Age 65 Stinks

[UndauntedFlyer]

Nope, no confusion here. It's been you all along avoiding a particular theme that you'd rather not address.

I'll repeat what I posted last night since you apparently weren't able to read or comprehend it.

"You blather on and on about how you "earned" that left seat and it was rightfully yours. Okay, fine. Were you born into that seat? No? How'd you get there? Oh, right, senior guys ahead of you retired so that you could move up to your lofty, God-given Left Seat. Don't forget, it wasn't that many years ago that you were a card carrying member of the "get out of my seat" crowd, just waiting for your chance to move up. I don't think you've even once acknowledged the fact that you moved up the list thanks to the Age 60 rule."

There is really no substance to your question; of course everyone moved up as those ahead of them moved out and into retirement.

I will also comment that I have never, as you insist I was, been part of the "get out of my seat crowd." Even when I was first hired I supported the ALPA position at the time, for the elimination of age-60 rule. When the ALPA position changed to hold onto age-60 I really didn't care much one way or the other because there was to be a pay off in the form of a large retirement, equal to final average earnings.

When retirement money was cut, following 9-11, it seemed only natural that ALPA, if it had any decency of right and wrong, would revert back to it's original position for the elimination of age-60. That didn't happen under ALPA’s Mr. Dwane Worthless, to his discredit as a whore bought and paid for by the "get out of my seat crowd." Finally, Prater was voted in and he replaced Mr. Worthless, kicking the present day "get out of my seat" crowd into their place. By that time it was too late for me but that's OK because I'm enjoying my time off living on Food Stamps and trying to pay for my 18-year old son's education.

Did I earn my left seat position, you ask? Of course, just the same as everyone and anyone else and all those in the future too. I know of no-one that doesn't earn the Captain job. I do know of some who don't get there through no fault of their own, just bad luck, but everyone who has the good fortune of becoming a Part 121 Captain earns that position through a lifetime of good decisions, good relationships, good health; and yes, good fortune too, all combined with some level of pilot skills with reasonable decision making ability. It's all a package that comes together to allow a person to earn that position. And yes, I earned it the same as everyone else.

As far as my benefiting from Age-60, I think if you consider my present position (unemployed as an airline pilot), I have not benefited from that rule. Yes, I was promoted to the left seat partially as a result of that rule and also because of the other factors I’ve mentioned, but did age-60 help me personally? The answer is no in the big picture. It is only those who are now working or will be working in the airline pilot profession from the date of the age age-65 rule change who benefit through a special amount of good fortune in this career. That means that you are one of the lucky ones, not I. It is your good fortune, not mine.

So now you call me names when it is you who have all the good luck to benefit from the rule change? You have heard of Tom Brokaw and his description of the "Greatest Generation," I must comment that your attitude seems to put you and your friends in the "Entitlement Generation," the Me, Me, Me, it’s all about Me generation.

If you will, please grow up and count the blessings of your generation in this profession: No age discrimination at age-60, women and minorities can compete evenly with WASP’s for the job, airline pilots you can be hired even if over age 30 to 35, various physical restrictions lifted such as 20/20 uncorrected vision and BP medications. You know, it wasn't too long ago that women and minorities, those who didn’t have 20/20 vision and those over age 30 to 35 couldn't be hired at a major airline. Those people just had to do something else and it was grossly unfair to deny these people the dream job of airline pilot. So all of these changes have been made in the interest of fairness, yet you yourself want to complain when you were probably one of the above groups who wouldn't have even had your application accepted just a few years ago. I can say that it was not your generation that made any of these above listed changes that benefit others. Far from it. You just want to make changes to screw others so you can advance your march to the left seat.

It is you and many of your colleagues that have this entitlement attitude; when in fact, you don't know how good you have it and seem to be unaware of what others have done for you. It seems that you just want more for yourself. Right?

Does this reply seem to address and answer your question?

 

[fullsail]

So my question to you and to all the others from the “get out of my seat crowd” is this: Would you be in favor of an Age-40 rule?

