APAAD Age 60 UPDATE 06 October 2007

[Chest Rockwell]

You miss an important part of the SWA group (your group, I'm assuming).

When they we're the "young guys" they said nothing about changing the rules because that would have impeded their advancement.

It's only now that THEY are the old guys, that they want to change the rules. Thankfully, it'll be another year or two before the change kicks in and at least some of the poor bastards will get stiffed as the rule does not allow rehiring if you've passed the age. They couldn't go back if they wanted to because the rest of the greedy bastards below them won't allow it.

By the way, for Southwest pilots the industry HAS NOT changed for the worse in the last 10 years, but for the better.

Perhaps that why they cannot help themselves to another slice of greed.....................


The mantras of the modern day senior Southwest airline pilot................"Every man for himself" and "do onto others, then split".

I love it.

You are obviuously ill-informed or choose to ignore facts. Most who are heavily involved changing this rule have been involved since their 40's. Many continue to work for change even though they have already turned 60. They believe in the principle that this rule is wrong.

 

[HoursHore]

Refreshing...all this hatred for guys trying to change an obsolete rule.

It's all about greed, guys. You think the "Old Guys" are being greedy because they want to keep their jobs in the face of a changed industry.

They think you, the "Young Guys" are similarly greedy for wanting to move up now, now, now for your share of the pie.

Both sides are equally greedy, men. What matters is what is the correct stance to take given:
-Icao's decision to allow pilots to fly up to 65
-a very different environment for all pilots, and not just the old ones.

Go ahead, stay greedy. Everybody is. It's in our nature. Won't change a thing. This rule is like a train that has left the station. The only question is "what time does it arrive?" But arrive it will!

More important, bitch away like bitter people with nothing left to do except gripe. After all, that is indeed all you have left.

By the way, the rule is going to change whether you like it or not, whether you gripe or not, or whether you live or die tomorrow. All you guys are doing now is to vent, carp and piss & moan about the change until it happens.

Why don't you do something more constructive with your time, like throw the ball with your kid?

Is it not more greedy to want more pie after having a lifetime of Pie?

Out of the way baby boomer. Your less than best generation has had its time, now off to the nursing home.

 

[Pocono Pilot]

Refreshing...all this hatred for guys trying to change an obsolete rule.

It's all about greed, guys. You think the "Old Guys" are being greedy because they want to keep their jobs in the face of a changed industry.

They think you, the "Young Guys" are similarly greedy for wanting to move up now, now, now for your share of the pie.

Both sides are equally greedy, men. What matters is what is the correct stance to take given:
-Icao's decision to allow pilots to fly up to 65
-a very different environment for all pilots, and not just the old ones.

Go ahead, stay greedy. Everybody is. It's in our nature. Won't change a thing. This rule is like a train that has left the station. The only question is "what time does it arrive?" But arrive it will!

More important, bitch away like bitter people with nothing left to do except gripe. After all, that is indeed all you have left.

By the way, the rule is going to change whether you like it or not, whether you gripe or not, or whether you live or die tomorrow. All you guys are doing now is to vent, carp and piss & moan about the change until it happens.

Why don't you do something more constructive with your time, like throw the ball with your kid?

I hope the rule changes when I am 59. Does that make me greedy?

Greedy like you?

 

[Andy]

I oppose a change to age 60, but if it must change, it needs to be phased in. For instance, increase the retirement by three months per year. At least that would limit the windfall to a small group of pilots based on their age. It would also allow advancement to continue, albeit at a slower rate.
My resistance to phased in change would be much less than a sudden change, as proposed.

Of course, I'm sure that the concept of a phased-in change on my part is merely viewed by those who are looking for a windfall as greed on my part. uke:

 

[mdf]

I oppose a change to age 60, but if it must change, it needs to be phased in. For instance, increase the retirement by three months per year. At least that would limit the windfall to a small group of pilots based on their age. It would also allow advancement to continue, albeit at a slower rate.
My resistance to phased in change would be much less than a sudden change, as proposed.

Of course, I'm sure that the concept of a phased-in change on my part is merely viewed by those who are looking for a windfall as greed on my part. uke:

I was thinking 1 year for every 5 years you benefited from the current rule. So if you were hired at 45, and got 15 years in, you could go to age 62. If you were able to put in 25 years, or more than age 60.

 

[spitfire1500]

Screw ....age 65...until Im 59 (2026)!!!

 

[walkthasky]

BLAH BLAH BLAH, SO sick of hearing how they're being thrown under the bus, CRY BABIES! Lifes a bitch, then you retire (and die)...

 

[PsubS]

CRY BABIES!

Yes, indeed you are. All those contesting this issue are simply flapping your gums, since it is going to change whether you like it or not.

"if it doesn't benefit me then I don't care" selfish, sorry, self centered individuals.

That quote applies to everyone who has posted here. Don't think that you have a lock on the moral compass in this issue!

 

[nimtz]

You are obviuously ill-informed or choose to ignore facts. Most who are heavily involved changing this rule have been involved since their 40's. Many continue to work for change even though they have already turned 60. They believe in the principle that this rule is wrong.

Glad these guys were busy trying to change 60 back then instead of oh I don't know, fighting to get Herb's wallet open to fund a real retirement...

