For those that oppose a change to age 60

[Andy]

Don't you all think that once this thing passes, the airlines will find a way to manipulate the change? Two concerns come to mind right off the bat. One is that I think they will try to get away with paying us less saying that we can make less hourly because we can work longer and make it up. The other is that I think the pilots at the airlines that still have pensions will get hosed. Undoubtedly management will impose a penalty for early retirement prior to 65 much like it would be for retiring prior to age 60. Like I said, I am not completely against it but I think it's going to be one of these things that management will screw us with somehow and we will regret it in the end. JMHO. Whaddya all think?

If the retirement age increases, it will result in a negative sum game for pilots. There will be a few that benefit, but most will end up losing more than was gained by the few. There will be a decrease in wages and benefits that most pilots will not be able to offset, even working an additional five years.

 

[Black Hawk]

Not everybody that wants to fly past 60 is a greedy [whatever]. I don't fly for an airline now for a variety of personal reasons but do intend to give it another shot in a few years when I'll be 53. I'd like the option of another 5 years of flying if I'm up to it.

 

[EWR_FO]

Not everybody that wants to fly past 60 is a greedy [whatever]. I don't fly for an airline now for a variety of personal reasons but do intend to give it another shot in a few years when I'll be 53. I'd like the option of another 5 years of flying if I'm up to it.

Sorry to spoil your hobby plans, but D.C. isn't interested anymore.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

It's a matter of safety! Keep 60.

Write to your congressman and tell him/her that it is a matter of safety.

Your congressman will then call the FAA Administrator and ask, "Is this really a matter of safety?"

The FAA Administrator will respond that it is not....your letter is then discredited....especially with pilots over age 65 now carrying passengers in our airspace....

See...this is where the cat is already out of the bag. If you really wanted to have a legitimate discussion....you should've done something to stop the ICAO rule change.....you either did nothing...or your viewpoint didn't matter.

Tejas

 

[CA1900]

With that logic than the age 60 retirement rule should only have affected those whose commercial certificates wer issued after it took effect in 1959--after all -those hired before that did not have a mandatory retirement age in effect when they entered the industry.

I wholeheartedly agree. Let's not screw it up a second time! How about age 60 for those who got their commercial between 1959 and 2007, and age 65 for the rest? Sounds fair and equitable to me.

 

[EWR_FO]

Write to your congressman and tell him/her that it is a matter of safety.

Your congressman will then call the FAA Administrator and ask, "Is this really a matter of safety?"

The FAA Administrator will respond that it is not....your letter is then discredited....especially with pilots over age 65 now carrying passengers in our airspace....

See...this is where the cat is already out of the bag. If you really wanted to have a legitimate discussion....you should've done something to stop the ICAO rule change.....you either did nothing...or your viewpoint didn't matter.

Tejas

Congressmen really don't care what the FAA has to say, that is obvious.

 

[Wiskey Driver]

Well, then bro...only one way to fix it...change it!!! (Trust me on this one, bro)


TP

TP,

Explain how changing the rule will fix the problem of career stagnation. The way I see it is if allowed to fly past sixty you will add that number of years to your upgrade. Now in the case of my carrier where acquisitions are the only growth which by the way for us pilots is not career growth but rather company size growth how does this change benefit us??? Now keep in mind that I am 40 now and had no intention of spending 12 plus years in the right seat of anyone's aircraft...

WD.

 

[The Prussian]

TP,

Explain how changing the rule will fix the problem of career stagnation. The way I see it is if allowed to fly past sixty you will add that number of years to your upgrade. Now in the case of my carrier where acquisitions are the only growth which by the way for us pilots is not career growth but rather company size growth how does this change benefit us??? Now keep in mind that I am 40 now and had no intention of spending 12 plus years in the right seat of anyone's aircraft...

WD.

Was just joking about your original post.

 

[Andy]

Template

For those that asked for a rough template, here it is. Feel free to disseminate widely and make any modifications necessary.



Senator ,

The 109th Congress adjourned prior to enacting into public law several Fiscal Year 2007 appropriations bills. Among those was HR 5576, the Appropriations Bill that included funding for the Department of Transportation. Contained within HR 5576 was a legislative amendment increasing airline pilot retirement age to sixty five.
While I realize that HR 5576 died with the end of the 109th Congress, I know that you will be very busy and that HR 5576 is likely to be used as a template for a new transportation appropriations bill that will become public law. For that reason, I request that you ensure that any appropriations bill passed by the 110th Congress be stripped of this legislative provision since it is inappropriate to use appropriations bills for legislative matters.
The item that I am referring to was contained in HR 5576.RS under Title I, Department of Transportation, Administrative Provisions—Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Section 114.
On 4 January 2007, Senator Inhofe sponsored S. 65, the Freedom to Fly Act, which increases airline pilot retirement age to 65, accomplishing the exact same thing as the amendment to HR 5576. This is a legislative issue, not an appropriations issue, and I request that you ensure that the issue receives proper consideration on the Senate floor rather than buried deep within an appropriations bill. Please ensure that this legislation is removed from the FY07 transportation appropriations bill.

