AirTran Pilots and Union Board Support Changing FAA Age 60 Rule

[j41driver]

Great . . . then you won't mind flying as my FO so someone else that loves his job can come back from furlough or upgrade.

You benefitted from the system your entire career. Period.


.

A-freakin'-men!!!

 

[SkiFishFly]

Great . . . then you won't mind flying as my FO so someone else that loves his job can come back from furlough or upgrade.

You benefitted from the system your entire career. Period.


.

Ty - there are some of us who are mid 40s and new to the airline business. You can't really say we have benefited much from the age 60 rule.
I support the change mainly because I think it grossly unfair for the US Gov to allow a foreigner to perform a job on US soil while it prohibits a US citizen from doing the same job. Especially since the only resaon the US citizen is prohibited is based soley on his/her age. I think the change is going to happen - it is just a matter of how soon.

 

[doer42]

Ty - there are some of us who are mid 40s and new to the airline business. You can't really say we have benefited much from the age 60 rule.

How do you think you got the job? Do you really think that if pilots had not been forced to leave because of this rule there would be as many new pilot jobs as there have been. When the rule changes, hiring and upgrades will slow down to a trickle for 3-5 years, until it again stabilizes when retirements start again.

 

[Lear70]

I'm hearing a 10% across the board pay raise. That gets us just even with inflation since the last one (three years ago). With a five year contract (if we don't get some sort of COLA built in), that would be a 15% pay cut by year five. Inflation has averaged 3% a year lately.

I can hear the arguments now: "but you get a pay raise every year", "Don't worry about FO pay, you'll be a Captain in 2 1/2 years".

BINGO!

EVERYONE needs to understand this basic FACT of pay raises.

3 years without a COLA raise = approximately 9% of a BASE pay raise JUST TO KEEP PACE WITH INFLATION.

That means if they come to us with a 15% pay raise, that REALLY means you just got a 6% raise over what our rates were 3 years ago in equivalent dollars.

So the pilot group has waited 3 years for a 6% raise?

That's why I've said the F/O's need AT LEAST a 25% raise IMMEDIATELY, going up by 3% per year for COLA plus an extra 3-5% for longevity at the bare minimum, for each year of the contract. That would be a 16% pay raise and would bring us about 1/3 of the way towards matching Southwest's pay scale.

3) Any references in any shape or form to allowing age 60+ guys back is a big "NO". We may have to endure the decisions of the idiots in Washington who are paid for their votes, but we don't have to give any more.

I don't have a problem with the age 60+ guys coming back under 2 conditions.

1. They don't get to come back as CA's. They can come back as F/O's.

2. They get to come back at their old longevity. If they were 15 year CA's, they can come back as 15 year F/O's.

This is what the legislation SHOULD have done to begin with for at least a 5 year, preferably a 15 year "integration period".

That way, they get some extra coin until they can collect social security AND those who are slated to upgrade don't have as bad of a financial impact to their career.

 

[tomgoodman]

Ask them in a year or so...

.... I've seen alot of guys hit 60 and had to retire in my mere 16 years of Airline experience.. and I haven't heard one of them that was glad it was over.

Probably true right after their last flight, but within a short time lots of them say "retirement is fantastic -- wish I'd gone earlier!" Not all, of course, especially if they couldn't put enough money aside or never developed an outside "life" while working.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Another greedy baby boomer

Ty - I support the change mainly because I think it grossly unfair for the US Gov to allow a foreigner to perform a job on US soil while it prohibits a US citizen from doing the same job.

So go work for a foreign company or a part 135 outfit and solve the problem. But instead you want to change an established system to suit your needs.

Pensioners such as yourself make me sick with the me, me, me. Go work for the post office for another 20 so you can double dip the US government and screw the tax payers again.

 

[El Pobre]

If you really want to get the BOD's attention on this, than why don't 3 or 5 of you file a class action lawsuit against your union. That will at least get the attention of your union leadership, who will probably want to settle by doing 2 things....conduction a poll of all members and 2)printing a retraction to their press release to be more accurate (ie not all members being polled or having the opportunity to vote). Chances are, if there were 10 of you, it would cost a couple of hundred bucks each and it would let your BOD know that the membership is concerned about how they are being represented. I would suspect that just the credible threat of a lawsuit (especially on such a charged topic) would see things get taken care of quickly.

Otherwise, I suspect that your union leadership really doesn't give a cra# about how you feel....ie the guy who called and was told to just change his mind.

Spouting off on a board here is great and all, but not going to make 1 iota of difference.

 

[FlyFastLiveSlow]

If you really want to get the BOD's attention on this, than why don't 3 or 5 of you file a class action lawsuit against your union. That will at least get the attention of your union leadership, who will probably want to settle by doing 2 things....conduction a poll of all members and 2)printing a retraction to their press release to be more accurate (ie not all members being polled or having the opportunity to vote). Chances are, if there were 10 of you, it would cost a couple of hundred bucks each and it would let your BOD know that the membership is concerned about how they are being represented. I would suspect that just the credible threat of a lawsuit (especially on such a charged topic) would see things get taken care of quickly.

Otherwise, I suspect that your union leadership really doesn't give a cra# about how you feel....ie the guy who called and was told to just change his mind.

Spouting off on a board here is great and all, but not going to make 1 iota of difference.

I'm in....Lear70, you wanna be number 2?

 

[Lear70]

Not really. I support age 65, although I think they should go to the right seat. Sorry,,,

I do, however, agree that they should have polled the entire group this last month BEFORE they came out with their official position. It's just too high-charged of an issue not to have 100% member participation (or at least the option to participate - some people wouldn't vote if their mother's life depended on it).

I've been involved in Wilson Polling before - the union does NOT get to choose who is called, Wilson Polling figures out how to split things up. Think about it... how the heck does the union know who commutes and who doesn't? Home address? Hardly conclusive.

 

[md83drvr]

It doesn't matter which side of age 60 you sit. The issue I have with the BOD is not polling ALL of the pilots.

I sent an email to AP, we will see if I get a response. My biggest fear is that if they don't poll all of the pilots for age 60 what will happen when we get a TA.

 

[atafan]

The change is coming, embrace it.

I love to hear about how so many pilots benefited from the current age 60 rule. You are all so spoiled, you think that waiting 3 - 5 years to upgrade is paying your dues while flying modern jet equipment. Give me a break! Everyone has a story, when I started out in this industry, not that many years ago, it was common for you to fly 10 plus years to even consider a left seat job in a jet transport for a major airline. If your timing was wrong you might fly for r15 o more years as a SO and FO before checking out as captain.

Suck it up, in a few years after the phase in all will be back to normal and you can start scratching the old guys off of the list again.

Everything is relative but one thing has always been constant.

GREED.

 

[SkiFishFly]

So go work for a foreign company or a part 135 outfit and solve the problem. But instead you want to change an established system to suit your needs.

Pensioners such as yourself make me sick with the me, me, me. Go work for the post office for another 20 so you can double dip the US government and screw the tax payers again.

Nice mature response there...
I guess 22 years of deployments, flying over the likes of Bosnia and Iraq in support of the US Government and the UN was just ripping off taxpayers such as yourself. Sorry you feel that way.
Not really. I'm not sorry - like you said I'm a spoiled baby boomer and it is just all about me anyways...
Here's one for you pal - the change to age 65 is coming no matter how much you rant and rave on flightinfo. Too bad you are not mature (or intelligent) enough to recognize that which you can not prevent.

 

[bendover]

I wonder just how many actually were polled. probably just a hundred or so. someone should ask and post the actual numbers. by the way i was not called as well and my vote would have been NO.

 

[AFcitrus]

The change is coming, embrace it.

I love to hear about how so many pilots benefited from the current age 60 rule. You are all so spoiled, you think that waiting 3 - 5 years to upgrade is paying your dues while flying modern jet equipment. Give me a break! Everyone has a story, when I started out in this industry, not that many years ago, it was common for you to fly 10 plus years to even consider a left seat job in a jet transport for a major airline. If your timing was wrong you might fly for r15 o more years as a SO and FO before checking out as captain.

Suck it up, in a few years after the phase in all will be back to normal and you can start scratching the old guys off of the list again.

Everything is relative but one thing has always been constant.

GREED.

And that would have been 15-20 years for you if the greedy elderly pilots had pushed for a change in this legislation then instead of now. By now all would be "back to normal" and we'd be "scratching the old guys off the list again". So you (or the older pilots you represent) have greatly benefited from the age 60 rule and now you want to change it to benefit you some more. We're GREEDY eh? If that's not the "pot calling the kettle black" I don't what is.

 

[Sunking]

Great . . . then you won't mind flying as my FO so someone else that loves his job can come back from furlough or upgrade.

You benefitted from the system your entire career. Period.


.

Don't know how much I have actually benefitted. Im still on furlough from UAL, something it seems you have never experienced. What is this your first airline here at AirTran? BTW no, I won't mind flying as your FO should I suffer a displacement at AAI. You will be more than welcomed to retire at 60,nothing on the proposed bill that would force you to bless us with your presence past 60. It never has been a safety issue, just one of greed.