Age limit will increase to 67 by years end.

[Mamma]

Your greed is somehow different than any of the other greed? How's that entitlement thing working out for you?

What have I been entitled to? I've served 20 hard years in the military so I think I've earned my way Sport. What about you? It's all perspective anyway. The younger guys want to move up and the gummers want to stay. It's not about entitlement or greed its just the way our system is set up. If gummers want to stay longer, someone's gotta pay for it. That's all. Kind of hard to call young guys greedy or entitled when they have to pay.

 

[waveflyer]

As has been stated before on this forum, the Federal Air Surgeon (at the Age 60 ARC held by the FAA in 2006) noted that the present aero medical was functioning without need for change - the system catches problems before they are cockpit issues. As was also previously noted, those talking of stricter medicals (for older pilots one presumes) are thus addressing a non-issue AND simultaneously opening the door for thousands of younger pilots being disastrously exposed to the same enhanced medical standards. I'm sitting on an aircraft right now (as a pax) and watched a very fit 55+ year-old Captain board standing tall and looking alert. The 30-ish co-pilot, on the other hand, is badly overweight (monster gut hanging over his belt) , shuffled when he walked? He was lacking in posture, fitness, attitude and alertness. Whom might you suppose is monitoring whom on this flight? If the Air Surgeon says there is no issue, why open Pandora's Box?

Laker- I actually agree with this- and man, if I'm still as fit as I am now when I'm 60, and as sharp, then I sure wouldn't want a regulation telling me I have to retire if I didn't want to. And at 42, I can't tell you I would-
But as to your example- that's not unusual- food and food habits in america are awful- if that FO was 40-ish then I'd give you more credence- but flying is mental- his danger is of flat out H.A./stroking out, and looking like a slob- not in mentally staying up with the aircraft.
And truly, the problem does not lay with 80% of 60+ pilots- it's the 10-20% that are being carried.
Again, I ask- what percentage of pilots is it acceptable for me to DO THEIR JOB, in that awkward realm of captain defensiveness and FO lack of authority, for LESS money? If its not a problem for you guys at 20%_ what does it take? Half?
Or would you even admit it then?

Human beings are not good at assessing their age related decline-

I say fly til you die if that's what you want- but no captains after 60.

 

[Mamma]

So, this young fat slob is probably going to only get worse over time. Wonder what he will look like at 66 and captaining a A380.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

What have I been entitled to? I've served 20 hard years in the military so I think I've earned my way Sport. What about you? It's all perspective anyway. The younger guys want to move up and the gummers want to stay. It's not about entitlement or greed its just the way our system is set up. If gummers want to stay longer, someone's gotta pay for it. That's all. Kind of hard to call young guys greedy or entitled when they have to pay.

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it. All the sniveling and foot stomping will not change anything, and in fact might make you look immature.
So buck up, square your hat, snap to and say "yes sir, I will take the fat one, because I like them that way" In return, the gummer just might have a stroke while playing "hide the sausage" with the 26 year old F/A, and bingo you will be one seniority number closer to climbing on that 27 year old F/A.

Kind of hard to call young guys greedy or entitled when they have to pay.

What are they paying? Last time I checked they get paid to swing the gear. This statement is the very essence of the entitlement concept. If you went into the airline game instead of serving "20 hard years" you would be one of those gummers you hate so much.
If you want "credit" for your "20 hard years", its called a pension, not seniority entitlement.

 

[flyboyike]

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it.

In other words, it's OK for the industry to be the gummers' personal merry-go-round, just not mine.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

In other words, it's OK for the industry to be the gummers' personal merry-go-round, just not mine.

You just don't get it, it is what it is, and all the foot stomping and whining will not change anything. You want change, change the law through the legislative process, until then, the whining and sniveling may make you feel better but won't change anything. If you want validation then you have come to the right place, F/I provides some of the best, maybe the Genny will give you a big double breasted hug....

 

[Flopgut]

Do you need a hug? Ribbon?

Here's an excerpt from the recent Time Magazine article entitled "The Me Me Me Generation":

"The incidence of narcissistic personality disorder is nearly three times as high for people in their 20s as for the generation that?s now 65 or older, according to the National Institutes of Health; 58% more college students scored higher on a narcissism scale in 2009 than in 1982. Millennials got so many participation trophies growing up that a recent study showed that 40% believe they should be promoted every two years, regardless of performance."

You want the brass ring, stomp your feet and whine like a puppy fresh off the teat, that will make it happen quicker.....

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it. All the sniveling and foot stomping will not change anything, and in fact might make you look immature.
So buck up, square your hat, snap to and say "yes sir, I will take the fat one, because I like them that way" In return, the gummer just might have a stroke while playing "hide the sausage" with the 26 year old F/A, and bingo you will be one seniority number closer to climbing on that 27 year old F/A.

Your thesis does not match the reality of our specific situation. The old guys weren't going to get their "ribbon" [pension], so they stomped their feet, bawled and cried, until they got their way. They got the exact age increase they wanted. The rest of the profession absorbed the ill effects (which were vast) with admirable decorum. And now we're seeing that 65 was not enough for these old bastards. They want more.

