Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Discussing Age 65 WITHOUT arguing the merits

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top