Age 65. Which airline hiring plans will be affected?

[FoxHunter]

Now he is, but how long did he sit on the non-members roster? Quite a while if memory serves. And I don't think he had to pay back-dues either, since FedEx wasn't an agency shop until the new contract. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You're wrong on all counts!

 

[PCL_128]

You're wrong on all counts!

My apologies then. Must be thinking of a different FedEx guy.

 

[Falconjet]

You're wrong on all counts!

That is an out and out lie.

In this case PCL, you were correct.

George found religion about two years ago and paid up his back taxes so to speak.

He has been working against the union from the "inside" ever since.

He is a "member" in name only.

Also, big fella, the FAA is currently running under a CR for this year. Your APAAD buddies telling you that this thing will get passed by Oct 1st are the ones you ought to sue for filling your head with fantasies.

Next Diiiiiicklicker (and his buddies) will be using up his sick account trying to remain in his current seat until the law changes. That will add to the confusion and lead to further law suits to settle the real "intent" of Congress.

Nice, independent contractor mentality, bringing the company down on the rest of who aren't milking our sick accounts in an effort to prevent the loss of their precious left seat.

Bunch of dooooooooooooochebags.

FJ

 

[PCL_128]

That is an out and out lie.

In this case PCL, you were correct.

Thanks for the real info. I thought that was the case. I'm surprised he actually paid his back dues, though.

Bunch of dooooooooooooochebags.

Ain't that the truth.

 

[jdec141]

Thanks for the real info. I thought that was the case. I'm surprised he actually paid his back dues, though.



Ain't that the truth.

my apologies i didn't realize he just stepped up to the plate a couple of years ago. Its kinda sad a guy that has already earned a complete fully funded retirement can't let it go so he can die with money in the bank!

 

[BID]

As far as Delta goes, we are currently hiring for expansion reasons. Before we went BK we lost 2300 pilots for their lump sums, so that took away a lot of older pilots. Still, when we stop hiring eventually, that last guy might be on reserve for years. After we finish getting the newer airplanes and ridding oursleves of older ones, the wheels will stop and people will sit idle for an extra 5 years thanks to these guys who want to keep flying after 60, even though they benefitted throughout their whole careers by the age 60 rule.

I do see some slow downs in hiring dat CAL, Fedex/UPS, and Southwest. USair also has a bunch of older pilots on the East side, so that will slow things over there too. What about those old FEs at Fedex and UPS? Can they go back to the left seat if there is a new bid?

Bye Bye--General Lee

Why do you see a slow down at CAL? We still have pension plan, although a "frozen" one we are still giving out lump sums. So for some it might not be worth it to continue to 65. You just might be working for free!

 

[Furloughed80]

Additionally, CAL has significant growth planned over the next few years.

 

[Falconjet]

This from Foxhunter in June 2005 :

Son, I've been a nonmember since January 4, 2005. I was probably paying dues when you were still in liquid form.

 

[Falconjet]

Here's another post from Foxhunter on the same thread. June 2005:

"Yes, I could sit back soaking up a free ride. I have chosen not to because I care about what happens at FedEx, and to the crew force here.

Some of you say that I have no say. I beg to disagree. As a nonmember I have every right to comment on what is going on at FedEx. As members you do not, unless it is in lock step with the direction of your leadership. At Tigers when we had the MEC making a fiasco with the dealing with Wolf there was a small group trying to change direction. One of the individuals was brought up on formal ALPA charges. He in the end was found not guilty. At that time I was in lock step with the MEC. As time went on I realized how foolish that was. Funny thing is that two of the Tiger ALPA leaders at that time were both on the nonmember list at FPA and then ALPA until the retired. One had actually served as an ALPA Executive VP. I guess they knew how to take a free ride.

You all appear very sensitive to any position counter to the line you have been fed by your leadership. I'm one individual taking a position. If I am wrong, time will prove it. If your leadership is correct I would be happy to pay my back dues and join."

 

[Flopgut]

At this point ladies and gentleman, worry less about getting hired...worry about what you're going to do if you get hired. What I mean is: There IS going to be continued hiring, but we're going to have to deal with a senior group of pilots who's seniority aggression type ways will continue.

 

[Falconjet]

Yet another one, I could be doing this all day:

FoxHunter vbmenu_register("postmenu_1128069", true);
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 617
Civ/Mil: Civilian
A/C Flown: DC8, SVC10, B747, B727, A300-600/A310, MD11, MD10
Ratings: ATP B727, DC8, MD11, A310
Curr Position: MD11 Captain
Total Time: 20000+
Posts: 617


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rez O. Lewshun
But is that really scabbing.... I mean it is all fair within defined politics...

Besides, if you use the scab term too loosely... then when someone really crosses the line its kinda deluted... save the scab word for the real thing... Mr. ex non member...

