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

[Hamburger]

How about "gee son, I just shelled out $100 k plus for your education and flight lessons to get you where you are and your poor old man needs another couple of years of income to pay off those bills. Thank you for understanding""

This is my favorite COP OUT.
If you are such a tightwad that you demand your children reimburse you for their education, then the FIVE YEARS worth of Captain's pay you are STEALING from your own son(daughter) will more than pay for the money you spent on his (her) education.
If you choose to be a bank rather than a parent, that is up to you. Getting more for yourself somehow makes it easier to get it from your own children?
Throwing a guilt trip on them, using their education as leverage is sad.
If you don't want to/can't pay for it, be a Man and let them know up front that they're on their own.

Give them the opportunity to reach the same place in their career you did at their age and let them worry about their own finances.

 

[FlyByNight1]

Hamburger - The "Think about the children" routine is a little dramatic dont you think? Man-Up a little!!

 

[Hamburger]

Not at all.

I am referencing pilots who have children who are pilots and are advocating the extension of their own careers at the expense of their children's careers.

No Drama at All.

I am sure that a lot of people for age 65 Don't have children who are pilots and can't fully grasp how they are screwing the generation behind them. I'm simply trying to give them a frame of reference because they don't seem to acknowledge the fact the first FIVE YEARS they were Captains (be it 1985-1990 or 1990-1995) happened because those before them retired at 60.

You want to 'Man Up'? Do it by retiring at 60 like every pilot before you. Don't try to change the rules when it gets to be your time to step aside.

 

[Hamburger]

Hamburger - The "Think about the children" routine is a little dramatic dont you think? Man-Up a little!!

For ********************'s sake, man. Age 65 passing means that you spend another FIVE YEARS flying a 1900 for whoever.

Look at any airline pay scale and figure what FIVE YEARS worth of Captain pay equals. Then come tell me that Man-Up means that I should sit back and do nothing while they take it from all of us.

 

[FlyByNight1]

first of all, I dont think the equation would quite work out that way. Its to simplistic to say age 65 passing would delay every regional pilot by 5 years; yeah, it might slow things up a bit at some companies, but not the entire industry. Companies will continue to expand, and some will fold. I dont believe the job market will change a great deal as a result. You have to consider that a lot of companies are hiring do to expansion, not just attrition.

"Look at any airline pay scale and figure what FIVE YEARS worth of Captain pay equals."

How about looking at this from a different direction. Think about how your career earnings will be affected with five more years at top pay, stocks, profit sharing, investment, ect... Remember- you get 5 more years too friend. Look, I am as anxious as you are to move on (trust me). But, I do have to agree with previous posts - it will be good for the industry. In one mans opinion.

 

[Hamburger]

The current group of pilots facing retirement at 60 and are fighting to extend it to 65 are BABY BOOMERS. They are the most populous generation in the history of America. If you think that them having an extra FIVE YEARS of working in a seniority/attrition based workforce doesn't affect EVERYONE below them, you are a fool.

How about looking at this from a different direction.

Seniority only works in ONE Direction.

Think about how your career earnings will be affected with five more years at top pay, stocks, profit sharing, investment, ect...

We get five years LESS at top pay. Not five years more. They want to upgrade at 30 and retire at 65 and make us upgrade at 35 and retire at 65. They get to have five more years at double pay than we do. Don't forget the reason they got to upgrade at 30 was that those before them left at 60.
So you've got the previous generation that upgraded at 30 and retired at 60 (30 years), and the younger generation who will upgrade at 35 and retire at 65 (30 years) on one side. On the other side, you've got those who upgraded at 30 (due to those before them retiring at 60), but want to retire at 65.(35 YEARS).

Simple math chief. SWA, CAL, DAL, FDX, UPS are already winding down. You are on the wrong side of the latest hiring boom. Attrition is your best firend.
YOU are the one getting screwed. Wake up. Age 65 passes and you will be in that 1900 until 2011. Have fun.

 

[Wicked-Picket]

Here's a question. Any children/pilots out there who voted to terminate their daddy's pensions?
If you added up all the overtime and vacation sellback at my former airline, you can easily see where the career stagnation really comes from.

 

[Hamburger]

Here's a question. Any children/pilots out there who voted to terminate their daddy's pensions?

No, Wicked, there isn't.

Daddy's pension was stolen by MANAGEMENT, Not pilots.

The Group pushing for age 65 is PILOTS taking from PILOTS.

Nobody is giving management some sort of pass on this one, but replacing your loss by taking from junior pilots is wrong any way you cut it.

 

[FlyByNight1]

Now see... I was trying to have a civil conversation.

O.K. Hamburger, now I see how your looking at it. Your one of those glass half empty guys. Your looking at it as us compared to them (or us against them). Their is no "them", we're all in the same industry. Im looking at it as me compared to me. I welcome the opertunity to have 5 more years. I find it funny that your ticked off that a guy doesnt want to give up his job of 35 years so you can have it. What would you say if someone said that to you at your job. Stop trying to invent ways your getting screwed, its bound to serve your career better. As for the personal attacks: You dont know anything about my position.
P.S. relax! your self induced stress might prevent you from seeing age 65.

 

[Phaedrus]

I'd say that in about 40 years from passage this whole age 65 thing will be a moot point.
Unless, of course, age 70, 75, 80, etc comes up. Then the whole cycle starts again. This could all be avoided with a phased-in age change.