness. Age 60 was written for your safety and the safety of all our passengers. It has well served the flying public for over 40 years.

So now doctor shopping is now the problem? Why not deal with that issue? You could apply for your medical online and FAA Aeromedical randomly spits out who you are to see based on location. Focus on the problem at hand, and don't wast your time inventing phantom problems. If the problems of 60-year old incapacitation are real and documented, then address them, but don't use an arbitrary age limit to avoid dealing with the problem.

We were all hired under the same rule, have known the risks, and should have planned for it. There were other airlines in past years that went belly up and the rule was never changed. Do these current pilots think they are some sort of prima donnas that deserve to keep their high-paying job for another five years at our expense?

This rule change has been gathering momentum for 10 years and has been embraced by ICAO. Folks should have been planning for it. And do you suppose ICAO flagrantly disregards safety?

The opponents to change are the cake and eat it crowd who have an Ozzie and Harriet view of retirement at 60 from the left seat and maybe a little military pension and VA health care to boot. They aren't about to let the reality of the carnage of the past 6 years upset their fantasy retirement. And if it takes tossing those who have had the least amount of time to prepare under the bus to do it, that's life!

Everyone assumes that the ones fighting hardest for this are greedy top-scalers. In fact most of the work is being done by average pilots who have experienced the pain, firsthand or by association, of starting over again at the bottom, through no fault of their own. They face retirement as mid-level F/O's at 60 with no retireee health insurance, no A-plan, and little likelihood of landing a job because of the stigma the FAA puts on the number 60.

The age 65 crowd is concerned about one thing and one thing only – more money in their back pocket. The only pilots that truly win in any 65 ruling are those at the top of the seniority list or those in the 55 – 60 age bracket. It’s a million dollar plus windfall for them. The rest of us will find ourselves working in an already unstable industry for an extra five years for very little gain. Run the numbers.

Ok, that's relatively easy. What do you expect to make during your final year? Multiply that by 5. Given the apparent zeal for leaving aviation at 60 (at least that's what people say) why would you expect more than 30% of those eligible to take advantage of age 65? And of those that do, their assumed decrepit health should prevent them from continuing to hold a medical, so take another 50% out there. Now you're down to 15%. As we enter a growth cycle, this 15% could delay the average upgrade time by a few months, but it could mean the world to those who need the opportunity to continue earning and rebuilding a shattered career.

If this group is successful in its quest for Age 65, it will be the worst thing to hit the airlines since B-scale in the 80’s. B-scale took almost 15 years to run its course. Age 65 will continue to harm the junior pilots for a similar length of time if it’s implemented.

The B-scale pilots could have chosen not to come to work at an airline that had a B-scale. No can choose not to turn 60.

 

[Andy]

but it could mean the world to those who need the opportunity to continue earning and rebuilding a shattered career.

Shattered career? Do some research. The piloting profession has always been that way. A series of peaks and valleys.
Their careers are no more or less shattered than those that came before them and those that come after, such as myself (on furlough for almost 5 years).
Stop the melodrama.

 

[Andy]

What do you expect to make during your final year? Multiply that by 5.

More like multiply by 4, eventually multiply by 3. You'll still work an additional 5 years, but for less money.

 

[Andy]

They aren't about to let the reality of the carnage of the past 6 years upset their fantasy retirement.

Carnage of the last 6 years? More melodrama! More like 60 years! Weren't you paying attention to the boom and bust cycles in the industry in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s? It's always been feast or famine for pilots. If you were foolish enough to think that the feast would last forever, you need to blame yourself for being gullible enough to believe everything that Kit Darby pumps out. And it's even more foolish of you to believe what management told you.

 

[munson]

The opponents to change are the cake and eat it crowd who have an Ozzie and Harriet view of retirement at 60 from the left seat and maybe a little military pension and VA health care to boot. They aren't about to let the reality of the carnage of the past 6 years upset their fantasy retirement. And if it takes tossing those who have had the least amount of time to prepare under the bus to do it, that's life!

Lets see, you want to have received the benefit of retirement of those at 60, yet push it to 65 for yourself....yeah I see how WE are cake and eat it too crowd. Dude, where do you come off. Loss of mental capacity is one of the things to go. And you know what, that is life. DID YOU NOT SEE THIS COMING (age 60). HAVE YOU NEVER SEEN AN AIRLINE GO OUT OF BUSINESS? Blame someone else crowd.

 

[Bringupthebird]

9/11/01 was far more than a minor downturn in the economy.

Suppose you were in your 50's waiting by the phone to get off furlough. That 5 years of additional opportunity would be of great value to you. Abolishing Age 60 for you at your age now would likely extend your furlough by a very small amount, plus if you choose, you have 5 additional years to recoup the losses of your current furlough. I've been on furlough myself, only my airline liquidated about 9 months after I went on furlough. And I've started at the bottom 6 times in my career and I'm only in my early 40's.

Keep Age 60? Sure for me it would be great. I'd get to hold a line, bid better equipment, but knowing all the while there were others for whom a small sacrifice could yield great benefit.

I don't know what the future of my airline holds, heck I could be out of work tomarrow (seen that before). But I would still advocate the elimination of Age 60 because it's the right thing to do.

 

[EWR_FO]

Abolishing Age 60 for you at your age now would likely extend your furlough by a very small amount, plus if you choose, you have 5 additional years to recoup the losses of your current furlough.

Guys on furlough are not interested in dealing with "likely." It is impossible for anyone to predict how long any furloughed would be extended, the only thing you can say is they WILL be extended.

 

[capt_zman]

Keep Age 60? Sure for me it would be great. I'd get to hold a line, bid better equipment, but knowing all the while there were others for whom a small sacrifice could yield great benefit.


Please give me a break. You want to give a small sacrifice (up to 5 years) so that others may benefit? There are a million different things that could happen to you in those 5 years of sacrifice, do you think 1 of these people who "benefitted" from your sacrifice would give one hoot about you?

Screw the sacrifice, I'm sure most, if not all of us, have ridden the sacrifice boat long enough.

 

[Andy]

9/11/01 was far more than a minor downturn in the economy.

Gulf war I was far more than a minor downturn in the economy in the early 90s.
Stagflation in the 80s was far more than a minor downturn in the economy.
The Arab oil embargo in the 70s was far more than a minor downturn in the economy.
Need I go on?

To quote George Santanya: "Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

 

[Freight Dog]

Bringup... you can spin it whichever way you want it. Changing the age 60 rule would be windfall by minority on account of the majority, and that's bullsh*t.

Funny, you should talk about how divided we are...
If APAAD would change their agenda and their name to APABA (Airline Pilots Against Bankruptcy Abuse) and fought to get the pension reform passed instead of changing age 60, you would truly have a unified pilot front.

Instead, your generation's screwups continue...

You need to go away.

 

[skiandsurf]

Took my kids out to dinner last night. I told the waitress that my 15 yr old would like a kids menu. She said that the kids menu were for kids 10 and under. I told her thats ok then, she'll have a cheeseburger, a cold beer and lets start with a shot of tequila.

Where does it end?

 

[Phaedrus]

ski, that was funny. Two Fingers or Cuervo?

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

Everyone assumes that the ones fighting hardest for this are greedy top-scalers. In fact most of the work is being done by average pilots who have experienced the pain, firsthand or by association, of starting over again at the bottom, through no fault of their own.

Bringup,

That's an outright lie.

AA767AV8TOR

 

[Bringupthebird]

I'm sure you wish the cliche' was true, but it's not. I've been working on this for almost 10 years and know many of the guys in the trenches fighting along side me.

Of course perpetuating a negative stereotype might be your only way to gain any sympathy for a disciminatory position. Let me know how that works out for 'ya.

 

[Freight Dog]

Bring... once again, how is Age 60 discrimination and 65 is not?

Secondly, the ARC results were pretty funny when you look at it. The people who wanted it were SWAPA and SWA management, JetBlue pilots and JetBlue management. That counted as 4 entities. Nice....

Thirdly, if you truly cannot see and acknowledge the effect this would have on everyone below you, you are truly oblivious, and as such, you need to retire since you're starting to lose sight of things.

 

[AA717driver]

Nope...their only asking to change the rules to suit them after a career of advancement provided by the mandatory retirement of pilots senior to them.

YOU YOUNG PUNK! Soon as I take a $h!t, I'm gonna hobble over there and throttle you! TC

 

[BoilerUP]

YOU YOUNG PUNK! Soon as I take a $h!t, I'm gonna hobble over there and throttle you! TC

I know how to respect my elders...but don't break your hip getting out of the GEEEEEEEFIVE old man...

 

[Freight Dog]

YOU YOUNG PUNK! Soon as I take a $h!t, I'm gonna hobble over there and throttle you! TC

"Hey Old Man River... zip it or I'll break your hip..."

- Adam Sandler

 

[Flopgut]

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.

This post has bothered me for a while.

Those are all terribly difficult things to deal with, but are all part of life. Is that supposed to be a list of reasons pilots nearing retirement age should be allowed more time to work? If so, what exactly do you intend to take responsibility for on your own?

 

[The Prussian]

This post has bothered me for a while.

Yeah, it's been bothering me too. I think what he meant to say was that hopefully stupidity does not run in the family....

 

[Tram]

The quick and easy fix to this, all Part 121 pilots that reach the age of 60, can elect to retire or move to the right (FO) seat. The upgrades will not be effected. The 60 year olds continue flying (earning a paycheck).

I can't tell, is this serious or sarcastic?

 

[Tram]

How about change the rule such that the PIC must be under 60 but that one could act as SIC until 65? That would be the most equal compromise; preserves career expectations of younger pilots yet keeps over 60 pilots flying and earning a paycheck for another 5 years.

Well, the can already go sit TIC if the company has aircraft available..

I am on both sides of the fence.. I support the change, as my pops does not want to retire just yet.. He has 3 years left..

However, it would effect my "upgrade" just like it would effect everyone elses...

 

[HighSpeedClimb]

Hey, if you want to fly till 65 go right ahead, and if you want to become an F/O after that until age 70 I don't care, just allow me to retire at 60 with no penalties to my retirement amount guaranteed at 60!

 

[ivauir]

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

Just like the courts have decided that age 60 isn't discrimination either. Sorry.