Capt Prater: Here is your sign!

[tomgoodman]

Accomplices

..management steals your pension...

Yes, management was the burglar, but ALPA drove the getaway car. At Delta, they agreed "not to oppose" the pension termination, and silenced protests from retirees by banning them from all ALPA forums, (posting OR EVEN READING)! :angryfire

 

[A350]

Huck:

I wouldn't worry about me.....I know I am not worried about you. After all, most Captains (myself included) wish they made as much as you.

Prater talks a good story, but the train has left the station.


A350

 

[enigma]

To me, this is fairly simple. The FAA is looking at changing the rule. ALPA has a choice, do we oppose the change; do we take no position and hope to be able to jump on the bandwagon after the music starts; or do we get on early in hopes of shaping the regs to fit our needs as best we can?

If we oppose, we take the chance of being left out of the process that will inevitably occur as the rules are being "massaged" by all of the other alphabet groups - But we just might be able to keep 60 as the age.

If we take no position we also chance being being left out and we also will most likely be allowing the rule to go away.

If we get on board early, we just might be able to "massage" the rules in our favor.

I don't envy the position in which National finds itself. The world is changing and they aren't in charge of the change. National will have a significant number of detractors, no matter which way they choose to proceed.

I have met Captain Prater, and I do believe that he is sincere in his desire to restore the profession. I don't have the answers, and I doubt that anyone has a solution that pleases everyone, but I do trust his intentions and I will wait until more facts are out before I make my decision.

Please feel free to PM. I do expect to have an influence on the direction taken by National on this subject.

Again, I have NOT made up my mind. Convince me of the best way to go. I am looking for ideas.

 

[Falconjet]

I trust his intentions as well, as he has clearly demonstrated already. The problem is that his intentions are to protect his interests instead of those of the majority of ALPA members.

Funny that the head of APA doesn't seem worried about being left out of the process, he is fighting hard to ensure that his union's views are not left out of the process.

Forming a blue ribbon panel to manage the impact of the change is a far cry from trying to oppose the change in accordance with the views of the majority.

FJ

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Over age 60 flying is coming to America. Get used to it.

Truthfully....Over age 60 in airline aircraft is already in America. It just isn't flown by American pilots...yet. It is however being flown by foreign pilots, carrying american citizens, in American airspace, approved by our American government.

Tejas

 

[Hamburger]

It is just age discrimination plain and simple.

Guess what, so is 65.

Yes, management was the burglar, but ALPA drove the getaway car. At Delta, they agreed "not to oppose" the pension termination, and silenced protests from retirees by banning them from all ALPA forums, (posting OR EVEN READING)! :angryfire

I notice that you didn't list ME as responsible for your pension disappearing. So please explain why it is ME you want to steal from to replace it? This is going to personally cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars and years of my life that I don't want to work.

 

[jetjockey#1]

I trust his intentions as well, as he has clearly demonstrated already. The problem is that his intentions are to protect his interests instead of those of the majority of ALPA members.

Funny that the head of APA doesn't seem worried about being left out of the process, he is fighting hard to ensure that his union's views are not left out of the process.

Forming a blue ribbon panel to manage the impact of the change is a far cry from trying to oppose the change in accordance with the views of the majority.

FJ

I second this post.

Cpt. Prater must fight this possible "rule change" tooth and nail.

Oh yeah, one more thing Cpt Prater: Represent the will of the membership or resign.

 

[vtwo]

Originally Posted by vtwo
It is just age discrimination plain and simple.


Guess what, so is 65.

So is any age.
65 is just closer to what the rest of American society is used to.

I have an Idea let make retirement mandatory at age 40.

 

[SkiFishFly]

“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

 

[SSDD]

The one thing people tend to ignore on this issue is the QUALIFIED pilot shortage we already find ourselves in. Most of the regionals are scraping the bottom of the barrel, and increasing pay does no good if there are no pilots in the training pipeline.

Retaining pilots beyond age 60 helps mitigate that shortage.

 

[PlaneDrvr]

Originally Posted by vtwo
It is just age discrimination plain and simple.


Guess what, so is 65.

So is any age.
65 is just closer to what the rest of American society is used to.

I have an Idea let make retirement mandatory at age 40.

Sorry to inform you but it is definitely NOT "age discrimination" as that case was already taken to the U.S. Supreme Court and they ruled that the 'Age 60 Rule' was NOT age discrimination. Unless you want to take a case all the way to the Supreme Court and get them to 'overturn' their previous ruling it is NOT age discrimination.

Also, I guess that it is also 'age disrimination' that ATC controllers are 'required' to retire at age 55; or the 'fact' that no one over the age of 38 yrs old can apply and be hired as a 'Sky Marshall' and so on and so.........

Again, Age 60 is NOT Age Discrimination.

Hope that makes it clear for you.

DA

 

[PlaneDrvr]

The one thing people tend to ignore on this issue is the QUALIFIED pilot shortage we already find ourselves in. Most of the regionals are scraping the bottom of the barrel, and increasing pay does no good if there are no pilots in the training pipeline.

Retaining pilots beyond age 60 helps mitigate that shortage.

What pilot shortage???????????

I have been hearing about the "impending pilot shortage" for almost all of my 20+ yrs. in this business. Haven't seen it yet.

