FAA Age 60 debate

[skeezer]

Hey we (ALPA members) took a vote and all you dorks who want to work till you die lost. Suck it up and start saving for retirement.

Crying about it won't do a thing but give you high blood pressure from being stressed-out, and in that case you wouldn't make it to 60 anyway so give it up.

Peace out!

Skeezer

 

[B6Driver]

Like it or not, the age 60 rule will change. When is the real question and not if.
I never voted on it and I paid ALPO dues for 13.5 years before that POS operation sold me and my group down the river.
There are a lot of furloughed pilots on the street still so maybe this may not be the time but it will change and change it will.
When you have been a member of ALPO long enough, you'll agree that they only look out for themselves and not the members that pay the bills. I hate ALPA, is that clear enough.
I feel so much better now. Breath in, breath out. Breath in, breath out.

 

[taloft]

congress ... is afraid to change something they could get blamed for later. it ain't happening any time soon.

Now we have the real reason it won't be changing.

 

[BLUE BAYOU]

The Age 60 Rule has other ramifications too. I just read an article in AOPA that states for those who wish to fly their own airplanes beyond that age, the insurance companies are tacking on a 60+ premium that goes up exponentionallly--because, they say, that is the age pilots retire from professional flying and are deemed as more risky because that's what the FAA determined...

 

[Fly-n-hi]

To say that the age 60 rule shouldn't be extended due to the likelyhood of pilot incapacitation or sudden illness is rediculous.

My grandfather kept up his first class medical until he was 75 and the only reason he didn't keep it up after that is because he was hit by a car. Many of his 70+ year old friends are still flying in some capacity.

The real reason that most pilots here want the age 60 rule to stay in place is because they think that they can move up the seniority ladder or get recalled from furlough faster. It's just a way to get rid of the senior pilots. The age 60 rule, when conceived, had nothing to do with health considerations.

I also hear some argue that they do not want to have to work past age 60. Huh??? No one is making you work past age 50, or 40, or 30. If you don't want to work past age 60 then don't...no one will force you to. I would like to be able to decide for myself if I want to work beyond 60.

And if you are worried that extending the age to 65 will force you to work another 5 years in order to receive you full pension...I wouldn't count on a pension at all. You're better off investing your money on your own in a 401k, a roth IRA, or even better...both. This way you can retire whenever you feel you have enough saved up plus you own your investment. Besides, pensions are about to become a thing of the past.

Those last 5 years at your company will be the most productive years most likely so what's wrong with allowing me to have 5 more?

It's simple...if you don't want to work past age 60 then don't. If you don't trust my health at age 63 then don't fly on my flight. You are free to get off although I'm willing to bet you wouldn't.

 

[ivauir]

The real reason that most pilots here want the age 60 rule to stay in place is because they think that they can move up the seniority ladder or get recalled from furlough faster. It's just a way to get rid of the senior pilots. The age 60 rule, when conceived, had nothing to do with health considerations.

But those senior pilots got to move up faster because the rule existed. Now many of them are crying about how unfair it is. Yes it is unfair, it was when they were in their 30s and 40s too

Those last 5 years at your company will be the most productive years most likely so what's wrong with allowing me to have 5 more?

Because then my last 5 years will start later, so if I chose to quit at 60 I'll miss out on my 5 most productive years. So the guys that are senior when the rule changes get 10 years while everyone else gets 5 (your numbers).

It's simple...if you don't want to work past age 60 then don't. If you don't trust my health at age 63 then don't fly on my flight. You are free to get off although I'm willing to bet you wouldn't.

It IS simple, the age 60 rule was in place when you were junior, now you are senior and you want to stay in my seat as long as you can. You accuse junior folks of being greedy, but clearly you have a lot to gain if the rule goes away.

Please understand that I think the age 60 rule is bogus, I support its repeal. But if it goes away my upgrade WILL be delayed.
It needs to be gradually phased out. I'd start with those reaching the age of ATP first (I think it is 23). That way there is no one junior to be hurt. No one is even proposing anyting like this because there is a whole generation hoping for and even expecting a windfall. They'll get more time at the top of the senority pile than anyone else before or after. On top of that they expect the junior folks to happily go along with their scheme.

 

[Moonshiner]

I say lower it to 55 (but only until I turn 54!).

 

[filejw]

Age 60 was originally pushed for by the CEO of American in 1959 so he didn't have to pay the most senior pilots on the new jets.He used his pull with the FAA to save himself money.Some things never change.This alone makes me hope for a rule change.

 

[Fly-n-hi]

ivauir,


Where do I start???

"It IS simple, the age 60 rule was in place when you were junior, now you are senior and you want to stay in my seat as long as you can. You accuse junior folks of being greedy, but clearly you have a lot to gain if the rule goes away."

Whoa!! I'm 28 and in the bottom 15% of my seniority list. I have no problem letting the guys who are 60 stay five more years.

"But those senior pilots got to move up faster because the rule existed. Now many of them are crying about how unfair it is. Yes it is unfair, it was when they were in their 30s and 40s too"

I don't care what their attitudes were back then. I'm concerned with today. What is the point of this argument?

"Because then my last 5 years will start later, so if I chose to quit at 60 I'll miss out on my 5 most productive years. So the guys that are senior when the rule changes get 10 years while everyone else gets 5 (your numbers)."

Sorry. Without trying to sound disrespectful...This argument makes absolutely no sense. Why do you care how much other pilots are getting? I am, as you sould be, concerned with my own outlook. I'm supposed to oppose extending the age 60 rule because someone else might make a little more money than me??? In reality they will not make more than me because I will get an additional 5 years as well.

