Anybody for the Age 60 Change Happen to have children who are pilots?

[Dan Roman]

Dan, speaking of DHC-7's, weren't they flown by pilots on HAL seniority list?

Yep, Flew them there and at Henson.

 

[whymeworry?]

Well said. It's hard to believe that anyone could complain about a parent wanting to fly to age 65 because the retirement package they were promised got jerked out from under them after they paid all that money for their kid to learn to fly. If I was in my twenties and my Dad had just paid for my education and flight training and than lost his retirement, I would be hoping and praying he could have the chance to keep flying if he needed to. The sense of entitlement the original poster has is galling.
An RJ pilot worried about age 60?? Since when does a job at a regional airline entitle you to move on to a larger carrier? If your an RJ pilot you are NOT at an airline effected by the rule and it's none of your business what the pilots at an airline that is effected do. You are not entitled to a job at SWA, UAL, DAL, Fed EX, etc etc just because you work at a regional airline. You may or may not make it to a larger airline, you may or may not even pass the first interview IF you do get called for an interview, it's none of your business until you work for an airline that is effected.
What's next, student pilots telling their flight instructor he'll have to quit once the student gets his ratings because he is taking up the job he needs to build up his experience?

Please tell me, what fight did you put up to keep your retirement? Management took plays out of the Lorenzo manual and you "senior" pilots failed to walk the talk. Y'all beat your chest about how experienced and necessary you are to the survival of this business. Yet when challenged to maintain a modicum of respect for the profession, you folded and voted (read VOTE) in a concessionary contract whereby you agreed to gut your own QOL.

As seniro pilots, you failed to lead nd instead fell victim to scare tactics and lawyers swifter than your MECs. Take ownership of where you are and go after management, rather than your fellow aviators.

 

[Dan Roman]

Please tell me, what fight did you put up to keep your retirement? Management took plays out of the Lorenzo manual and you "senior" pilots failed to walk the talk. Y'all beat your chest about how experienced and necessary you are to the survival of this business. Yet when challenged to maintain a modicum of respect for the profession, you folded and voted (read VOTE) in a concessionary contract whereby you agreed to gut your own QOL.

As seniro pilots, you failed to lead nd instead fell victim to scare tactics and lawyers swifter than your MECs. Take ownership of where you are and go after management, rather than your fellow aviators.

I can't speak for any other airline, but my airline came out of a very challenging situation without "screwing the junior pilots" in fact. the retiremnt for people junior to me is argueably better than what I have. The senior folks kept the DB, the junior folks get a mix of both. Their DC is more secure than what I have and has the potential for greater gains. My airline has never screwed the junior pilots for the benefit of the senior pilots. At one point we had the lowest L1011 payscale in the industry, but the highest DHC-7 (junior pilots) pay scale. We never had a B scale. We had a large scale furlough and the list of benefits that was extended to the furloughed pilots out of the working pilots pocket is to extensive to go into here. I could go on, but I can safely say we never stuck it to a the junior pilots at my airline to benefit the senior pilots.

 

[Dan Roman]

Whyme worry,
BTW, I don't work for CO, I'm guessing you do. You don't have a clue what our situation has been, so why would you be judging what we did?

 

[get2flyin]

Why the hell are we all arguing the topic in the 1st place? First off, we aren't going to change each others minds. Second, it's not like the decision is our to make. If you're so pissed about it, regardless of what side of the fence you're on, write your congressman instead of complaining on here.

*Yes, I did post on this topic and yes, I am calling the kettle black.

 

[waveflyer]

Common sense has to figure into this at some point. When the age 60 rule was implemented- ALPA and every pilot was pissed- and rightfully- b/c it was a successful ploy to chop off the highest paid, least productive group of pilots on the property (Ie: NOT lazy- but those who accrue the most vacation and sick time).

I think we as pilots don't adjust to change well enough and certainly not quickly enough. We look foolish when we pound the pavement everytime a change happens- when we could use that energy to use that change to our advantage.

Age 60 has always been a random rule-- Why should we argue to restrict our flying in our most profitable years if we want to continue flying?
5 years is a b/s number- It's already been pointed out that at some carriers- it's more profitable to still retire at 60 and take the DB. For others where it makes sense to keep flying-- what will it REALLY BE? Kind of a semi-retirement anyway, unless you like to donate your sick time and vacation back to the company.

The key is only to keep our contracts up (and personal finance up) so that we aren't all killing ourselves to age 65-- But imho- we don't need to be forced into retirement in order to make that the priority.

