FAA Age 60 debate

[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