"...now you are senior and you want to stay in my seat as long as you can."

Again, without trying to sound direspectful, this sentence is the foundation of your argument. Explain to me please what you mean by "my" seat??? This sentence suggests envy.

 

[3M1900FO]

Look I Have Flown With Several 59 Year Olds. Now I Understand Why Cathay Retires At 55.

 

[3M1900FO]

Plan Ahead Sell Real Estate Be A Sim Instructor Etc Etc. Guys Above 55 Dont Want To Be There Anymore. Its Not Our Fault That They Have Four Divorces And Lost Every At Age 54 And Take It Out On The F.o. Theres An Emery Guy Who I Flew With In His Last Month What A Horrible Experience Of Bitterness And Lets Play The Pathetic Victim.

 

[ivauir]

Whoa!! I'm 28 and in the bottom 15% of my seniority list. I have no problem letting the guys who are 60 stay five more years.

.

I am not going to turn this into a math lesson, but if you are 28 you need to consider the impact this will have. You won't get an extra 5 super productive years, your extra years will just start later. The majoity of folks pushing for the change are 50+ and have questionable motives. I think it is a bad rule and should (and will change). But every one I know who is personaly pushing for the change has a lot to bemefit. Sometimes they get upset when I do not share their enthusiasm.

 

[Fly-n-hi]

"I am not going to turn this into a math lesson, but if you are 28 you need to consider the impact this will have. You won't get an extra 5 super productive years, your extra years will just start later."

I realize that I will not upgrade for an additional 5 years. I don't have a problem with that. You are completely wrong in this regard: I will get an extra 5 years of FO pay...and at 75K to 85K for those 5 years that is fine by me. And my time in the left seat over the span of my career will not be any less if I retire at 65...I will just have to wait 5 more years before I get there (assuming that every pilot senior to me opts to continue flying past age 60).

Now, to steal your line, I don't want to turn this into a math lesson but that five years will get me an additional $400,000 to $450,000 (before taxes). If I invest 20% (pre-tax) of what I make into my 401k (or IRA), plus the 3% the company (AWA) matches, plus the 7% that they (AWA) give me regardless of what I invest, and then factor in compound interest...that comes out to alot of money by the time i'm 65. 20% + 3% + 7% of $80,000 = $24,000 a year for 5 years...earning compound interest for 20 or more years = alot. It certainly will get me quite a bit more money in the long run. Plus, I have the choice to retire whenever I feel that my retirement saving are enough to live on.

Now, I already know your next argument. You will say this: You could get CA pay five years sooner and therefore invest more 5 years sooner. That only matters if I stop receiving paychecks at age 60. If I retire at 65 that's 5 more years of paychecks that I will receive and 5 more years of compound interest...even if those 5 years happen to be at FO salary.

I get the impression that you would rather upgade sooner so that you can get a bigger paycheck sooner even though it means making less in the long run. I don't understand that at all.

"The majority of folks pushing for the change are 50+ and have questionable motives."

This statement is pure speculation. There is no possible way that you can know the motives of the majority of pilots unless you have interviewed every one of them, or unless you have interviewed enough of them to declare a majority.

"I think it is a bad rule and should (and will change). But every one I know who is personaly pushing for the change has a lot to benefit."

I have no problem admiting that I have much to benefit from the change. And I believe you do to. There is nothing wrong with being motivated by personal benefit. My finacial position will benefit incredibly.

The only drawback that that you seem to be considering is that you will have to wait a few extra years to upgrade to captain. That seems like a small price to pay if you ask me. And believe me, I want to upgade like everybody else.

"Sometimes they get upset when I do not share their enthusiasm"

I hope you can tell by my tone that I am not upset or confrotational...just passionate about what I believe, my well being, and my future.

 

[filejw]

3m1900fo,
i just few with two 40 yr olds and you know what? with skills like that we better go back to 12 yr olds......

 

[turbodriver]

All you old farts get the bunk out!! I wanna upgrade before I retire!!!

 

[Paradoxus]

It has been my experience in this business that the older guys generally suck. Unfortunately, the opinions of the laypeople that both exist as passengers and aviation management correlate an elderly pilot with automatic demi-god proficiency as a pilot.

Ahhhh...the folley of popular misconception....

 

[pilotyip]

para I can see with 3000 hours you have it all figured out. Right?

 

[spinproof]

Both the APA and ALPA say that the age 60 rule hasn't resulted in any medical accidents, and that changing that rule could lead to one. I agree.

...So there haven't been any medical related accidents to anyone under age 60??? ...another Duane Worthlessism.

To presuppose one has more of a chance of failing at ones duties, at a pre-determined age, negates the fact that it is stress and not age which determines the life expectancy of man and equipment!

 

[V1andgo]

Here is an idea!
We raise the retirement age to 65. But all the guys above 60 will downgrade to FO. All the folks above 60 will still make money and enjoy medical benefits while younger guys and girls can upgrade and not suffer finanically, because of it.
Or, we change the hourly pay difference between Captain and FO. For example, if the Captain makes $100 per hour the FO should make at least $85. Which I guess, comes out to a maximum pay gap of 15%.
Now people who want or have to work longer can do so, while those waiting for their chance to upgrade can make a living in the meantime.
Just an idea.

 

[semperfido]

It has been my experience in this business that the older guys generally suck. Unfortunately, the opinions of the laypeople that both exist as passengers and aviation management correlate an elderly pilot with automatic demi-god proficiency as a pilot.

Ahhhh...the folley of popular misconception....

LOL...very funny