 

[Andy]

All those contesting this issue are simply flapping your gums, since it is going to change whether you like it or not.

WOW! With your ability to see into the future, you shouldn't be hanging out here. Put that talent to good use and bring us world peace.

As far as the age changing, yes, it's got a much better shot at changing than in the past. However, barring some miracle, it isn't going to change during this session of Congress. GW will veto the Reauthorization Bill which is very unlikely to override his veto. And Oberstar isn't going to let it be stripped from the Reauthorization Bill to be voted on separately. So the earliest that Congress is likely to act on an age change is mid 2009.

A lot can happen between now and mid 2009.

The economy can go down the toilet and airlines could be furloughing again. What are the odds that an age change would pass while airlines are furloughing? Do you think that the airlines would support a change under those circumstances? Do you think that it would have a bunch of political support under those circumstances?

ALPA's support for the change seems to have waned considerably this summer. Perhaps ALPA will once again be opposed to a change by 2009. I don't know; there was substantial outcry from the membership over ALPA's push poll.

This topic doesn't raise a large amount of political interest outside of those of us immediately effected by the change; the general public could care less. If there are a number of hot button political topics in 2009, this issue won't come to the surface.

And where's the promised NPRM that was supposed to be on the street by this fall, as promised by the FAA Administrator? Oh yeah, her term ended and it's now been shuffled between back offices where it will end up getting buried. I doubt that the acting Administrator's going to put out an NPRM; that'll have to wait for a new Administrator. If the new Administrator doesn't see a need to change the rule, the NPRM will get round filed.

The odds are that age 60 will eventually change. But neither you nor I can speak with absolute certitude that it will or will not change. Nor can either of us give a concrete timeframe for instituting such a change.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Glad these guys were busy trying to change 60 back then instead of oh I don't know, fighting to get Herb's wallet open to fund a real retirement...

But wouldn't that be "changing the rules" that were in place when they got hired?

If you would examine SWA pay, not just pay rates, over the last 15 years you would see that there has been a steady progression.

 

[Freight Dog]

Occam... you're killing me man! You're just absolutely killing me... LOLOL.

Ah, gotta love the geezer's persistency.

Here's the mentality of one pro-65 Aloha pilot who since retired:

It was his contention that the sole reason we lost our A-plan was because of the mass hiring we did in 2000 - 2004 and launching our mainland ETOPS operation. He argues that now that we are implementing our C-plan, those of us hired in that time frame shouldn't get anything.

It gets better...

The day this captain was leaving on his retirement trip, he was flying with his son who's one of our FO's. His son is a very nice guy, by the way. As they were getting all their paperwork, another captain who is also soon to retire came in to our remote dispatch. They were turning in paperwork to the company requesting LOA's so when the rule changed (after their retirement), they can come back at their old seniority - they knew the company was gonna deny their request, and they were saying how getting that would give them grounds for a lawsuit.

I wanted to throw up when I heard that. I didn't want to trump on the old man's last flight, but how about letting your son take a turn in the left seat, old man?

This is the mentality of most pro-65 people. They need to go away...

Nominee: Most Ironic Quote EVER!


The effort is "bogged down" just like the careers of younger pilots would be bogged down by pilots attempting to stick around longer than they should!



50?

YESSSSS!

Keep in mind, you've been moving up because of that process!



Ha! Not quite! Your math is wrong. There are sponsors who support the Reauthorization Bill...but don't support your plan. Example: My hero and my congressman: James Oberstar.



Yeah...my wife gets like that for a few days every month too...



Holy Misleading Statements, Batman!

"Discussed" don't mean "endorses" or "will vote for".



...and by lobbyists and informed constituents, like me!

Looks like you don't hold the sway I do!

Neener! Neener!



(sniff) I wuv him!



Wow! You mean ALPA is acting the way a MAJORITY of it's membership wants it to?



Wilco! I'm sending another "Atta Boy!" to my MEC Chairman....who is strongly opposed to any change to Age 60...just like most ALPA members.



Buh Bye, Tony! Blue skies, brother! Enjoy the retirement you knew would happen waaaay back when you entered this profession! I wish you health and happiness.



Alzheimers? Demetia? Other priorities? Ethical re-awakening? [Choose One]



Is this a great country...or what!



MY man! Jimmy Rocks! Woo Hoo! You go, Jimbo! Keep up the good work!

 

[gutshotdraw]

If this thing is going to become law anyway, can someone PLEASE add language to the bill that makes 65 the age cutoff for ALL compensated flying including 91, 91K, and 135? We've got some fossils in their SEVENTIES driving around the planet and they have got to GO. And now we really ARE talking a safety issue. At least if the age does go up to 65, a lot of these guys will have had enough by then and won't go looking for work in the 91, 91K or 135 world.

Please do not consider this an endorsement of the age change to 65. I just want ONE RULE for ALL COMPENSATED FLYING.

 

[Daddy]

What is going to happen when the age changes to 65 and pilots are forced to retire then. Is this AAPAD going to regroup and say that 65 is age discrimination as well?

Bingo!
You can count on it....Paul Emens is a greedy, self-serving SOB who will stop at nothing to prolong his time in the left seat...it will never be enough

 

[bubbers44]

Who has more greed, the pilot that wants to keep flying and continuing his career or the one that wants him fired because of his age so he can get his job?