At some point we have to cut the rope on these old guys. Money, seniority, extra years. It's all being wasted by them.

 

[flyboyike]

You just don't get it, it is what it is, and all the foot stomping and whining will not change anything. You want change, change the law through the legislative process, until then, the whining and sniveling may make you feel better but won't change anything. If you want validation then you have come to the right place, F/I provides some of the best, maybe the Genny will give you a big double breasted hug....

Well, the gummers are the ones trying to change it (again), not me. And they're doing it by whining about how five more years wasn't enough, but two more will be for sure. But again, it's okay for them, because they've earned it, right?

 

[Mamma]

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it. All the sniveling and foot stomping will not change anything, and in fact might make you look immature.
So buck up, square your hat, snap to and say "yes sir, I will take the fat one, because I like them that way" In return, the gummer just might have a stroke while playing "hide the sausage" with the 26 year old F/A, and bingo you will be one seniority number closer to climbing on that 27 year old F/A.


What are they paying? Last time I checked they get paid to swing the gear. This statement is the very essence of the entitlement concept. If you went into the airline game instead of serving "20 hard years" you would be one of those gummers you hate so much.
If you want "credit" for your "20 hard years", its called a pension, not seniority entitlement.

Based on your apathetic take on things, I take it you don't vote either. Probably a good thing. I did reserves my last 10 so no pension for awhile if ever. So lets discuss this "one way" entitlement you like to bring up. Just who feels they are entitled? The young FO at Skywest who will be stagnated or the older Delta FO who will enjoy 5-10 years of stagnation caused by age increases? OR, maybe the old guy who just can't hang it up like all those before him did. Just maybe the age 65 guy, who got a 5 year windfall feels entitled to another 5 years on the backs of those behind him. In case you didn't know, this is a bulletin board designed to discuss issues. If you are upset over what you perceive as whining, go somewhere else where everyone plays with unicorns and dances in green fields under bright rainbows. Or come here for reality and listen to what others are thinking. For the record, I am ok with age 65. Just not an extension.

 

[Flopgut]

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it.


What are they paying? Last time I checked they get paid to swing the gear. This statement is the very essence of the entitlement concept. If you went into the airline game instead of serving "20 hard years" you would be one of those gummers you hate so much.
If you want "credit" for your "20 hard years", its called a pension, not seniority entitlement.

Not hard for me to recall the effort to change 60 to 65. Talk about "whining and sniveling". The second part? Can't believe you wrote that. Yip mentioned the 95 year old WW2 veteran earlier. Other than many decades, what's the difference between Mamma and a WW2 vet?! Why in the hell is ok that we cherish one and kick the other in the teeth?!

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Based on your apathetic take on things, I take it you don't vote either. Probably a good thing. I did reserves my last 10 so no pension for awhile if ever. So lets discuss this "one way" entitlement you like to bring up. Just who feels they are entitled? The young FO at Skywest who will be stagnated or the older Delta FO who will enjoy 5-10 years of stagnation caused by age increases? OR, maybe the old guy who just can't hang it up like all those before him did. Just maybe the age 65 guy, who got a 5 year windfall feels entitled to another 5 years on the backs of those behind him. In case you didn't know, this is a bulletin board designed to discuss issues. If you are upset over what you perceive as whining, go somewhere else where everyone plays with unicorns and dances in green fields under bright rainbows. Or come here for reality and listen to what others are thinking. For the record, I am ok with age 65. Just not an extension.

For the record, I am active in local politics, yes I am a community organizer. So yes I do a bit more than just vote. I might suggest reading more closely, you and your ilk are whining and complaining about the gummers and lack of career progression, not me. Are you really that clueless? The age 65 was pushed by industry, not pilots, when in the history of this industry has management or the business community been concerned for the welfare of its employees? DAL/UAL/AA have how many different fleets? Do the math very carefully and calculate how many training events are required to replace one 747 Captain. The industry is driving this and it has nothing with entitlement, greed of gummers or keeping you down, cash plain and simple, its cheaper to keep your gummers in their seats than pay train the resulting transition costs for your career progression.
Boom! You wanna hate, hate the managers at your favorite airline, this is their plan, you and I are just pawns in that game, and if sacrificing your financial health keeps their costs lower by even a miniscule amount you will be swinging gear until that gummer's wheelchair wont fit through the cockpit door.

 

[flyboyike]

....you will be swinging gear until that gummer's wheelchair wont fit through the cockpit door.

They'll just make smaller wheelchairs, no worries.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

They'll just make smaller wheelchairs, no worries.

I wonder how much they save by keeping all the resultant pilots at a lower pay scale? Airline cost structures show labor as 40% of their operating costs, if they can shave a percentage point from the 40% number it amounts to millions. So while you shower your fellow employees with contempt for doing nothing more than doing what they like to do, realize you will be in the same position sooner or later, trying to make up for lost/delayed opportunities, while the MPL F/O posts on F/I III, about the gummer clogging up his path to wealth.

