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 65 now dead for the 109th Congress

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
perspective

Really? I did it for over 6 YEARS and was happy as a clam. That's because hiring had stopped and pilots at other airlines were getting furloughed. If you need a job, Jurassic Jet Plumber looks pretty good. :)

While you were a plummer I was flying D0228s and E120s around Chicago Midway, freezing my arse off, and couldn't get a job anywhere else because other pilots were already furloughed. Yeah, we've all had it rough. I still like a window seat better.

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
FAA Set to Raise
Retirement Age
For Pilots to 65


[FONT=times new roman,times,serif][FONT=times new roman,times,serif]By ANDY PASZTOR
December 11, 2006; Page A3
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
The Federal Aviation Administration, moving away from its longstanding policy that airline pilots must retire at age 60, wants to let them work in the cockpit as many as five years longer, according to industry and government officials.
The agency's emerging support for raising the mandatory retirement age to 65 comes as foreign airlines and regulators are adopting similar changes. If left unchanged, the current rules over the next decade will require thousands of passenger and cargo commercial pilots -- some projections total more than 30,0000 aviators -- to retire at age 60, regardless of their health, according to industry officials.
QUESTION OF THE DAY

Vote: What should be the mandatory retirement age for U.S. commercial jet pilots?


After repeatedly opposing similar efforts to change the rules, some U.S. airlines and pilots groups are beginning to soften their stances. Retaining larger numbers of senior pilots could help some airlines keep a lid on pension expenses and reduce training costs as younger pilots fill in behind retirees, while pension cutbacks at some carriers make working longer more important to some pilots. The 60-year age limit was a compromise between unions and airlines in the 1950s over economics and hasn't been changed since.
According to people familiar with the situation, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey is crafting the new position slowly but steadily. Before spelling it out publicly, she is expected to gauge the willingness of incoming Democratic leaders in Congress to take the lead in advocating such moves. Input from the White House and Department of Transportation could affect the agency's actions. Bills calling for the policy shift failed to pick up enough traction this year. A spokeswoman for Ms. Blakey said the industry can "expect a decision relatively soon."
Finalizing new regulations could take 18 months or more, but FAA lawyers are mulling over whether to apply the new standard to currently retired pilots between 60 and 65, according to one person familiar with the process. Seniority rules could make it extremely difficult to make any change retroactive.
The FAA's apparent change of heart is influenced by the current tight market globally for pilots as well as the lack of recent scientific data demonstrating any clear-cut erosion of safety from extending the careers of pilots, according to one person familiar with the matter. In addition, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission concluded the 60-year age limit is discriminatory.
Keeping the age limit at 60 is becoming more difficult to defend, following a move by the International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations agency that sets nonbinding global safety standards, to raise retirement ages at airlines world-wide.
ICAO said last month airline pilots could safely stay behind the controls until they turn 65, as long as the other pilot in the same cockpit is younger than 60. Even before that, a few foreign carriers were flying into and out of U.S. airports with copilots older than age 60.
Proponents of change see pressure building. "If Congress fails to act in the next three months, the FAA will be prepared to go to rulemaking" anyway, said Gary Cottingham, a retired US Airways Group Inc. pilot spearheading a group called Airline Pilots Against Age Discrimination.
An FAA-sponsored study group set up to clarify safety and economic issues didn't make specific recommendations in a recent report.
A spokesman for the Air Line Pilots Association, the pilots union that has opposed changes on safety grounds, said "changing the age is a lot more complex than most [people] would realize, especially when it comes to scheduling crews" for long-distance or international flying.
The union recognizes political momentum is building for change. A spokesman said "regardless of what the FAA does, our pilots will have to find their own way of dealing with" the issue.
Already, union leaders have negotiated labor contracts with at least two Canadian carriers explicitly allowing pilots to stay past the age of 60. And pilot age hasn't been a factor in any of the high-profile jetliner crashes in recent years.
Robert "Hoot" Gibson, a former astronaut who was forced to retire from Southwest Airlines Co. in October, said today's situation is "ludicrous" because "it isn't based on medical evidence." He said retirement should hinge on the specific health of pilots, who are required to pass an FAA-sanctioned medical exam every six months in order to remain on flight duty.
To defuse safety worries, one possible compromise may be to mandate "more-extensive physicals and an increased level of scrutiny" as soon as pilots turn 60, according to Richard Healing, an aviation consultant and former member of the National Transportation Safety Board. "It needs to be done right" to reassure critics, he said.
Advocates of the age 65 rule, including Mr. Gibson, are pleased senior agency officials are starting out with a more-neutral position, rather than dismissing the idea outright as they did in the past. "For the first time, the FAA has said it is neutral" on the topic, Mr. Gibson said.
Earlier this year, Jim Ballough, director of the FAA's flight standards office, signaled the more-flexible approach when he told an international industry conference in Portland, Oregon, that agency officials were "discussing the issue internally" and "looking at our options."
The debate coincides with other efforts to revise traditional pilot scheduling and training rules globally. U.S. and foreign airlines, for instance, are mulling ways to have pilots fly longer-than-normal shifts on ultralong-range international trips. And ICAO is pushing new standards requiring less actual flight time before copilots can receive a license.
To keep the retirement issue in the limelight, Mr. Cottingham and his advocacy organization for 60 and older pilots are contemplating asking the FAA to approve a bunch of exemptions for particular aviators. In an interview last week, Mr. Cottingham said such waivers were granted routinely to pilots of regional aircraft in the late 1990s, and his group plans to start asking the FAA chief for similar exemptions for soon-to-be retirees.
Low-fare domestic carriers Southwest and JetBlue Airways have told the FAA they are eager to start implementing a rule change to help pilots over 60. But legacy carriers with international routes so far have been reluctant to buck their pilot unions by openly supporting such a shift.
Indicating a strategy for the coming fight, a spokesman for ALPA, which recently elected a new president, said "having Congress take the lead and avoid a full-scale rulemaking procedure" by the FAA would "have negative ramifications down the road."
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected]
 