 

[kwick]

Children who are pilots are mostly against changing the rule to the international age standard.

 

[Flopgut]

Dan: career progression from a regional to a major is FAR more reasonable and customary than it is to assert a 40+ year rule should change to your benefit.

 

[The Prussian]

What he meant to say was....

Dan: career progression from a regional to a major is FAR more reasonable and customary (in today's way of thinking) than it is to correct a 40+ year rule that was wrong.

 

[jet1man]

Loud Noises!!!

 

[Flopgut]

What he meant to say was....

Dan: career progression from a regional to a major is FAR more reasonable and customary (in today's way of thinking) than it is to correct a 40+ year rule that was wrong.

Whatever.

Changing a 40+ year accepted methodology is extraordinary; It does not matter how you look at it. So when this change doesn't live up to your expectations (and it won't in most cases), what will be the next extraordinary demand you"ll want? Seriously, what's your next stunt going to be? Because I'm really not too worried about his rule change anymore. I believe it's going to end up favoring age 60 as normal retirement age.

 

[Flopgut]

Making up facts? The original string was made up by someone that appeared to me to be a regional pilot wanting more jobs to open up for him. Again, that's pretty cocky thinking that what the pilots do at USAir, SWA, DAL, NWA etc is any of his/her concern. Just because someone is flying an RJ somewhere does not entitle them to fly for one of the carriers that proggresion would be slowed due to age 65.

Friends and neighbors:

Old Danno's type is going to get an offer all too soon on some form of cabotage or foreign control that's going to take care of him, but leave everybody else out. And this is the same rational he'll use to justify taking it.

 

[Flopgut]

I can't speak for any other airline, but my airline came out of a very challenging situation without "screwing the junior pilots" in fact. the retiremnt for people junior to me is argueably better than what I have. The senior folks kept the DB, the junior folks get a mix of both. Their DC is more secure than what I have and has the potential for greater gains.

Hmmm. Shouldn't we adjust those dollars for inflation? Doesn't make it look quite as good then.

 

[EMB170Pilot]

Who Likes Girls Jumping On Trampolines?

 

[get2flyin]

Children who are pilots are mostly against changing the rule to the international age standard.

Grandparents who are pilots are mostly for changing the rule to the international age standard.

 

[whymeworry?]

Whyme worry,
BTW, I don't work for CO, I'm guessing you do. You don't have a clue what our situation has been, so why would you be judging what we did?

I may not have all the insights that you do about your carrier's situation, but I certainly do have a clue. You don't have to be a genius to keep apprised of the goings-on at the various MECs in the airline business these days. I have studied virtually all of the MECs responses during the post 9/11 years. Hands down, they all failed to implement the full force of the RLA. I am not saying we shouldn't have helped the our respective airlines during the recovery years. What I am saying is our MECs let mgmt get away with outright robbery and now your generation of pilots want the younger to bail you out. Millions of dollars were paid to executives for running sub-standard balance sheets further into the dirt and labor was the ATM for their financial solutions. ALPA, which was lead by your generation of pilots, failed to draw it's line in the sand and enforce. It is the pilots who are now retiring that lead ALPA and their MECs down this road over the past few years. They failed miserably and now they want to stick around, at the expense of junior pilots, to fix their mistakes. Is this generation not the the whiniest bunch to ever to grace our skies? You guys were the leaders of your carrier's union and you failed to lead, failed to rise to the challenge failed to show mgmt what dealing with labor can result in. Instead, you threw the younger pilots of this business under the bus to save your retirements, which were taken from a majority of you anyway. Your beef should be with mgmt... not your fellow pilots. Mgmts paid themselves ridiculous amounts of cash in the years since these concessionary deals were signed. You could have prevented that behavior by using the RLA. Instead you decide to throw the youth of this business under the bus ONE MORE TIME by refusing to retire when you agreed to int he first place. How much longer do you want us to finance your failures? Let me guess, 10 more years. I would bet a million dollars that when y'all turn 65, you will be asking for the age to change to 70, and at 70 there you'll say there should be no age limit. When does it end?

Is it any wonder that after the last concessionary deal was signed the mgmts of this business succeeded in increasing fares no less than 42 times... fare increases that stuck? They did nothing novel, they simply charged the consumer for the cost of doing business plus a small profit. When we were all negotiating concessions they told us fare hikes were not possible. Our MECs deliver a sub-standard TA and moments later mgmts finally raise fares to cover the cost of our product.