You ARE a member of the "get out of my seat crowd." You haven't fooled us here. When you were 45yrs old you had an agenda to get in the left seat as soon as possible. That easily makes you one of us. As you neared 60yrs old, your agenda changed. You didn't want to give up the seat. Or, you didn't want the seat "stolen" from you as you like to say. Face it, you wanted it BOTH ways.

You figure out how to enact age 40 retirement and I'll figure out a furlough in reverse seniority. You don't like that idea? Not too hard to come up with absurd hypotheticals is it?

 

[Flopgut]

Strike's never over for SCABS.

How do you like ALPA treating your career progression with less regard than Lorenzo had for pilots when he was in charge? Think about it. Prater has been just as bad for pilots as Lorenzo was. We knew Lorenzo stood against us, Prater is supposed to helping us. Why get tough with scabs and then excuse even worse behavior out of your union leadership?

 

[jbDC9]

There is really no substance to your question; of course everyone moved up as those ahead of them moved out and into retirement.

Just as there's really no substance to your lengthy posts. So of course everyone moved up huh? Even you?

I will also comment that I have never, as you insist I was, been part of the "get out of my seat crowd."

Well guess what? Not all of us are in the "get out of my seat" crowd either. Get hired on, do your time sitting sideways followed by years in the right seat, then move over when your number comes up. Same as you.

As far as my benefiting from Age-60, I think if you consider my present position (unemployed as an airline pilot), I have not benefited from that rule. Yes, I was promoted to the left seat partially as a result of that rule and also because of the other factors I’ve mentioned, but did age-60 help me personally? The answer is no in the big picture. It is only those who are now working or will be working in the airline pilot profession from the date of the age age-65 rule change who benefit through a special amount of good fortune in this career. That means that you are one of the lucky ones, not I. It is your good fortune, not mine.

Holy crap, you finally admitted (half heartedly) that you benefited from the Age 60 Rule. So how old were you when you hired on? As a youngster, you benefited from the rule as retirements above you moved you up the list. Now that you're past 60, it's a bad rule and you're adversely affected.

So all of these changes have been made in the interest of fairness, yet you yourself want to complain when you were probably one of the above groups who wouldn't have even had your application accepted just a few years ago. I can say that it was not your generation that made any of these above listed changes that benefit others. Far from it. You just want to make changes to screw others so you can advance your march to the left seat.

Is it difficult to carry that gigantic Holier Than Thou ego around? I'm not screwing anybody in my "march to the left seat". I'm already in the left seat, and I got there the same way you did; senior guys ahead of me retired so that I could move up. As far as making changes to screw others to move up, perhaps you should take that up with the lawmakers who instituted the rule back in 1959, well before you were hired.The current generation of younger pilots didn't change anything.

It is you and many of your colleagues that have this entitlement attitude; when in fact, you don't know how good you have it and seem to be unaware of what others have done for you. It seems that you just want more for yourself. Right?

Wrong. You're saying we younger guys (I'm 40 btw) have an entitlement attitude just because we wanted the same advancement opportunities that you had, and that makes us the "me me me entitlement" generation? You mentioned positive changes made in the interest of "fairness"... isn't it fair that we are able to move up the list the same way you did?? It certainly looks to me like you have your own entitlement issues to deal with.

Does this reply seem to address and answer your question?

I guess it doesn't really matter does it? You've got your ego and the blinders are on; you see it the way you see it that's that. So never mind, I'm done.

 

[avbug]

Why do you guys come back to aviation? Seriously, not trying to jump into the arguement here but why come back? After all the time away from home and then losing and getting your jobs back. Why not just do something else?

If there are furloughs at DL, chances are I won't be coming back. Money isn't here anymore and the time away from home is hard on a family.

Not everyone enters into aviation for the purpose of earning as much as possible and working as little as possible.

I began flying to fly...as much as possible. That program remains unchanged. When furloughed at one location, fly at another. Simple.

When you were 45yrs old you had an agenda to get in the left seat as soon as possible. That easily makes you one of us. As you neared 60yrs old, your agenda changed. You didn't want to give up the seat.

Here again we see the spoiled child me-want-it-now mentality. You're accusing the poster of living life. Do you not have an agenda to upgrade as soon as possible? You're faulting another for wanting to further his career?