Really? I did it for over 6 YEARS and was happy as a clam. That's because hiring had stopped and pilots at other airlines were getting furloughed. If you need a job, Jurassic Jet Plumber looks pretty good. :)

What's the matter, Tom, your life wasn't ruined because you didn't check out as CA in three years? ;) Four years at the panel for me (no furlough, either...well, until later but that's another thread).

Too many people (some right here on this board) have lost their pensions. Many lost their pensions within 5 years of being forced to retire. To those who say "tough, you knew the rules before you started" I'll reply: "tough, you knew nothing is guaranteed in this life".

The anti-change crowd doesn't give a $h!t about anyone else--they just want THEIR 'guaranteed' CA seat at the top. Well, why should anyone care about your career and what you think YOU 'deserve'?

Another 5 years in the left seat making $130/hr. isn't going to make up for the loss of a couple million dollars in stolen pensions but it will mean they won't have to eat dog food once they retire. AND, contrary to some of the ignorant and incredibly arrogant posts, not everyone who is in favor of flying past 60 needs to do it because they have "two ex wives and three houses".

Another 5 years in the right seat won't send you packing off to work at Wal-mart to eat.

I don't want to fly past age 60. I probably will have to because of my furlough at age 45. If given the choice between spending my retirement living from paycheck to paycheck and working at Wal-mart or delaying YOUR upgrade by 5 years, well... Let's just say I'll give you the same respect and understanding you're giving those who have lost their pension through no fault of their own. Fair enough?

Have a nice day. :) TC
 
Last edited:
Funny, This was dropped along with all pending spending bills by the current leadership. However, The incoming leadership says they will be working longer days and hours from now on. It appears the three day work week for congress is gone.
 
Some highlights:

"The FAA's apparent change of heart is influenced by the current tight market globally for pilots as well as the lack of recent scientific data demonstrating any clear-cut erosion of safety from extending the careers of pilots,"

Yeah, riiiiight! We don't have enough pilots? Anybody have an anecdotal information to refute that?

"If Congress fails to act in the next three months, the FAA will be prepared to go to rulemaking" anyway, said Gary Cottingham,

Ah, the oracle! If you're trying to figure out how the FAA will address the issue, don't listen to those chumps that actually, you know, run the FAA....listen to a guy with a self-serving interest.

"To defuse safety worries, one possible compromise may be to mandate "more-extensive physicals and an increased level of scrutiny" as soon as pilots turn 60, according to Richard Healing, an aviation consultant and former member of the National Transportation Safety Board. "It needs to be done right" to reassure critics, he said."

Woo hoo! Tougher physicals and more Big Brother watching us! Sign me up! If it helps even one numbskull still paying off his first two wives work just a little bit longer...it'll all be worth it!

"Low-fare domestic carriers Southwest and JetBlue Airways have told the FAA they are eager to start implementing a rule change to help pilots over 60."

"eager"
 
aA
FAA Set to Raise
Retirement Age
For Pilots to 65

[FONT=times new roman,times,serif][FONT=times new roman,times,serif]By ANDY PASZTOR[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times,serif]December 11, 2006; Page A3[/FONT]
[/FONT]

Hmmm. No quotes from the FAA for the article. Only this: Earlier this year, Jim Ballough, director of the FAA's flight standards office, signaled the more-flexible approach when he told an international industry conference in Portland, Oregon, that agency officials were "discussing the issue internally" and "looking at our options."
One quote from an unnamed ALPA spokesman stating, "changing the age is a lot more complex than most [people] would realize, especially when it comes to scheduling crews" for long-distance or international flying.
All of the attributable quotes are from the pro-change crowd. Very one sided. Wonder who approached Mr Pasztor with this story?
Anyone? Anyone? Ferris? Anyone?
UF did the same stuff with a couple of Chicago Trib reporters.

Makes for good press but lacks substance. The easiest position for the FAA to maintain is the status quo.
And very few people care. A change will effect less than 1/20th of 1% of the population. It's pretty hard to get the public the public to sympathize for such a small minority, especially 'rich' pilots.