I am not directing this only at your carrier, Dan, this goes to all the major carriers. Nobody, NOBODY opted to use the RLA to maintain their contracts (i.e. strike). Instead, they played into mgmts hands and now they whine that they should be able to stick around further asking the youth of their seniority list to do a cash-out financing of their futures.

Just who was leading these MECs during this period? The X-generation? They Y generation? Nope. You guys had chance to lead, you got spanked by mgmt instead (and took down the whole profession in the process).

I have always suggested that a compromise on this issue would be allowing the retiring pilots to come back into the right seat at full longevity. 99% of all the Captains I have suggested this to balk at such an idea... "why should I have to sit right seat with all my experience?!?" Why should I have to finance your lack of fiscal prudence while you played our unions into mgmts hands?

Look, lets just agree to disagree on this issue, which we obvioulsy do.

I flew a trip the other day where for two legs the Captain told me how angry he was that congress failed to get age-60 passed on the latest version of the FAA reauthorization bill. He went from one diatribe to the next about his 24 years of experience, and what a good stick he is... blah, blah, blah. At the end of the trip, after we get off the bus ride to the employee lot, he gets into his $53,000 brand new truck. Ya' think he's ready to retire?

 

[Wicked-Picket]

Brilliant ! You judge a guy by the truck he drives ?
I'm living in mine!

 

[get2flyin]

I may not have all the insights that you do about your carrier's situation, but I certainly do have a clue. You don't have to be a genius to keep apprised of the goings-on at the various MECs in the airline business these days. .

(Middle deleted because you can read it above)

Ya' think he's ready to retire?

Wow! Nicely stated. YEAH! What he said!

 

[Poahi]

Since when does a job at a regional airline entitle you to move on to a larger carrier?

and it's none of your business

it's none of your business until you work for an airline that is effected.

This generation warfare rhetoric nonsense has got to stop. Every career pilot has a stake in this issue whether you agree or not - and every person able to vote has a right to speak on this issue.

A regional job doesn't entitle you to a job with a DC/DB carrier, but inasmuch as it is reasonable that someone who was 'screwed' out of their DB retirement plan expected that money to retire, it is reasonable for a younger pilot to anticipate eventually getting on with a carrier that does have such a plan.

And here's another thing for those who don't believe it makes a difference: I've run present value numbers on two scenarios - one with a late twenty something flying for a regional and then getting on with a legacy carrier retiring at 65 and another one at 60. The results were virtually equal; i.e., adjusted for the time value of money, those working to 65 with a three year upgrade delay worked for free for the last five years. You can debate my assumptions, but you can't deny there is a consequence.

I've been lucky and fortunate enough to have my retirement under control as well, but please, let's maintain the discussion as if we were peers.

 

[Vastly Underemp]

It's pretty simple, really...

It ain't your f***ing seat until the airline gives it to you, and that means someone has to give it up. It's all a crap shoot as to when in your career that will happen.

 

[Freight Dog]

Nice post whyworry...

One thing though - how were we supposed to use RLA to our advantage when the management playbook involved Bankruptcy Abuse 101 where the judge would toss your contract and you were prohibited from striking PERIOD? "Illegal" strikes?

What do you think?

 

[Hamburger]

You are just plain wrong. I still have 15 years left even at 60 so don't try to say I'm trying to screw my children.

When I was 22 and flying crap airplanes around for $928 a month the idea of age 60 retirement didn't even enter my mind. When I landed a job at a "major" I was just so happy to be there and sit next to guys with decades of experience. I was more interested in learning from them, I couldn't even dream of just waiting to scratch them off the list.

You fail to realize that most of these soon to turn 60 guys probably sat right seat and third seat for 12 - 20 years before being able to check out as captain, depending on when they were hired. The good pay probably didn't happen until the last 10 years of their career, and most of that is just gone.

Many Pilots are so spoiled today. You land a right seat jet job right out of college, no recip commuter/freight job for you and no 5 year engineer seat either. You go right to the right seat of a jet and make captain with minimal time. You seem to think that the captain seat at a major is owed to you and you don't want to wait for it.

Don't forget, most of these guys you want to throw to the curb paid greatly to be where they are and I say, I have always said, let them enjoy a few extra years to help pay for their retirement. I know selfish, self centered children like you won't lift a finger to help them.