The agenda never changed. The poster desired to advance his career and earn what he could earn. While at one time the law allowed him to work to age 60 only, finally an element of good sense has prevailed, and while still imperfect, the law has finally expanded to permit him to work a little longer...because he has the skill, ability, longevity, seniority, and ability to do so. He's put in his time to reach that point. You, of course, have not. You want him to sacrifice his seat, his job, and his seniority, so you can have it. You want his job, and again we hear the childish whine of "get out of my way, old man. I want your job." You're no different than the other whiners.

Whether others "benefited" from age 60 legislation in the past is irrelevant. Others upgraded when they were able, and flew as long as they could, today is no different. You don't like the law, you change it. Given the opportunity, you wouldn't fly until age 65?

Do this, same challenge given all the other hypocrites who squawk your same line: retire today, sacrifice your career in order for others beneath you to move up and advance themselves. You're prepared to do this, of course? You're asking others to do it for you...so of course you're prepared to put your money where your mouth his, let the rubber meet the road, and overcome your hypocrisy. You want others to retire for you...you retire for others. Do it now.

Not going to do it? You have no right to ask of others what you won't do yourself, and can therefore be given no more consideration or credence. You're preaching a selfish lie. Anything further you have may be safely dismissed as lying trash.

What are we going to do to stop Age 70 or no age limit? Just like guys said a 100 seat outsourced jet would never happen, there will be a push for increased age limits again. What are we going to do to make sure Age 70 doesn't happen?

Prevent age 70 or unlimited age for pilots? Hardly. We should embrace it and encourage it. I certainly do, wholeheartedly, and without reservation. I've little respect nor concern for those who don't.

 

[Flopgut]

Prevent age 70 or unlimited age for pilots? Hardly. We should embrace it and encourage it. I certainly do, wholeheartedly, and without reservation. I've little respect nor concern for those who don't.

I think your seniority beliefs are more a coping mechanism than anything at this point. I can assure you that John Prater does not share your vision. Nor do most of these guys who are cheering you on. Retirement age is just one way this generation is going to steal.

I want to know what your employer thinks about guys like you who believe your entitiled to work for them as long as you want? The position is in fact created by them, and they hired those junior to you in the same way they hired you, along with every single one of us. What makes you think the company is cool with granting some employees a cradle to grave position and others stay furloughed for most of the time? You speak to continuous increases in retirement age like your absolutely certain all these old guys are exactly what the company wants. They aren't. I think some better HR types would like to know where you get off thinking your that special?

Flight attendants provide a good example of why your vision sucks. At CAL we have some FAs with 50 years, hundreds with 30 + years. Some of these senior FAs are great. But for the most part they are really, really old. Elderly, in fact. To the point it overwhelms anything else about their personality and impacts their job and the airline's product. When we launch a new destination that is even semi cool they are the first to bid it. We send a brand new plane, out of a brand new terminal, loaded to the hilt with premium service items, and more than half the FAs look, smell, and act like they escaped an assisted living facility. This is harsh, but true enough. And when you line that flight up next to Singapore or Emirates you can't win.

Same problem exists with what you desire in a constantly increasing retirement age for pilots. We would get to a point where a widebody upgrade would only fly for a few months before the medical'd out or hit retirement age. That's not how you want to run an airline.

 

[Flopgut]

Why do you guys come back to aviation? Seriously, not trying to jump into the arguement here but why come back? After all the time away from home and then losing and getting your jobs back. Why not just do something else?

If there are furloughs at DL, chances are I won't be coming back. Money isn't here anymore and the time away from home is hard on a family. Just isn't worth it to me, especially over and over again. What a headache! It's no way to live.

Just my thoughts though.

Anyone who doubts this parallel I'm drawing between the CAL strke/Lorenzo years and 65 should count up the number of pilots advising others to quit. We're at the same point we were back then. Except that there are fewer opportunities and the economy is worse.

BTW, I don't necessarily disagree with your advice Linedriver, but we ought to aspire to a better solution.

 

[Linedriver]

Anyone who doubts this parallel I'm drawing between the CAL strke/Lorenzo years and 65 should count up the number of pilots advising others to quit. We're at the same point we were back then. Except that there are fewer opportunities and the economy is worse.

BTW, I don't necessarily disagree with your advice Linedriver, but we ought to aspire to a better solution.

I do see your point and I agree with you, there needs to be a better solution and I would never advise anyone to leave their job. I was just curious about others motivation.

In the end I work for money and priorities change as I get older - security and stability have quickly moved to the front.

Don't think there will be any one particular thing, or things, to change that will make this industry the industry it once was. The change may come when the resistance comes from the bottom, as in the quality and experience level of the applicant pool. The Colgan crash earlier this year is probably an early indication of this.

 

[Flopgut]

Don't think there will be any one particular thing, or things, to change that will make this industry the industry it once was. The change may come when the resistance comes from the bottom, as in the quality and experience level of the applicant pool. The Colgan crash earlier this year is probably an early indication of this.

I couldn't agree more.

Beyond that, I believe that as more is revealed about the philosophies and personalities of the Avbugs and Undaunteds of the airline pilot world even the "pilot mill" pools will dry up. Few are going to want to embark on a career like this only to one day find themselves shoulder to shoulder with those types.

 

[avbug]

I can assure you that John Prater does not share your vision. Nor do most of these guys who are cheering you on.

I have no concern for what Prater thinks, nor do I have any connection with him. His opinion is, therefore, irrelevant to me. That he may or may not share my "vision," means nothing.

I know nothing about others cheering, but I couldn't care less about what they think, either. I can think for myself.

I want to know what your employer thinks about guys like you who believe your entitiled to work for them as long as you want? The position is in fact created by them, and they hired those junior to you in the same way they hired you, along with every single one of us. What makes you think the company is cool with granting some employees a cradle to grave position and others stay furloughed for most of the time? You speak to continuous increases in retirement age like your absolutely certain all these old guys are exactly what the company wants. They aren't. I think some better HR types would like to know where you get off thinking your that special?

You may be deeply concerned about what my employer may think, but I'm certainly not. It's irrelevant. This is a matter of law. An act of congress. It's a done deal.

I said nothing about being entitled to work for my employer as long as I want, nor did I say anything about being entitled to work. I may or may not work for my employer for a given period of time. I am permitted by an act of congress to work until 65 for a Part 121 carrier if I choose and I am able. I'm not entitled to anything...but I am legally allowed.

What the company wants isn't entirely relevant, either. The company may not simply hire then fire when they feel the employee is too old. Certain protections do exist. The company isn't entitled to carte blanche authority to dispose of senior pilots with abandon.

The fact is that a pilot who has put in more time with the company than you, who has more experience than you, who has held the position longer than you, has more opportunity to withstand an impending furlough, just as he or she has more opportunity or liklihood of bidding a chosen line, time off, etc. It's no surprise, then, that should you get furloughed, the age 62 pilot who has 20 more years with the company than you may very well retain his seat. The fact is that the ability to remain past 60 isn't senior generations stealing out of your pocket, but an act of Congress and is law. If any entitlement exists at all, it's the ability of a citizen to act under the law, in accordance with the law, with such privilege as that law may allow.

Presently that privilege is the opportunity to work until age 65, under Part 121, if able.

A pilot outside tiny little stuffy world of the airlines, of course, may work much longer than that.

Same problem exists with what you desire in a constantly increasing retirement age for pilots. We would get to a point where a widebody upgrade would only fly for a few months before the medical'd out or hit retirement age. That's not how you want to run an airline.

I don't want to run an airline. No interest at all.

You're going to predicate public law on where an airline pilot might be able to upgrade? I think not.

Highly experienced, qualified pilots are a resource which should not be discarded for age or for your own selfish desires. Whereas you want what others have and think they should give it to you, you haven't hardly established a valid reason for restricting age beyond what you think should be yours.

As before, you want what others have, and cannot have it. This is greed, envy, covetness, avarice, and an unsavory trait which is unprofessional, unwarranted, unattractive, and juvinile.

Again it boils down to "get out of my way, old man. I want your job."

You're fully prepared to sacrifice your own job today to give it to those beneath you, then? Very well. We await word that you've given notice, as a good faith sign that you're not the hypocrite you appear to be. You may defer posting again until you can share the good news.