I find it interesting that the pro-change crowd, unsuccessful in getting the FAA to make a regulatory change, tried the judicial system and failed, then tried the legislative system and failed, has now gone back to the FAA pushing for a regulatory change. How long before they go back to the judicial system?
 
U.S. FAA wants to raise pilot-retirement age to 65 from 60
Marketwatch - The story behind the numbers
3:21:51 AM ET 12/11/2006

TEL AVIV (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. Federal Aviation Administratin wants to raise the mandatory retirement age for pilots to 65 from 60, The Wall Street Journal Online reported, citing people familar with the situation. The move, which is in line with policies of non-U.S. airlines and regulatory agencies, could help domestic carriers control their pension costs, the paper said. FAA Administrator Marion Blakey wants to sound out incoming Democratic Party lawmakers on the idea before detailing it publicly, the Journal reported.
 
What's the matter, Tom, your life wasn't ruined because you didn't check out as CA in three years? ;) Four years at the panel for me (no furlough, either...well, until later but that's another thread).

Too many people (some right here on this board) have lost their pensions. Many lost their pensions within 5 years of being forced to retire. To those who say "tough, you knew the rules before you started" I'll reply: "tough, you knew nothing is guaranteed in this life".

The anti-change crowd doesn't give a $h!t about anyone else--they just want THEIR 'guaranteed' CA seat at the top. Well, why should anyone care about your career and what you think YOU 'deserve'?

Another 5 years in the left seat making $130/hr. isn't going to make up for the loss of a couple million dollars in stolen pensions but it will mean they won't have to eat dog food once they retire. AND, contrary to some of the ignorant and incredibly arrogant posts, not everyone who is in favor of flying past 60 needs to do it because they have "two ex wives and three houses".

Another 5 years in the right seat won't send you packing off to work at Wal-mart to eat.

I don't want to fly past age 60. I probably will have to because of my furlough at age 45. If given the choice between spending my retirement living from paycheck to paycheck and working at Wal-mart or delaying YOUR upgrade by 5 years, well... Let's just say I'll give you the same respect and understanding you're giving those who have lost their pension through no fault of their own. Fair enough?

Have a nice day. :) TC

It WILL screw up labor negotiations! I think we all wanted a raise!? Change this age, and our employers will try to tell us "You just got a HUGE raise, you get to work till 65, Yay for you!" That will be the exact rational when a PEB trys to stop a strike. Of course to anyone who wants to work past 60, it is a raise and that minority of pilots could care less about anyone but themselves. It's a HUGE paycut for anyone who wants to retire at 60. It's just more stupid pilot stuff. The senior guys will take the money from the junior ones... gov and mgts are more than happy to help them out.

And don't think for a moment 65, or anything else, will be enough. They'll be coming back for more of the junior guys' money.

If they had any ba!!s they'd try to get their pensions back.
 
Has anyone voted or posted a reply to the Age 60 thread on the WSJ message board? I put my vote in.

Vote: What should be the mandatory retirement age for U.S. commercial jet pilots?

I just voted too. If it aint broke...don't fix it.

...but I'm afraid the geezer clowns have made opinions on this issue like p!ssing in the wind...the vocal minority wins again

well at least the 5 additional years as an FO will be spent as a senior FO

I can already imagine the negotiating effort the company will expend during the next round to lower my A fund multiplier, B fund contribution and 401K match since I'll have 5 more years before I walk away from this mess.
 
Probably a true statement but she was appointed by Pres. Bill Clinton if my recall is correct.;)


I checked her bio. Sworn in Sept. 13, 2002. Pretty sure Bill Clinton was not the President in 2002. It doesn't really matter, whatever happens with this age 60 bill, somebody will find some way to blame Bill Clinton for it.
 
Acceptance

I don't want to fly past age 60. I probably will have to because of my furlough at age 45.

Good luck, and I hope you can still afford to retire by age 60, as you planned. I had to go at 55 to save my lump sum--took a big penalty, lost the annuity, and pay 100% of my medical insurance. HOWEVER...I discovered that I don't need as much income as I thought, that retirement is fantastic, and that the job I remember doesn't exist any more. It is what it is.
 
Well it's still not changed and all you guys still have to retire period!!! GET OUT OF MY SEAT.. you knew it was 60 when you signed up. TOO BAD
 
I am not specifically against the age change. What concerns me is the CEO that addresses the now aged pilot group and says: "Holy cow! You guys and gals now can make more than a half a MILLION more dollars (+/-) in your extended careers! You mean to tell me you want a snap back to your higher wages too??"

Guess what? I WANT MY "MORE THAN A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS" NOW! That way I can enjoy it after age 60.:beer:
 
Just maybe the FAT Lady was a signing a little too soon, Ah........................


"Before spelling it out publicly, she is expected to gauge the willingness of incoming Democratic leaders in Congress to take the lead in advocating such moves."



Blakely said this rule could go into effect in the Spring, and Congress will be back after Xmas. The Democrats will never go for it. Your SWA lobbyst even stated that.

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom