I don't know why your people in Washington are saying that, but it doesn't make sense that the FAA would only be interested in opinions that back their proposal. Alpa could have opposed the change.
As for the results, it was done via roll call of the MEC chairmen, not a ballot of the membership. When the survey took place last October, the membership was 60% opposed to changing the rule. This time the survey results were not released. Gee, I wonder why...
John-
They're not "my" people per se. I'm talking my ALPA reps at UAL. Obviously there's a big uproar here at UAL, too- especially among the people that tend to be spectator unionists and didn't even take the time to take the poll. The poll results aren't being "hidden" as you say. Here are two questions here, courtesy of the NWA guys. Note the PATHETIC amount of "unionists" who couldn't take 15 minutes out of their day to participate in a poll such as this. I would bet some of the largest complainers on this forum didn't even take the time to do the survey themselves.
https://crewroom.alpa.org/NWAMEC/De...View.aspx?itemid=8432&ModuleId=5044&Tabid=760
This whole process is political. I don't think the typical pilot understands the political nature of changes like this. I don't 100% either, but I question my representatives who do have a better understanding. This is what I'm being told, take it or leave it:
Pre 1/30/2007: ALPA was against age 65 and was "fighting" in the background on Capitol Hill and were successful until recently. ICAO passes rules which allow pilots to fly past the age of 60. The FAA/U.S. now faces the choice of denying all ICAO pilots access to U.S. airspace who are over the age of 60 or letting them fly in. They decide on the latter despite ALPA's lobbying. The FAA now realize that by doing that, every airline pilot in the U.S. is going to ask why an over 60 year old pilot ICAO pilot can fly in the U.S. but a U.S. pilot can't. So.........
1/30/2007 FAA Administrator Marion Blakely announces that the FAA will propose a new rule to allow pilots to fly until they are 65, the same as the ICAO standard.
5/16/2007 The Senate Commerce Committee comes out with their version of the FAA Reauthorization Bill, and as part of the bill the Age 65 language is included. The House is expected to do the same. According to ALPA's Government Affairs Department, Senators and Congressman who had previously supported ALPA's age 60 position were starting to switch sides, under pressure from whatever entities wanted the Age 60 rule gone (SWAPA, pensionless ALPA pilots who want the rule changed, groups who support the rights of older people like the AARP, etc.)
So basically ALPA is in a bad position. Due to the above, it's pretty clear that Age 60 is going away no matter what ALPA does. ALPA had been successful in the past with killing Age 65 attempts in the past, but no longer can win.
ALPA members clearly state that they want Age 60 to stay, but ALPA National knows it's not going to happen. So they have to make a choice: either continue a fight that is very likely unwinnable and be politically excluded from the new rulemaking that will ultimately govern the Age 65 crowd OR change their position and take part in the political process as the pilots desired in the latest poll taken. So the Executive Board voted to support the rule change as to not be excluded from the process of the ineveitable Age 65 rulemaking as we don't want an organization like the ATA (read: airline management) having more influence on the new Age 65 rules than ALPA.