 

[Mamma]

For the record, I am active in local politics, yes I am a community organizer. So yes I do a bit more than just vote. I might suggest reading more closely, you and your ilk are whining and complaining about the gummers and lack of career progression, not me. Are you really that clueless? The age 65 was pushed by industry, not pilots, when in the history of this industry has management or the business community been concerned for the welfare of its employees? DAL/UAL/AA have how many different fleets? Do the math very carefully and calculate how many training events are required to replace one 747 Captain. The industry is driving this and it has nothing with entitlement, greed of gummers or keeping you down, cash plain and simple, its cheaper to keep your gummers in their seats than pay train the resulting transition costs for your career progression.
Boom! You wanna hate, hate the managers at your favorite airline, this is their plan, you and I are just pawns in that game, and if sacrificing your financial health keeps their costs lower by even a miniscule amount you will be swinging gear until that gummer's wheelchair wont fit through the cockpit door.

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong point. This thread is about increasing the retirement age to 67....not rehashing 65. I will say again, I have no issue with age 65. I am against increasing it. I bear no malice towards the guys who stay until 65. They got a windfall and we paid for it. The young guys you berate as selfish and greedy should not have to pay again.

 

[SIG600]

Do you need a hug? Ribbon?

Here's an excerpt from the recent Time Magazine article entitled "The Me Me Me Generation":

"The incidence of narcissistic personality disorder is nearly three times as high for people in their 20s as for the generation that?s now 65 or older, according to the National Institutes of Health; 58% more college students scored higher on a narcissism scale in 2009 than in 1982. Millennials got so many participation trophies growing up that a recent study showed that 40% believe they should be promoted every two years, regardless of performance."

You want the brass ring, stomp your feet and whine like a puppy fresh off the teat, that will make it happen quicker.....

Agree. Glad there's more than a decade (and 20+ years of flying) between me and that group. Makes me miss the 80's that much more.

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong point. This thread is about increasing the retirement age to 67....not rehashing 65. I will say again, I have no issue with age 65. I am against increasing it. I bear no malice towards the guys who stay until 65. They got a windfall and we paid for it. The young guys you berate as selfish and greedy should not have to pay again.

^^^Gets it^^^

 

[PBRstreetgang]

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong point. This thread is about increasing the retirement age to 67....not rehashing 65. I will say again, I have no issue with age 65. I am against increasing it. I bear no malice towards the guys who stay until 65. They got a windfall and we paid for it. The young guys you berate as selfish and greedy should not have to pay again.

You haven' paid for anything, the upgrade isn't yours until you have the seniority to hold it. Age 65,67,70 whatever, you won't discuss the merits of the why theory I posted, most likely because it's too close to the truth for most. I didn't like 65 and most certainly don't like 67, but you are like most Millenials, unable to read the writing on the wall. You are selfish and greedy, that's ok, you fit in with almost every other airline pilot out there. Airline management will use that weakness against you like they have done in the past, and will again in the future. The industry if nothing else is predictable, and even more so are the pilots, most would sell their first born to get off of reserve. Most are petty and predictable, quite sad. You think that because you fly airplanes for a living you have the brass ring in your grubby little paw, news flash you are just worker bee/drones to be sacrificed at the first hint of financial winter.
You want guarantees? Buy a nice set of Mud and Snow tires.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

i've served 20 hard years in the military

............
mos?

 

[laker4284]

You guys are all wrapped about a NON issue. As Mamma said, this thread is about RAISING the age to 67. ALL the evidence points to this NOT being on the table - not in Congress, not within the FAA, not in corporate offices.

Forget the ginned-up "notice" supposedly from the FAA. As has been pointed out, it's a (poorly done) remake of the FAA notice in early 2007. The docket # is bogus. There s no "notice of proposed rulemaking". There is no aviation rulemaking committee (ARC), as is required by law. You really should have able to figure that out w/o all the angst. I mean SURELY you know better than to believe some random bs from an FAA inspector. They like to hear themselves talk. They know little or nothing about what's going on in the upper offices.

Congress? Go to Thomas.gov and see if there has been a bill to change the age (again) introduced. There is nothing. Heads Up: Bookmark that site. If you hear a rumor you can dispell or confirm it there. Any bill, with ts co sponsors, will be there. If some guy says he's been in some congressional office and heard good things, maybe he did. Staffers are great at schmoozing you, telling you what you want to hear. Has the congressman introduced or co sponsored a bill? If not, it's all bs.

The various pilot unions (ALPA, APA, SWAPA and CAPA) ALL agree that there is nothing out there. That's about the ONLY time they have been in unified agreement. If their GAC committees hear nothing - well - there IS nothing.

You're being snookered. Played.

There's much that is factually wrong or misleading in this thread. But...the one thing that you can count on is that 67 is not in play any time soon.

 

[laker4284]

I've touched base with some friends that are tight with some of the leading members of ICAO. Nothing going on there, either. The one thing in play is that ICAO will likely pass an amendment that will allow BOTH pilots to be 60-64. The supporting documents speak to the fact that there have been NO med issues with pilots over 60, and that the "odds" (statistical probability) of an age-related medical crisis leading to an incident or accident are VERY small. You wouldn't want to play those odds in Vegas.

If I can figure out how to get the ICAO PDF on here, I will.

 

[laker4284]

Duplicate post deleted.