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

  • Thread starter Thread starter J3guy
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 45

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
Like I said realityman, it is what it is. I never bring it up.

I don't want you to feel sorry for me. Yeah, we took a hit, but that's life.

When a guy like yourself, who isn't affected, says; "well, when you think about it, it's not really a big deal..It all comes out in the wash" Then I'm going to let you know that's not the case. Thousands of guys took it in the shorts on this one and you're frankly insulting their intelligence by trying to claim anything different. We aren't fools.

I'm also not going to sit here and feed Fubi's coping mechanisms where I'm the greedy one, not him. This isn't some random 'anything can happen in a career' variable. It was a deliberate effort, organized by people like him to take from people like me.

I don't bring it up. It's done. I've had to make some adjustments, but I'll be just fine.

What I refuse to do is sit on my hands while people tell me it was no big deal, or that I'm the greedy one.
 
Last edited:
Say tomorrow, all the Captains at Netjets sit down with management and used their greater numbers to give themselves a pay raise and the FO's a pay cut. I'm sorry, I don't work for your airline. Could you please post the pay scales that show you will now be making less? Really? The new age 65 rule started and your company immediately implemented a concessionary pay scale where your wages were downgraded? Show me which years of service, specifically, you'll be working for free in. Last time, and then I'm done with this: I will grant you that you will HAVE to work longer to get the same years as a captain, but over the course of your career, you will make a total of MORE, even at F/O wages, than you would have with the age 60 rule. As you have said yourself, the math doesn't lie. At no point do I see you working for free.At the core, that's what we're talking about.
After all, those FO's didn't do anything to 'deserve' their pay rate, right? Yeah, I know that the pay rate has been set in stone for decades and the Captain's got it when they were FO's, but now they 'deserve' more. Okay, you're angry. Like i said, you feel how you feel and you're entitled to feel however you want to about it. It's a personal thing. But your anger is blinding you to some other facts. It wasn't the pilots who came up with the random age of 60 to force pilots out. It was airline management. Without so much as a "would you mind terribly if we....?" airline management cut short the careers of tens of thousands of pilots. This age wasn't based on any scientific safety data. It was a random age chosen to force out the highest paid pilots in the workforce. And despite what you've previously said, most pilots have been fighting for a very long time to get rid ofnthe age 60 thing. We're talking decades. Maybe instead of viewing it as them taking something from you, they're taking back something that was taken, most unfairly, from them. You like to mention those not hired yet. Well, as pilots retire, and there is some growth in the airline industry, things will even out again. The newhires of the future will now have a choice to retire at age 60, making the same money as pilots of the past, or continue on to age 65 and make even more. It is those of you who are caught in the transition who MAY experience a downside to this change. chosen
Those FO's have no reason to be upset, right? That's just the nature of the business.
The worst is when one of those greedy, entitled FO's, who has to work to work overtime to break even, has the audacity to not tell the Captain he's special and 'deserves' a raise.

All kinds of uncertainty out there for everyone, but only one segment faces that uncertainty by eating their young. This isn't economy, this isn't fuel price, this isn't 9/11. It's pilots taking from pilots.


That's exactly what every one of them said when they were FO's.
But now they're special and 'deserve' more.
"Give me your money because there are more of us, and we're special."

You've boiled it down to: "you lose, that's the breaks, suck it up. They've got the numbers, boo hoo for you."No. I never said you shouldn't be upset. I just keep saying that it isn't all bad for ALL the current and future F/O's. You don't want to work until 65. I get it. But I will bet you my next year's salary that there are a great many F/O's who are thrilled with the fact they don't have to quit at 65 if they don't want to. We have a whole bunch of retired airline guys at NJA. Some are working because they need to. Many more are here because they weren't ready to quit flying, were still physically and mentally sharp enough to be able to do the job, and wanted to stay in the flight levels a little longer. Do you really think this condition applies only to their generation. Through all the years, pilots are pilots. Some things just don't change. And as such, I don't believe that ALL the F/O's got hosed, or that they all feel badly about the new rule. Again, it's a personal thing. You feel you got hosed. Okay. No one is telling you to feel otherwise. But don't try to tell me that ALL F/O's feel the same way.
You're right. Absolutely.

Just don't try to pretend that five years of my life or hundreds of thousands of dollars are no big deal. Don't try to tell me how lucky I am to have the 'privilege' of working an extra five years for free. Don't try to tell the guy who just wanted the same deal that every pilot before him got (nothing more, nothing less) is greedy while the guy who took more isn't.
It's just not going to fly.I'm not calling anyone greedy. And as things rebalance in the industry, everyone will have the same opportunity as those that came before them. In fact, it will present MORE opportunities and choices than they would have had previously. You don't like the deal. Okay. It's just a shame that in your anger you can't see how this will benefit many working today, and all who will come in the future.