Here's a thought. The reason why the regionals are as you put it "scraping the bottom of the barrel" and have trouble finding 'experienced/qualified' pilot is that They Don't PAY $hit. There are still plenty (in the thousands), of experienced, qualified pilot out there, 'furloughed' who won't work for a company that won't pay a 'decent' wage. And, the "bottom of the Barrel" guys are applying in mass to outfits like SkumBus; who only pays an 'experienced A320 Capt' all of $65,000.

There is NO pilot shortage, so please don't use that as some 'poor, stupid' excuse for repealing age 60.

DA

 

[TheBaron]

I notice that you didn't list ME as responsible for your pension disappearing. So please explain why it is ME you want to steal from to replace it? This is going to personally cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars and years of my life that I don't want to work.

Who said you were guaranteed anything in this industry? Are you some kinda' pinko commie or socialist that you think you are "entitled" to employment for life under specific and unchanging rules? How is your position any less greedy than that of some 58 year old pilot that wants to provide for his family? Maybe you should look into Avon or Mary Kay so you can be your own boss.

 

[Huck]

There is NO pilot shortage, so please don't use that as some 'poor, stupid' excuse for repealing age 60.

Yeah, I didn't get that - we're all supposed to take a break in our career progression to give the ATA time to recover from years of sh!t wages and crap working conditions....

 

[SkiFishFly]

Sorry to inform you but it is definitely NOT "age discrimination" as that case was already taken to the U.S. Supreme Court and they ruled that the 'Age 60 Rule' was NOT age discrimination. Unless you want to take a case all the way to the Supreme Court and get them to 'overturn' their previous ruling it is NOT age discrimination.

Also, I guess that it is also 'age disrimination' that ATC controllers are 'required' to retire at age 55; or the 'fact' that no one over the age of 38 yrs old can apply and be hired as a 'Sky Marshall' and so on and so.........

Again, Age 60 is NOT Age Discrimination.

Hope that makes it clear for you.

DA

The rules of the game have changed since the supreme court ruled on this issue.

The courts will no longer hold up the age 60 rule. When a Government agency prohibits a US citizen from performing a job based soley on age and yet the same gov agency allows a non US citizen to perform the same job on US soil past the age at which it allows the US citizen to work - that is age discrimination.

 

[Flopgut]

Who said you were guaranteed anything in this industry? Are you some kinda' pinko commie or socialist that you think you are "entitled" to employment for life under specific and unchanging rules? How is your position any less greedy than that of some 58 year old pilot that wants to provide for his family? Maybe you should look into Avon or Mary Kay so you can be your own boss.

Who said [you] were guaranteed a pension? Seems adequately causal in your case that if you lose one it's OK to take from your peers? If you have another setback after the age change are you going to hit up your peers again? The arguement to keep age 60 is "less greedy" because it only seeks to pass the same onto others. No more no less. That 58 year old can go work somewhere else. Pilots have lost pensions in the past and dealt with it.

Talk about "employment for life", you've got it backward. Age 65 as a retirement age is championed by a bunch of greedy geezers who insist cradle to grave employment is their inalienable right!

 

[tomgoodman]

Blame the pension-dumpers

I notice that you didn't list ME as responsible for your pension disappearing. So please explain why it is ME you want to steal from to replace it? This is going to personally cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars and years of my life that I don't want to work.

Since you had no part in any pension-dumping, you may become one of the innocent victims, along with retired and furloughed pilots who could not vote. The ALPA pension-dumpers didn't want to stagnate careers either, but they should have foreseen that those deprived of compensation ALREADY EARNED would make legal efforts to get it back, via an extension of the retirement age. Unfortunately for junior pilots, the consequences will fall upon many, innocent or not; but it won't be retirees who block your career advancement -- we can't come back.

 

[TheBaron]

Who said [you] were guaranteed a pension? Seems adequately causal in your case that if you lose one it's OK to take from your peers? If you have another setback after the age change are you going to hit up your peers again? The arguement to keep age 60 is "less greedy" because it only seeks to pass the same onto others. No more no less. That 58 year old can go work somewhere else. Pilots have lost pensions in the past and dealt with it.

Talk about "employment for life", you've got it backward. Age 65 as a retirement age is championed by a bunch of greedy geezers who insist cradle to grave employment is their inalienable right!

Who is "taking" something from their peers. There goes that entitlement mentality. Where did you get the idea you were "owed" an upgrade at a certain point in your career. When the economy tanks and pilots are furloughed should the "greedy" geezers give up their jobs so the younger pilots can keep theirs? The only thing constant in this career is change. How is it any "less greedy" for a junior pilot to be worried about how this will affect his bottom line? Both sides of the coin have valid points and they are all EQUALLY self serving.

 

[regionaltard]

There is NO pilot shortage..................

DA

Yeah, right.

 

[Hamburger]

Who said you were guaranteed anything in this industry? Are you some kinda' pinko commie or socialist that you think you are "entitled" to employment for life under specific and unchanging rules?

No, dumbass, I don't want 'employment for life'. I want to retire at 60. If you want to start comparing people to socailists, note that raising the age falls in step with the EU way of doing things.

How is your position any less greedy than that of some 58 year old pilot that wants to provide for his family?

This is unbelieveably simple. Those on our side want nothing more than the same opportunities that those before us enjoyed. NOTHING MORE. Those on your side want to alter the rules so that they benefit at the expense of those on my side. Only one party here is greedy. It is very, very, Black and White. No amount of rationalization will change this fact.