DOT seeks age 60 opinion, young guys speak up

[BoilerUP]

Yeah, you're right. My bad... Got a little pissed off...

My wife was flying professionally when she was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes last year, effectively ending her career before it really got started. Comments like that really hit close to home with me.

I want Age 60 to remain as is because every CA in the industry has benefitted from such blatant "age discrimination" yet nobody complained loudly about it until recently - when it was in their financial best interest. I want you out of "my" seat when you turn 60 because thats the way it happened for you and everybody else clamoring for this change. Is that selfish? Sure is, but its no more selfish than changing the rules we all knew about in the middle of the game once they no longer suit you.

That said, I'd never wish a medical problem on anybody...ever.

 

[Flybynite]

I want Age 60 to remain as is because every CA in the industry has benefitted from such blatant "age discrimination" yet nobody complained loudly about it until recently - when it was in their financial best interest. I want you out of "my" seat when you turn 60 because thats the way it happened for you and everybody else clamoring for this change. Is that selfish? Sure is, but its no more selfish than changing the rules we all knew about in the middle of the game once they no longer suit you.

Since you don't like change I hope you enjoy flying your BE20/40 or CL65 till you reach 60. Seems only fair since you knew what your flying. Stay where you are and let someone else get the job at a major. Sounds just as reasonable as your ignorant argument. The nothing ever changes gang.

 

[LEROY]

Why not approve the age 65 rule change...for anyone hired AFTER the rule change takes effect? Let's see how many folks would approve of that measure...

 

[MECH]

How is 65 not discrimination? Why not 67 when you can collect full social security benefits?

This whole issue is about money! I fly that captains that lost on average $200,000 to $300,000 dollars when their retirement was frozen. They want to work an extra 5 years to make it up. By calculations the most they will need to make it up is 2 years. Why the extra 3 years?

This same group that is pushing for the change is the same group that forced ALPA into supporting the age 60 rule.

If it does change and I am stuck in my current seat for an extra 4 years. Then lose my medical at age 60 plus 1 day it will cost me about $200,000 dollars in lost retirement.

How can I support this change.

 

[Andy]

Posted on the UAL board by a pilot - easy instructions on how to comment:

Easy way to comment on Age 60
https://dms.dot.gov/submit/

Page one
click continue

Page two
enter docket no 26139
enter operating administration FAA
enter docket existence does exist
enter submitter information
click continue

Page 3
enter your comments
enter submit


If you read the comments, it looks like the pro-change crowd has been able to rally the troops and 'get out the vote.' They are much more organized with APAAD and PPF. It looks like they've been able to send the message to their members, trying to keep it off of the radar screen for us younger pups. Great work, PVB BEACH.

 

[Jim Smyth]

Why not approve the age 65 rule change...for anyone hired AFTER the rule change takes effect? Let's see how many folks would approve of that measure...

Why not make it age 65 and let all the Pilots that were forced out at age 60 be able to come back immediately at there original seniority after they get there First Class back and pass there check ride? Sounds fair too doesn't it! That way no one benefits from being forced out at age 60!

 

[Lear70]

I'm very sorry to hear that, Boiler, that really sucks and yeah I feel bad for posting it and will remove it if you like (Hansom quoted it anyway so it would stay up regardless). Again, my apologies.

I know how most guys my age feel about it, and I understand you don't want your career to suffer by sitting another 2, 3, or even 5 years in the right seat, but it's age discrimination, and it has to end SOMETIME... if not now, when?

I'm willing to take that extra time in the right seat in order to make it happen now because I believe it's the right thing to do and I will always go with what I believe is right, even if it hurts me financially, but I'm a bit of an idealist.

Personally, I don't have a problem with 67 either, as long as the medical requirements are stringent enough to weed out problems, but 65 is the accepted ICAO age and I think it's fair to match that.

Just my opinion, backed by a bunch of medical research and pilots in other countries currently flying to that age that shows it's perfectly safe. Opinions vary,,,

 

[LEROY]

When you were hired at your (hopefully) 30+ year career at your dream major AND (since career progression is based on an age limit) you understood that you would have a conceivable finite limit in the left seat of a widebody, you accepted it. The person who had to retire in order for your slot to open up accepted that fact too. For you to then attempt to change the rule DURING your career would be a freebie for you, shouldered by those who would come after you.
If you were hired as a government employee knowing you could only make GS-16 as a final career position, changing Age 60 would be like asking for a GS-20 position to be created specifically for you.
If you started out as an O-1 in the military, knowing you could only aspire to O-11 (on a first-name basis w/ the Pres) it would be like altering the rank structure for yourself to become an O-16. You would effectively undermine the stature of the folks senior to you, and undercut the careers of those junior to you.
Seems to me, if it's about safety, then it's certainly as safe, or safer, to allow the rule to change only for those entering the business after the rule changes.
OTOH, if it's about money, and greed, and recouping personal losses incurred as a result of corrupt, ethically questionable managers liquidating your retirement assets, I say don't try to make two wrongs into a right. Address the real problem. Don't attempt to take stop-gap measures which affect everone else, mostly negatively.
Just my pair O' pennies...

 

[General Lee]

I'm very sorry to hear that, Boiler, that really sucks and yeah I feel bad for posting it and will remove it if you like (Hansom quoted it anyway so it would stay up regardless). Again, my apologies.

I know how most guys my age feel about it, and I understand you don't want your career to suffer by sitting another 2, 3, or even 5 years in the right seat, but it's age discrimination, and it has to end SOMETIME... if not now, when?

I'm willing to take that extra time in the right seat in order to make it happen now because I believe it's the right thing to do and I will always go with what I believe is right, even if it hurts me financially, but I'm a bit of an idealist.

Personally, I don't have a problem with 67 either, as long as the medical requirements are stringent enough to weed out problems, but 65 is the accepted ICAO age and I think it's fair to match that.

Just my opinion, backed by a bunch of medical research and pilots in other countries currently flying to that age that shows it's perfectly safe. Opinions vary,,,

The main reason ICAO recommended this was not because they decided one morning that old guys should fly longer and later in life, but rather Europe is short of pilots. The expansion of LCCs in Europe has caused a shortage. That was the imputus. It's great you feel like you want to "do the right thing." But that is the real reason ICAO asked for this--Ryanair and Easyjet expansion.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[EAP]

Why not make it age 65 and let all the Pilots that were forced out at age 60 be able to come back immediately at there original seniority after they get there First Class back and pass there check ride? Sounds fair too doesn't it! That way no one benefits from being forced out at age 60!

Fairness? There is no fairness in business, is there? How about we negotiate a deal. We get rid of seniority entirely and go on merit. And we can all work till our little tickers stop mid trip. How's that? Everybody's right, this is not a safety issue at all. O'l Frankie L. would be proud of us lazy pilots about now, well he probably is.