"Fair" treatment for "experienced" pilots comes home to roost?

[SuperFLUF]

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1130-full.html#197946


[FONT=arial,helvetica,geneva]The Fight For Pilots Hurt By New Age 65 Rule[/FONT]


Now that U.S. airline pilots can fly to age 65, litigation is now moving forward to overturn wording in the 2007 law that also specifically barred some 3,000 pilots forced into retirement before age 60 from being rehired with their prior pay, position and benefits. Congress last year passed the Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act that raised the mandatory retirement age for pilots to a more internationally recognized age of 65, but wording in the law excluded some 3,000 veteran pilots forced to retire between November 23, 2006, and December 17, 2007, from being rehired at their previously held seniority levels. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley has brought a motion to have the U.S. Court of Appeals determine the constitutionality of the congressional law before it can be used to dismiss petitions filed on behalf of those pilots forced into retirement. "That motion allows the court to review the law faster than it would have otherwise," according to a posting to LegalTimes.com blog.


"The law arbitrarily strips pilots of their position, seniority, and benefits at the age of 60," Turley said.

 

[Max Powers]

THE PAST 30 YEARS HAS HAD THE POLITICALLY POWERFUL OLD PEOPLE DESTROYING the young people's future.

 

[atrdriver]

I said there would be lawsuits for this within a year of the leglislation passing. The age 65 pundits on the board said no, that could never happen because of the wording of the bill.

 

[Spooky 2]

I said there would be lawsuits for this within a year of the leglislation passing. The age 65 pundits on the board said no, that could never happen because of the wording of the bill.

I think the major players in this suit are USAir guys but certainly there will be more. The attorney who is handling this, Johnathon Turley (sp?) is nobody's fool and not given to wild goose chases.

 

[Flopgut]

I say let em come back to CAL.

No problem....Just bring that lump sum check back. We're going to need it.

 

[AAflyer]

I say let em come back to CAL.

No problem....Just bring that lump sum check back. We're going to need it.

No kidding... names have removed from seniority lists, lumps sums have been cashed, manning has been readjusted due to vacancies.

Are these pilots going to pay for the cascade in seat movements due to them coming back?

Are they expecting to keep ALL their retirement while they hop back into the left seat of 777.

Good Times,

AA

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

What about guys that retired on Nov. 22nd?

 

[iflyhigh]

I now firmly believe that this group of pilots are truely "Herpies".

They never go away.

 

[atrdriver]

What about guys that retired on Nov. 22nd?

It was before the bill was passed, they stay out. Period. They never should have allowed this in the first place. Just a bunch of greedy whiny a$$holes who benefited from the rules all their careers and then wanted to change them at the end to benefit again. Nothing like the "me generation."

 

[~~~^~~~]

ATR - You were correct.