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 LAW!!!

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
If you honestly believe that I said attrition plays no part in upgrades, you are a fool. RTFP.

I will amend that from 'no' to 'minimal'
If you had ZERO growth with age 60 in place you wouldn't be upgrading anytime soon either. The main reason anybody has upgraded in the last 50 years is growth, not forced age discrimination.

You really seem to be downplaying the effect that the Thousands upon Thousands of pilot that have retired in the last 50 years had on every living pilot's career advancement. The ranks of the growth carriers were filled in large part by the furloughs of the failed carriers. Not a lot of fresh guys getting hired off the streets after Pan Am, Eastern, Braniff, et al went under. Moving people around to different carriers doesn't create jobs. Attrition Does. Growth is not nearly the driving factor that Age is. You wouldn't be upset if they allowed the retirees for the last five years come back and bump you back down to F/O pay or reserve?
 
Last edited:
Age 65 is also discriminatory. Why have a mandatory retirement age at all? Pass a physical, then you're qualified. The requirement to have a pilot under age 60 to babysit the geezer is discriminatory. If a pilot is qualified, he should be qualified period.

It's discriminatory to exclude the current retirees from coming back to the cockpit.

These pro-65 geezers are the biggest hypocrites of all.
 
Hi!

You're right, of course. The Age 65 limit should be changed. In fact, the JAA (European FAA) set up an Age 70 committee this year. Maybe the FAA will study it as well.

cliff
YIP
 
Hi!

You're right, of course. The Age 65 limit should be changed. In fact, the JAA (European FAA) set up an Age 70 committee this year. Maybe the FAA will study it as well.

cliff
YIP
*snicker*

On a different note, why the avatar change? Making a job switch soon...? :)

I have 3 good friends who fly for Emirates, they absolutely love it.
 
You're right, of course. The Age 65 limit should be changed. In fact, the JAA (European FAA) set up an Age 70 committee this year. Maybe the FAA will study it as well.

And it starts. You guys are a bunch of idiots. Society needs limits because people like you don't know when to quit. Since this is an "age discrimination", let's discuss dissolving the age requirement to drive, vote, fly, drink, be elected president, etc. This is an arguement based on greed, and greed only. You knew the rules when you got hired, now your upset by the same laws that benefited you during your career. Hopefully it will take another 6-7 yrs for the FAA to develope medical standards and you whiners will be out on the street.
 
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it? The legislation does not require the FAA to "develope" any medical standards.

You would know more than anybody!! Do you not read the "unless" statement in the new rule?? If they go no further than what we already know there would exist data to support changes.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top