Age 65 on fast track

[Fly4hire]

I suggest you look in the definition section of your contract. At NWA (we have ropes) "pilot" includes Capt, FO, IRC, and SO

 

[XJTAv8r]

That would be the case with the NPRM. With this language now attached to the FAA Authorization Bill, it will go into effect 30 days after enactment of the FAA Authorization Bill. I am assuming that the text of this will not be stripped from the FAA Authorization Bill AND that the FAA Authorization Bill passes before the 110th Congress adjourns (all bills not passed prior to adjournment die when Congress adjourns). Don't get your hopes up on the bill dying; the 110th won't adjourn until ~Dec 2008.

Here's a suggested template for anyone who wants to write their local Senators in Washington: (feel free to edit)

Dear Senator:

The current FAA Authorization Bill, S1300, has emerged from committee containing a provision (SEC. 706) to change the FAA’s mandatory retirement age from 60 to 65. The FAA is currently studying this issue through its Notice for Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) process and was eventually going to make an educated judgment whether to change the rule within the next one to two years. It is essential and proper that the NPRM process be allowed to proceed without being circumnavigated by this “fast track” piece of legislation. This will allow time for safety studies and public comment, instead of pushing the political and financial agendas of what is primarily a group of airline pilots who are nearing age 60 and want to quickly extend their most profitable earnings years. This is a Federal Aviation Regulation issue, not a Congressional issue and I request that you ensure that the issue receives proper consideration through the FAA’s NPRM rather than buried deep within an authorization bill. Thank you for your time.


Andy,
Since this has left committee, would you suggest writing anyone else besides your 2 state Senators?

 

[Andy]

Also the FAA reauthorization bill is going to be highly controversial with its funding based on a user fee system. I am not so sure S1300 will ever pass.

Yeah, I didn't bother mentioning that because I do not want to give anyone the hope that the FAA Authorization Bill will die. I'm hoping that it does and was aware of the user fees; that alone will jam this bill in Congress for a while. However, we're fighting a much harder uphill battle with ALPA working behind the scenes in favor of 65.

 

[Andy]

Andy,
Since this has left committee, would you suggest writing anyone else besides your 2 state Senators?

Yes, the FAA Authorization Bill has to be married up with its counterpart in the House. IF the text of S 65 (HR 1225) is not included in the House version, this would eventually have to be reconciled between the House and Senate versions. So, the target audience in the house would be the House members of the House Subcommittee on Aviation. Here's a link: http://transportation.house.gov/aviation/index.shtml

 

[XJTAv8r]

Here's the contact info. for those who want to write their Senators about this proposed bill:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

 

[Hawker800]

Foreign carriers doing it in US airspace. Hard not to justify. Doesn't the FAA Authorization have to be in place by 10/1/07? It is coming. Anyway when all the young folks reach age 60, they might be glad this happened. User fees. The airlines are pushing this big time. They just might accept age 65 to get the fees. They would love to put General Aviation out of business.
If that does happen, where do the age 60 guys go if the age does not change.

 

[Beetle007]

In my limiting ability to comprehend congressional legalese but I read it saying if you are over 60 on the effective date your done.

Then will come the lawsuits.

You are not done.This congressional legislation is different than the FAA version. It would allow any pilots over the age of 60 to continue as a pilot (regardless of when they turned 60). For example, If I am age 62 when they pass this legislation, I could seek employment at any airline as a pilot(opposite of the FAA version).

If I am already employeed as a pilot, I can continue as a pilot until I reach the age of 65. I consider flight engineers to be a pilot, and most collective bargaining agreements do also. So a 62 year old flight engineer could move back to the left seat. It all depends on the legal definition (and the definition of your pilot contracts) of a pilot.

My guess, is that any pilot on the seniority list (regardless of if they are a flight engineer, sim instructor, etc) the day this goes into effect can continue as a pilot until the age of 65.

 

[Andy]

Doesn't the FAA Authorization have to be in place by 10/1/07?

No. The FAA can continue to be funded by CR (continuing resolution).

 

[Andy]

You are not done.This congressional legislation is different than the FAA version. It would allow any pilots over the age of 60 to continue as a pilot (regardless of when they turned 60). For example, If I am age 62 when they pass this legislation, I could seek employment at any airline as a pilot(opposite of the FAA version).

If I am already employeed as a pilot, I can continue as a pilot until I reach the age of 65. I consider flight engineers to be a pilot, and most collective bargaining agreements do also. So a 62 year old flight engineer could move back to the left seat. It all depends on the legal definition (and the definition of your pilot contracts) of a pilot.

My guess, is that any pilot on the seniority list (regardless of if they are a flight engineer, sim instructor, etc) the day this goes into effect can continue as a pilot until the age of 65.

Bad info in your post, Beetle.

1) Congressional legislation states clearly that if you're over 60 when this goes into effect, you're done. You cannot come back. It could be challenged in court, but will fail since the judicial branch will not override the legislative branch on this issue.
2) A flight engineer is NOT a pilot. A flight engineer is a flight crewmember. Read the title of part 63 of the FARs and then check out subpart B.

 

[FoxHunter]

Bad info in your post, Beetle.

1) Congressional legislation states clearly that if you're over 60 when this goes into effect, you're done. You cannot come back. It could be challenged in court, but will fail since the judicial branch will not override the legislative branch on this issue.
2) A flight engineer is NOT a pilot. A flight engineer is a flight crewmember. Read the title of part 63 of the FARs and then check out subpart B.

A S/O is a pilot at any other ALPA carrier that has them.

It also appears that the Senators disagree with your view. Then how should the know? Could be that is the insight you get when you write the legislation in question!


http://www.age60rule.com/docs/2007 Inhofe et al to Blakey.pdf