Does addressing me as an "ex non member" really do something for you? Hey that scab word is thrown around by quite a few ALPA Kool-Aid types that would probably would be among the first to cross if things went bad. No, ALPA would like the age 65 problem to go away. The problem is that guys and gals keep getting older and then they have a change of heart. What do you think the results would be if ALPA had held a poll in 1970 regarding women and minorities in the cockpit? Should women and minorities not been hired if the vote was 9 to 1 against, 8 to 2 against, 7 to 3 against or would you argue that ALPA should have opposed women and minorities if 50%+1 were against? No Rez, some things are not goverened by polls. Opposition to the age 60 change comes only from those whose self interest is for it not to change, until they are old enough to want it to change.

No Rez, I quit ALPA over that fraud of an "Age 60 Education Campaign". I rejoined because I believed the issue would be resolved. It was no mistake to quit, just waiting to see if it was a mistake to rejoin.:beer:

 

[Falconjet]

Just shows the "character" (actually lack thereof) of the characters who are trying to force the rule change down everybody's throats.

And keep your feet to yourself in the stalls of the AOC would ya?

FJ

 

[Yuppyguppy]

Screw Alpa

 

[thor2j]

Now I just have to figure out a way at CAL for all the "younger" guys to vote out the A fund to benefit us, then all will be fair!

Next contract that will be my agenda.

 

[JudgeSmails218]

Some of the timing will depend on whether the final version is like Europe--i.e. only one crew member can be over 60. The airlines will most likely have to change their crew scheduling programs which could further delay implementation.

 

[Falconjet]

There are going to be many changes when the law changes, except that the duuuuuuuuuchebags like d!ckl!cker will still be duuuuuuuuchebags.

FJ

 

[Falconjet]

No retorts or rebuttal huh?

Just waiting for somebody to turn out the light in the kitchen before you come crawling back out?

FJ

 

[BobbyB]

Member or not, it would seem he doesn't understand civics. Each house passed a bill that goes to conference. In conference, the differences between the two bills will be hashed out (or not) and that final form will go to the president for signature. There is no way to know what that will look like right now. If it isn't worked out in conference it dies on the spot. If it goes to the president and he vetoes it, then it can be re-introduced or not. Since it is an appropriations bill, and it was vetoed, and if it doesn't get re-introduced, the appropriations part (the money for the FAA etc) will be lumped together with all the other spending bills in an omnibus bill that will have to be bickered about etc and voted on to fund the various agencies. That stuff has to happen by Sept 30 since that is the end of the fiscal year. The chances of the Age 60 making it through all that? Who knows. The amendment will likely be stripped in an omnibus bill, but who knows. I think there is very little chance of overturning a veto since the spending stuff will be taken care of with an omnibus bill.

By the way, let's just say it passes and is signed, the rule takes effect the day it is signed or Sept 30 whichever is later since it is for Fiscal 08.

...Im just a bill....Sitting here on captal hill.....

 

[Falconjet]

Or, the government and the FAA can continue to operate under a continuing resolution (CR), as they are doing right now for THIS year, if the bill is never passed.

The "beauty" of the federal government spending is that they don't really have to have the budget passed by the end of the fiscal year. They just pass a CR and operate until they can get a spending bill passed. Sometimes the whole year passes under a CR.

FJ

 

[Gorilla]

All it will do at AA is turn all of us 18 year FO's into 23 year FO's. When will the beatings end? We get beaten by management, TSA, and now get flogged by oldsters who were too stupid to invest wisely. It was apparently much easier (more fun too) to buy boats, RV's, and penny stocks. Can't forget those 3 divorces, either.


I love the fact that the oldster will need a baby-sitter in certain circumstances. If these are our "most seasoned and experienced pilots" then why do they need supervision?

 

[ToThePain]

Why do you see a slow down at CAL? We still have pension plan, although a "frozen" one we are still giving out lump sums. So for some it might not be worth it to continue to 65. You just might be working for free!

I believe that you are correct. Airlines that still have a lump sum will not be affected as much as the ones that do not have a lump sum. The new pension laws will seriously affect the amount paid out on those lump sums, diminishing returns each year. At worst I see some of the pilots here at CAL staying on till 62 when they can draw health care and leave. The majority of those pilots have been saving their sick time for a health coverage bridge for an age 60 retirements. Of the people that stay most will probably call out sick at least once a month causing the companies to continue hiring even if they aren't expanding.
CAL does have a pretty aggressive expansion plan (especially international) with lots of planes coming and is still understaffed. I don't have a crystal ball but would guess that hiring will continue.

Planes coming: 30 737 NGs for 2008 (retiring I believe 17 737-300's), 24 737NGs and 2-3 787s for 2009, and 10 737 NGs and 6 787s for 2009-2012.

Retirement numbers:
2008:193 2013:180 2018:186
2009:200 2014:197 2019:154
2010:190 2015:168 2020:155
2011:207 2016:191 2021:162
2012:211 2017:179 2022:164