Gonna lay it on the line there ATAFan. I understand exactly where you are sitting because there's a good chance I've sat next to you. I was furloughed by ATA four years ago.....
You can give me any story you want to about when you first got hired and how you were an engineer for so many years or whatever. I was there and I'm not an engineer.................
I am on the street. Not an engin-anything. Every extra year you take off the top of your career is a year I don't get at the start.

BTW we all made $1000 a month (if we were lucky) when we were 22. You don't own the patent on that sob story.

Calling me a self centered, spoiled child may make you feel better, but deep down, you must know. You knew from DAY ONE that you would be required to retire at 60 and had Decades to prepare for that day. You readily admit that it didn't even enter your mind. If you were too shortsighted to understand the realities of retirement... YOUR PROBLEM not mine.

IT HAS ENTERED MY MIND.

You claim that I have a sense of entitlement as if something is owed to me in the same breath you admit that you had no clue as to the factors affecting your career earning potential? I claim the right to nothing more than you enjoyed on your way up the ladder years ago. The difference being that I understand the realities of my career and paycheck at a time when you admittedly were clueless. Taking your self admitted poor financial planning out on my generation is poor form.
You seem to fail to realize that those captains that had to sit 12-20 years sidesaddle would've had to sit 17-25 years if the Captains before them retired at 65 instead of 60.

So do you actually have a child my age? Speaking from a context of placing your own career in front of your son/daughter or just postulating?

I've heard a lot of response, but none from a Captain that actually has a child that is trying to follow in their footsteps.

Anyone? Anyone at all?

 

[Hamburger]

Stop being a tool. First you wont get five years less pay as captain, as you will fly for 5 years longer (ie. retire at 65 not 60).

I'll illustrate it again for your benefit. Read slowly. Those who want to change were able to upgrade at roughly 35 because those before them retired at 60. If they work until 65, they get 30 Years of Captains pay.

If they get their way, YOU will upgrade at roughly 40 (because of the extra five years of working they will get holds YOU down) and will retire at 65 for a total of 25 years of Captain pay. There is only one tool here. It is you. Look up the difference that five years of CA pay vs FO pay is anywhere and tell me that I'm the tool.
Enjoy your jungle jet.
Are you really so dense that you don't understand that an extra five years of attrition means that you won't get hired at a carrier that doesn't fly RJs for another five years?

 

[whymeworry?]

Nice post whyworry...

One thing though - how were we supposed to use RLA to our advantage when the management playbook involved Bankruptcy Abuse 101 where the judge would toss your contract and you were prohibited from striking PERIOD? "Illegal" strikes?

What do you think?

That was/ is an idle threat. One which the MECs caved to. This is where we needed to take a stand and lead. Judges know nothing about the force of UNIFIED labor. But... instead of rising to the challenge, the MECs told the rank-and-file that if we were to strike it could be illegal. Oh really? Now the MECs are telling us that a strike IS THE ONLY LEGAL OPTION a pilot group has in today's Bush Admin (read anti-labor) environment when we finally start negotiating our next contract. So which is it? Can we strike or can't we? Of course we can. This is at the heart of the RLA package. Was this issue ever actually ever put to the test? NO! The MECs all folded out of FEAR. This was more an issue of accepting defeat in the form of a concessionary contract, than it was of administering the self-help framework of the RLA.

A judge can say whatever he wants about forcing a contract down labor's throat. Fact is, his word IS NOT above the RLA. In the RLA, we negotiate until we reach an impasse, talks breakdown, we cool off then stirke or CHAOS. The MECs of ALPA never came close to this brink as all accepted the threat (which was more just his interpretation of the rules) of the judge as gospel and used it as spin to tell the pilots to vote on a contract that would ultimately keep their carrier's in tact until they (the MEC reps) retire.

Y'all think I'm wrong? If so then you'd better start feverishly writing your MECs and LECs to demand ALPA moved language through congress that will change the RLA and it's relationship to bancruptcy code. Because if I'm wrong, and mgmt trys this stunt again we will get spanked. I think I'm right, however, perhaps due to my interpretation of the full force of the RLA or maybe due to my philosophical belief that together we can accomplish anything. But for that to occur we need the right leaders.

The topic of this discussion is how senior pilots are sacraficing junior ones for their own selfish interests once again by attempting to change the retirement rule. This can again be seen when the ALPA Exec board voted to change it's stance on age-60. 80% of those exec board members are/ were looking to benefit from such a rule change... without any regard for the jr pilot who will be affected. And they do this while chanting the mantra of unity an ALPA.