Floppy: Excuse me but you must have mistaken me for someone else. I personally or even collectively had nothing to do with the Frontier deal, or the Air Wisconsin screwing either. Those deals were just the usual work of UAL with maybe a little cooperation from ALPA. The membership had nothing to do with that. There was no vote. And besides, you are just trying to change the subject because you know the age-60/65 issue is all lies by you and your colleagues, as AVBUG as so accurately pointed out. My advice, get over this all and just go on to work. Preoccupation with things like this can be dangerous and maybe a medical disqualification factor.
I'm preoccupied with nothing more than trying to see benefit for this entire profession. I'm trying to understand why you won't take any initiative and only want to whine. Retirement age criteria needs to be part of the dialog and not just an arguement. It has already changed, it doesn't need to be defended. It needs to be further managed!! I don't know why we all can't agree that raising the retirement age should be a distant second to getting better retirement dollars for all pilots? But it's impossible and I don't think it's the junior guys fault. Let's forget who is junior and who is senior for a moment. The title of this thread is "Age 65 stinks". It does stink! In any scenario there are good, better, and best outcomes. On whatever level age 65 was "good" there is a "better" and a "best" outcome we should aspire to. It would be "better" than age 65 if every pilot had the money to retire at 60. It would be "best" if those who wanted to stay could, those who wanted to retire also could, and retirement age was superfulous [no limit] because every pilot had a secure economic backstop. Let's all unload the emotional part of this and try to see the big picture. There is no reason we can't improve things.