 

[Ty Webb]

Now keep in mind that I am 40 now and had no intention of spending 12 plus years in the right seat of anyone's aircraft...

Or another 5 years in the left seat of anyone's aircraft . . . . except, of course, my own.

,

 

[Quimby]

It would be interesting to see the ages and hours of pilot error crashes in the past 20 years. I bet that the statistics will show that the younger and less flight time, the more likely to have an accident. (Comair, Pinnacle are the two that come to mind).

that is such a lame argument. there are just as many accidents caused from over-confident, "high" time/experience guys as from "low" time guys. sometimes different causes, but still results in bent metal or worse.

(Tenerife & too many others to list come to mind)

 

[Black Hawk]

Sorry to spoil your hobby plans, but D.C. isn't interested anymore.

Actually it's going to change to 65 at some point, it's just a matter of when and how. Something wrong with pursuing a second career in this business?

 

[Falcon Jet 1]

Anybody have the link showing the mortality rate increase for those that work longer. Looked everywhere but cant find it. Andy help.

 

[WSurf]

Look, most of these guys that are in favor the of the age 65 rule are the ones that benefited for the age 60 Rule there whole career! Now all the sudden they want to change the rules.
We all knew when we started this business that we would be done at age 60. Lets leave it alone!

Yea, Yea, some countries allow over 60 year old pilots, but they have to be paired with someone less then sixty!! So what does that tell you!!

Leave... retire and move on!!! Most of us don't want to be babysitting someone over 60+ anyway!! And we don't wanna see you folks flying around with your Depends on, and Poppin Vigra on overnights!!!

 

[SkiFishFly]

The cat is out of the bag

With ICAO already allowing over 60 pilots and the FAA allowing these foriegn pilots to operate within the US, The change to 65 for US pilots is coming. It is just a question of how the change comes about. Congress, the FAA or through an anti-discrimination lawsuit in the courts.
I think it will happen in the courts because the FAA and Congress could not make a real decision to save their lives.

If the FAA allows a non US citizen to work in the US as an airline pilot, but prohibits a US citizen from doing the same job on US soil due to the persons age. How is that not discrimination?

As a person who came from the military to this industry with no pre-conceived notion of whether I would get hired, or if I would ever upgrade, I look at most of those arguing against age 65 - they are angry at the "greed" exhibited by the older guys. Do you not see that your anger appears to be based on your own self centered notion of when you are "owed" an upgrade to Captain?

Standing by for incoming....

 

[Mach 80]

All blacks born before 1956 should continue to be made to sit in the back of the bus...after all, that was the rule when you started riding the bus and you knew it when you started riding the buses.

Those born after 1956 when the rules changed may sit where they please.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Whatever skifishfly. You obviously have a govt. pension and just need a hobby job for a second career. Have you considered working the TSA, corporate, etc.?

Stay out of airline flying Mr. Hobby Jobby, skifishfly.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

All blacks born before 1956 should continue to be made to sit in the back of the bus...after all, that was the rule when you started riding the bus and you knew it when you started riding the buses.

Those born after 1956 when the rules changed may sit where they please.

Do you even know what discrimination is protected in the Constitution? Race, creed, color, gender, and religion.

Age is not protected. Gay is not protected. And dumb is not protected.

Age in this case is a safety factor that the Supreme Court has ruled can be used to eliminate unsafe issues just like those that effect fire fighters, policemen, ATC, the Presidents job, and under age drinking.

 

[lostplnetairman]

Actually, race, creed, color, gender and religion are protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Congress wasn't sure about age, so they commissioned a study, concluded there was indeed age discrimination and passed the Age Discrimination in Employment Act in 1968. And then, in 1978, Congress amended Title VII with the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.

HRDiva

 

[SkiFishFly]

Whatever skifishfly. You obviously have a govt. pension and just need a hobby job for a second career. Have you considered working the TSA, corporate, etc.?

Stay out of airline flying Mr. Hobby Jobby, skifishfly.

Nice... You don't know me or anything about me.

How about we just stick to the debate at hand and you stop trying to tell me what to do... I have a wife for that already...

 

[Phaedrus]

All blacks born before 1956 should continue to be made to sit in the back of the bus...after all, that was the rule when you started riding the bus and you knew it when you started riding the buses.

Those born after 1956 when the rules changed may sit where they please.

Quite possibly the most false analogy I've seen in some time...and that's saying something since I'm a regular reader of the NYT. Also, quite possibly the most ignorant post of 2007.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Actually, race, creed, color, gender and religion are protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Congress wasn't sure about age, so they commissioned a study, concluded there was indeed age discrimination and passed the Age Discrimination in Employment Act in 1968. And then, in 1978, Congress amended Title VII with the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.