CEO pillages the pension; do you get upset at the CEO or do you call the pilots entitled and greedy for thinking they 'deserved' anything in this uncertain industry?

I wish you luck with your career. Maybe things will turn out better than you think.
 
I wish you luck with your career. Maybe things will turn out better than you think.

Doubtful, RM. All guys like Humbuger do is biatch about how they were "screwed" by the man. He'll never be happy because he was too busy counting his chickens before they hatched. Now that he's realized his error he's too busy worrying about the water that has already passed under the bridge.

Hopefully, someday he'll grow up.
 
Mr. Hamburger

Why are you on the fractional part of the board having this argument?

This should be taken over to the commuter or majors protion of Flightinfo.

We don't have a mandantory retirement age of 65 at the fractionals, and I hope we never do.

Personally, I hope to be retired at 65.

I'm so tired of this argument, I think anyone who wants this rule is setting themselves up for a good screwing. (Taking away an option you may very well need. One big medical problem could wipe out your savings, or getting sued, who knows? A natural disaster? So much could happen)

"Carma is a bitch"!

Good luck to you all, and you as well Mr. Hamburger

Semore
 
We don't have a mandantory retirement age of 65 at the fractionals, and I hope we never do.

Humbuger is exactly the reason why you don't want this rule. You'd have to put up with a bunch of green-eyed little boys who want your seat. You're lucky that isn't the case in the fracs...yet.
 
Why are you on the fractional part of the board having this argument?..........I'm so tired of this argument, I think anyone who wants this rule is setting themselves up for a good screwing. (Taking away an option you may very well need. One big medical problem could wipe out your savings, or getting sued, who knows? A natural disaster? So much could happen)

"Carma is a bitch"!

Good luck to you all, and you as well Mr. Hamburger

Semore
Hey!, this is a pilot board stop dealing with reality.
 
Humbuger is exactly the reason why you don't want this rule. You'd have to put up with a bunch of green-eyed little boys who want your seat. You're lucky that isn't the case in the fracs...yet.


That's as stupid as the stereotype that every 60+ pilot wears depends in addition to their bifocals. Every First Officer I know at NetJets is at least in their 30s. All have an ATP and at least one if not several type ratings. That is certainly more qualified than most of the 60 plus ex 121 pilots I have met at NJA when they were hired at XYZ major airline when they were in their 20s.
 
Last edited:
typical sterotype

That's as stupid as the stereotype that every 60+ pilot wears depends in addition to their bifocals.
age 67, 1st class medical no limitations, so not everyone, BTW We have five NJ F/O's working for us, average age 47
 
FF,
I was an FO at NJ until furloughed. I'm 63 and in my hire class of 8, 3 were over 60. Plenty of NJ FOs in the older brackets. I had an ATP before 30 and I have 9 type ratings. Quit making up your facts. More qualified, my a--.
Helm
PS: Amen Semore.
 
The only pilots screwed were those forced to retire at 60 and lost around one million in income that guys like Hamburger will earn in those 5 extra years, if they so chose. That's the kind of choice I prefer to have. Greed? Hardly. As mentioned elsewhere, it's called opportunity.
 
age 67, 1st class medical no limitations, so not everyone, BTW We have five NJ F/O's working for us, average age 47

FF,
I was an FO at NJ until furloughed. I'm 63 and in my hire class of 8, 3 were over 60. Plenty of NJ FOs in the older brackets. I had an ATP before 30 and I have 9 type ratings. Quit making up your facts. More qualified, my a--

Guess I wasn't so stupid after all, FF. And the term "little boys" has nothing to do with age. It has EVERYTHING to do with maturity. Throwing tantrums about "I want what you have" doesn't qualify as maturity.

The only pilots screwed were those forced to retire at 60 and lost around one million in income that guys like Hamburger will earn in those 5 extra years, if they so chose. That's the kind of choice I prefer to have. Greed? Hardly. As mentioned elsewhere, it's called opportunity.

Amen, brother.
 
Where was the push amongst airline captains to allow those who were forced out at 60 to return to their respective companies at the seniority they held when they left?
 
imacdog, it was the younger guys that put that in the law. However, human nature being what it is, the older guys did not mind as long as it happened before they hit 60. I know first hand. Imissed the cutoff by 9 days. And yes Pervis, that would have been worth over a million $ to me (way more than my twice bankruptcy hit retirement funds).
 
age 67, 1st class medical no limitations, so not everyone, BTW We have five NJ F/O's working for us, average age 47


That is exactly my point. Not all (more like none) of NetJet First Officers are young and "Green eyed little boys who want your seat".

They are union dues paying coworkers who have a different opinion than others.

Stereotypes remove any validity to any argument.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom