Discussing Age 65 WITHOUT arguing the merits

[Andy Neill]

Merry Christmas

.....

 

[mach none]

stagnation-furloughs-selfish greed-igotmineandiamgonnapulltheladderupbehindme.

LOVE 65

 

[alaskaplt]

stagnation-furloughs-selfish greed-igotmineandiamgonnapulltheladderupbehindme.

LOVE 65

I wish we could see who voted how on this recent healthcare assessment. I bet the majority of the 22% who voted against it are either over 60 or close to it. Hopefully a byproduct of a strike will be mass exodus by those greedy bastards. Doubt it though.

 

[Grandpa +65]

Here we go again!

 

[Chief Pilot]

There are merits to the change to age 65?

Also I second alaskaplt.

 

[vtech]

Fly as long as you're proficient and medically qualified. Age discrimination should never be tolerated.

 

[bubbers44]

I retired approaching 60. It was the law. Now approaching 65 I don't feel any different but how would I know if I was slowing down or not? Passing a physical is easy. Passing a checkride may or may not show proficiency in certain situations like long duty days or all night operations. I have flown with 55 year old captains that were having problems and we all knew it. Age is a factor but it affects each person differently.

 

[vtech]

Age is a factor but it affects each person differently.

Exactly. So, if you're medically qualified and proficient, you ought to be allowed to work if you want to. If you're disqualified by nothing other than age, it's age discrimination.

 

[vtech]

In order to honor the terms of the thread title and attempt to discuss the Age 65 Rule without talking about the merits of the new rule I'll say this: I think the Age 65 legislation was printed on good paper with a nice type style.

 

[DashTrash400]

In order to honor the terms of the thread title and attempt to discuss the Age 65 Rule without talking about the merits of the new rule I'll say this: I think the Age 65 legislation was printed on good paper with a nice type style.

...good, soft paper, not uncomfortably hard but also not so flimsy that I get poop on my hands when I use it to wipe my butt after blowing steaming chunks all over the picture of John Prater I have taped to my toilet bowl because I got the hershey squirts from eating too much Ramen and Cup-o-Soup because I'm stuck at the regionals indefinitely so the codgers who voted to outsource half their airline can continue to take naps across the Atlantic till they keel over...yep, that's some mighty nice paper! :laugh:

 

[contrail67]

stagnation-furloughs-selfish greed-igotmineandiamgonnapulltheladderupbehindme.

LOVE 65

You actually spelled that right!

 

[Andy Neill]

I posted another thread where I was more clear on the intent. I was trying to lay out the feasibility of establishing a less than 60 age limit as an agreed provision of future contracts between unions and management. I would appreciate it if those comments would be posted on that thread and this thread could die or be removed.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Now approaching 65 I don't feel any different but how would I know if I was slowing down or not? Passing a physical is easy. Passing a checkride may or may not show proficiency in certain situations like long duty days or all night operations. I have flown with 55 year old captains that were having problems and we all knew it. Age is a factor but it affects each person differently.

I do fly under those conditions with 60+ guys here in Japan all the time. This is a political issue that has nothing to do with physiology and in fact it has become such an issue because of the current status of the industry, if all the majors where hiring 80 pilots a month a la pre 9/11, all of you hypocrites would be applauding this, it has nothing to do with abilities and everything to do with the fact that you are stuck on the right seat a little longer. It's political, nothing else

 

[Andy Neill]

Again
1. This was intended as a thread to discuss the feasibility of establishing a lower than 65 limit in future contracts and not to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of the rule itself.
2. It was my intent to gut this thread of content and for posts to be added to the Three Score and Five thread.

Mods, can this thread be removed, please.

 

[Flopgut]

The feasability is: Get pilots the money and they will retire! We [CAL] Just had an early out and lot's of pilots took it. It was an interesting phenomenon to observe. Separate age from the equation and just find a way to get more pilots the money and things will take care of themselves. The pitfall was/is what we are dealing with right now: Some pilots could work to age 100 and not have enough money. Not so coincidentally, those type are predominately the ones who didn't leave CAL under the recent early out. And that is likely to be the case throughout all airlines. It's unpleasant, but it's gremaine to the equation so it must be discussed. We're going to have to wait out the perpetually unprepared goofballs among us, AND we're going to have to watch out for them! They live hand to mouth, and are usually not the ones you hear about with sick spouses or extraordinary circumstances. They just want more large, monthly paychecks and cashflow, specific amounts don't matter because no number will enough. So as things improve we will have to watch these guys because they will want to merchandise decreasing any and all recalls, growth or lower end pay bumps (or anything that isn't going straight into their own pockets) for thier own insatiable needs.

 

[Flopgut]

It is a small miracle to get hired into this profession. It is a somewhat larger miracle to be able to retire from this profession. I'm in favor of both of those becoming a reality for more pilots. It is no miracle whatsoever to find a way to stay longer in a seniority system! That is to say: Flying professionally to, say, age 75 might also be somewhat miraculous. But certainly not in a seniority system when you did so by soaking up a rule change! That's not really different than getting hired in a manner to everyone else's detriment.

The best test for working past age 60 I ever saw was wether or not anyone would hire you? (Yes, you always could work past 60) Make no mistake, the loudest voices wanting this rule to change and supporting it now, wouldn't be able to get hired past 60.

 

[Flopgut]

So the answer is: Get more pilots more money. Give those who can stick to a plan the opportunity to build a retirment. This will not be accomplihed if we let the greed imperative have a free pass. Yes the rule has changed but we have to roll up our sleeves and do some hard work. We can't pull punches when we're talking about our weak links.

 

[Andy Neill]

Please refer to the questions on the other thread and let this thread die please.
http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=119512

 

[Flopgut]

Start a two part thread that asks:

How are the pilots who will work past 60 managing money in these tough times so they are ready to retire at 65? (that will be an eye opener. they aren't doing anything)

And, what can we do contracturally and within the RLA to get a broadbased retirement change for US 121 airline pilots?

 

[Andy Neill]

Start a two part thread that asks:

How are the pilots who will work past 60 managing money in these tough times so they are ready to retire at 65? (that will be an eye opener. they aren't doing anything)

And, what can we do contracturally and within the RLA to get a broadbased retirement change for US 121 airline pilots?

Bingo! Thanks.

 

[mach none]

The same group that lobbied for age 65, did nothing to help pass the law when they were on the bottom of the seniority list years ago.

Hypocritical? I think so.

 

[Andy Neill]

The same group that lobbied for age 65, did nothing to help pass the law when they were on the bottom of the seniority list years ago.

Hypocritical? I think so.

But not in the spirit of this thread. Now to get back to the point, is there something that can be done in terms of revising union contracts to reverse the effects?

 

[hockeypilot44]

My favorite are the NWA pilots who bid to sit sideways for a month or two because they turned 60 before the rule was changed. As soon as the rule was changed, every single one of them bid back to captain or wide-body first officer. The rule change was a shame. In the grand scheme of things, ALPA dropped the ball. ALPA should have organized a nation-wide shut-down or strike as soon as the first pension was taken away. Sometimes laws need to be broken in order to make sure the right thing is done.

On another note, I also think we should be cutting policians' pay and benefits. Afterall, our government is broke. That is their solution to the auto companies. Get pay cuts from your workers. Why would the government's solution be any different.

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

It wasn’t too hard to predict this was going to happen. Even the brakes are slammed on at Southwest. I think everyone better start enjoying their seats. It looks like we’re all going to be there for awhile!

AA767AV8TOR

http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/1091523.html

Pilot hiring is at lowest point since 9-11, firm say

By TREBOR [email protected]


Pilot hiring hit its lowest point last month since just after Sept. 11, 2001, as the airline industry shrank, according to a report released Friday.

Airlines hired just 133 pilots in November while laying off more than 400, according to AIR Inc., a consulting firm that focuses on careers and jobs for airline pilots. About 4,500 pilots are on furlough nationwide.

In November 2007, the industry hired 1,084 pilots and had about 2,700 on furlough.

None of the major airlines, such as Fort Worth-based American Airlines, United Airlines or Delta Air Lines, hired any pilots during the month, according to AIR. Only smaller regional carriers and corporate-jet operators hired.

Those jobs typically pay far less than flying positions at large airlines like American and United.

American has by far the most pilots on furlough, 1,969. That’s about 23 percent of the 8,379 pilots that AIR has listed for American.

United has the second-most pilots on furlough, 222, while Dallas-based Southwest has none.

Pilots on furlough keep their seniority and can be recalled to work when the airlines begin hiring. But they don’t receive wages or most benefits.

Furloughed pilots from large airlines rarely take lower-paying jobs with smaller carriers because they risk losing their seniority.

The big airlines have been cutting flights in recent months amid a steep drop in travel demand. More cuts are expected next year, which could lead to more furloughs.

TREBOR BANSTETTER, 817-390-7064

 

[mach none]

But not in the spirit of this thread. Now to get back to the point, is there something that can be done in terms of revising union contracts to reverse the effects?

With the elimination of the A plans, do we really need to change anything in the contracts other than pay and the DC contribution?

Without the A plan, there is no penalty for retirement before 60 or after 60. You go when you have had enough of this torture.

 

[alaskaplt]

With the elimination of the A plans, do we really need to change anything in the contracts other than pay and the DC contribution?

Without the A plan, there is no penalty for retirement before 60 or after 60. You go when you have had enough of this torture.

And/or elimination of the 50% lump sum payment from the A plan. They would flee like rats off a sinking ship. I actually hope we can eliminate this for all the people who didn't take the full retirement, plus 6 months of full medical, along with the 100k. It would be great to see them have to leave and not get the 100k that they turned down. I hope it is my vote that seals it.

 

[Andy Neill]

Now we're getting somewhere.

 

[mach none]

.....

 

[reroute]

IIRC, the age 65 change here in the US was LEGISLATED in Congress. Any contract REQUIRING pilots to retire earlier than this would most likely be considered illegal.

Now, negotiation of something that would make it ADVANTAGEOUS to retire early is certainly feasable.

But first you need to get your company to pony up any additional labor expense. Next, you would need to get the majority of the pilots to vote yes on any TA.

And, up to this point, not even the strongest airline in the land has been willing to do something such as this. They don't see any reason to do so, nor do they envision any enhancement to their bottom line as a result.

 

[Andy Neill]

IIRC, the age 65 change here in the US was LEGISLATED in Congress. Any contract REQUIRING pilots to retire earlier than this would most likely be considered illegal.

I don't agree on this point. The legislation does not allow those to fly airline beyond Age 65. There is nothing in the rule requiring the airline to retain those above any lesser age.

So if ALPA and a carrier agree that retirement is required at age 63, for instance, what would prevent them from doing so? Others have pointed out that this may be advantageous to the carrier by reducing the average longevity pay of the pilot force and I am sure many pilots would be glad to see the older pilots walk out the door a couple of years earlier.