HRDiva

I was referencing the US Constitutions ad. 1, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 26.

Also the Supreme Court ruled in a case against SWA pilots that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act in 1968 and then amended in 1978 did not apply to Part 121 airline pilots.

 

[Ty Webb]

Do you not see that your anger appears to be based on your own self centered notion of when you are "owed" an upgrade to Captain?

Standing by for incoming....

I don't think anyone feels they are "owed" an upgrade . . . to me, the issue is that guys who have benefitted from the Age 60 rule their whole career now want to change the rule to benefit themselves . . . to the detriment of everyone who comes behind them.

 

[munson]

All blacks born before 1956 should continue to be made to sit in the back of the bus...after all, that was the rule when you started riding the bus and you knew it when you started riding the buses.

Those born after 1956 when the rules changed may sit where they please.

You are an idiot.

 

[capt. megadeth]

I don't think I am owed anything, I just think (more like....I know) the airlines will take it and run with it. It kind of reminds me of the whole RJ phenomena. I also think the "discrimination" and "safety" argument is a ton of $hit. It's about lost pensions and my question is this....why are we not going after companies and executives to be held accountable and making them do everything they can to save pensions? Instead we are letting this happen and trying to work longer to make up for the lost money WE ARE OWED THAT WAS PROMISED TO US!

I know it's easier said than done but WTF?

 

[luckytohaveajob]

I don't think I am owed anything, I just think (more like....I know) the airlines will take it and run with it. It kind of reminds me of the whole RJ phenomena. I also think the "discrimination" and "safety" argument is a ton of $hit. It's about lost pensions and my question is this....why are we not going after companies and executives to be held accountable and making them do everything they can to save pensions? Instead we are letting this happen and trying to work longer to make up for the lost money WE ARE OWED THAT WAS PROMISED TO US!

I know it's easier said than done but WTF?

Because the old experienced pilots didn't have the experience they claimed. And instead of closing one of the companies and getting the retirement money they were owed in the liquidation and protecting the industry as a whole by one companies sacrifice they sold us all out to get less they than they would have in the liquidation. Ask a UAL pilot why this industry tanked and you will get a different answer.

 

[lostplnetairman]

I was referencing the US Constitutions ad. 1, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 26.

Also the Supreme Court ruled in a case against SWA pilots that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act in 1968 and then amended in 1978 did not apply to Part 121 airline pilots.

Those amendments refer to freedom of religion, choosing the president/vp, abolishing slavery, citizenship, race not a bar to voting, gender not a bar to voting and voting age at 18. Again, it was Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which protected individuals from discrimination in employment, among other things, on the basis of their race, creed, national origin, gender and religion.

Please cite the ruling of the Supreme Court--I've seen it referenced many times but have not had the time to look it up. Thanks.

HRDiva

 

[Yuppyguppy]

Can't wait for all those age 60 to RETIRE FOR GOOD!!!!!!!! PRAISE THE ALMIGHTY

 

[Bringupthebird]

Well there will undoubtedly be screwings, but not over working longer. Management doesn't impose a penalty for early retirement. The penalty comes from the IRS who limits the amount that may be withdrawn from A-plans if you retire before the legal retirement age, which for pilots is 60. However, to be affected you would have to have an A-plan and you would need a salary upwards of $270,000 per year. Very few US Airline pilots meet both those requirements.

I'm not sure what would happen to the F/O's who are older then 60 but less than 65 in terms of them bidding, since it would be a hassle to segregate them from over 60 pilots in the ICAO scenario. They may be forced to upgrade rather than bypass and take CA pay as is done in many airlines. This seems like a relatively minor hurdle.

Will healthcare expenses rise? Maybe, but since there is no data on commercial airline pilots over 60 it's impossible to say with certainty. When it comes to health insurance, though you can be sure of rate increases regularly regardless of age.

 

[Benhuntn]

I see a lot of opinions thrown around here. How about some of you posting some facts. IE. accident rates by age. Deaths by age of pilots, etc. I read a published study on the SWAPA website and it refutes all the things you guys are saying but I would be interested in reading your data.

As for govt. pensions and flying as a hobby now. I take offense. I am not on a pension but a retainer. I am subject to recall. Congress doesn't pay us a pension. The retainer can be stopped anytime, it isn't owed to us by law. I am now in my second career and working to secure my future. If age 65 is passed I will get 5 more yrs. If I choose to work those yrs I will put 1million dollars in my pocket, and 100,000 in my 401k. Everybody coming along after me will have that same opportunity whether they are delayed in upgrade to capt. or not. staying an FO a little longer now to have a chance to work 5 more yrs at the highest possible earnings rate seems reasonable. To oppose this is short sighted.