Get ready for Age 67+

[Taco Rocket]

Wasn't the original argument that these guys needed "more time" to make up for lost pensions, access to health care, social security, etc.?

I've just seen most of these guys collect a bigger mortgage, another ex, and a 3rd car these last several years...

Talk about entitlement: the baby boom is entitlement central. Me me me...

 

[Metro752]

With the ATP/1500 Hour rule coming soon even regionals will not be able to hire anyone younger than:

2011 - 21 y/o
2012 - 22 y/o
2013 - 23 y/o


or something like that.

 

[Abernathy]

With the ATP/1500 Hour rule coming soon

Let me stop you right there. That sh** isn't coming anytime soon and neither are the new rest rules.

 

[Andy]

We have had right around 200 retire from CAL after the age was changed to 65. For those who pay attention, those pilots set a good example. Unfortunately we have guys like Fubi we all have to take care of, who it's abundantly clear doesn't even understand SS.

Flop, as a big loser in all of this, I understand why many pilots are staying until 65. Medicare. Do I blame them? Yes; they should have been able to pay for medical insurance with all of their savings. No savings? Not my fault; bad planning on their part.

My point in all of this is that there will be greater backroom support for raising the retirement age, especially from the legacy airlines. Age 65 was a huge financial windfall for those carriers that operate multiple equipment types, as they were able to shutter most of their training facilities over the last three years. That alone produced huge cost savings.
The risk, the wild card for the airlines was hull losses. That didn't happen. So if I were an airline exec, I'd be wanting to increase retirement age again.
Let me throw out a widget-style analogy. Think of pilots as engine oil. Engine oil had a forecast lifespan in an engine of 3000 miles when I was a kid. Then it moved up to 5000. My BMW now has 20,000 mile engine oil. I change it at 7500 miles but the manufacturer tells me that I could run the oil for 24 months/20,000 miles before changing it. Employees are viewed in a similar light at most airlines. Squeeze a bit more life out of them before replacing them. No failures at age 65? Sure, let's push for increasing retirement age again because our accountant stated that we'll save $bigbux every year that we have our flight training center running at minimum manning.

This is why I think that the anti-age 65 crowd needs to use a different approach to the next age increase. Rather than saying no way, we need to push for slowing it down a bit. Increasing retirement age by 1 month every quarter will increase retirement age by 4 months per year. This would allow airlines to reap some financial benefits of lower training costs. It would also allow the FAA to determine what is a reasonable maximum age for pilots.
We lost last time around because we used an all-or-nothing approach to oppose it. That was a losing strategy. Slowing down age increases will result in less of a shock to the system - rather than fully shutting down the training pipeline, it reduces the training flow but still allows a decent number of pilots to remain employed within the training pipeline.
I'd like to say that I could count on organized opposition to another age increase but after my experiences last time around, I think that most pilots are going to be lazy and just let another age increase pass without opposition.

 

[Andy]

Let me stop you right there. That sh** isn't coming anytime soon and neither are the new rest rules.

I'd say you're correct on that; no changes to minimum requirements and no change to rest rules. Besides, I doubt that the regionals are having a hard time finding fully qualified pilots right now. Another year from now will be a different story.

 

[EWR_FO]

But of course the medical standards here in Japan for over 60 guys are very strict

Of course, in the USA they are a joke.

 

[Furloughed80]

Has any group officially started to lobby for an increase to age 65?

 

[Fubijaakr]

I think its all speculative at this point.

 

[Flopgut]

Andy: My MEC and pilot group are watchful for a further change effort. We will fight it and we still have an all-or-nothing viewpoint. We will fight it tooth and nail, and will be no more "snakes" on the MEC. There are a few well organized types that are pushing for another increase but all doors are being slammed in their face. All they talk about now is trying to fly in the right seat and only domestic. It's not going anywhere for them.

We still regard it as a safety issue. CAL pilots are reminded of the 757 enroute to MX when the captain died. That airplane barely got on the ground; The remaining pilot was nearly in cardiac arrest. All US airlines are at extreme risk for that scenario to happen again. Really just a matter of time.

The bigger issue is the near total dysfunction this age change has brought on. From the affects way the rule was changed [ambush] to factoring of older workers into mergers. As you predicted, it stagnated the wages. Additionally, these aren't the brightest guys that are staying and many of them have some real ego problems. In our own merger [UAL] there's a lack of consistent mgt-type pilot leadership. What we're stuck with is two separate hoards of angry, old, mega-egoed pilots with old, failed ways of doing things. It's a huge mess! They are NOT going to get UAL put together right. The Delta guys ran the table on their merger with NWA. And DAL had had a lot of old guys recently retire. They had a sharp, age diverse bunch that made it work. Look at how that deal went togeether compared to ours? Sure, I'll admit, the UAL side should be doing just as DAL did. But the UAL sage pilots aren't leaders. Of course senior CAL guys aren't up to it either!

We're just going to have to wait and see what (or if) we have left of an airline job until after old guys start leaving. Retirement age or medicals or whatever starts things moving.

Quick question Andy: Did you see Wendy's update two weeks ago? The one that sounded apologetic? It described how being young meant you were junior, and being old meant that you were senior? She touched on how those pasts truths were no longer valid and how pilot leaders have done a poor job of considering all perspectives. It was very interesting.

 

[Andy]

Andy: My MEC and pilot group are watchful for a further change effort. We will fight it and we still have an all-or-nothing viewpoint. We will fight it tooth and nail, and will be no more "snakes" on the MEC. There are a few well organized types that are pushing for another increase but all doors are being slammed in their face. All they talk about now is trying to fly in the right seat and only domestic. It's not going anywhere for them..

You won't see it coming until it's well past the embryonic stage. Next time it'll be airline management meeting behind closed doors with elected officials. That's why I mentioned the cost reductions for airlines due to age 65. The bean counters are very happy with age 65.
It won't be a grassroots effort this time around. And it will be a much more effective plan of attack. That's why I'm posting this now, today. Rather than try to hold back the floodgates, a better strategy IMHO is to accept an incremental age change.
And don't mistake the public as caring how young or old their pilot is. They don't care. All they care about is cheap tickets and airlne management can deliver cheaper tickets if they don't have a large annual pilot training bill.

For the above reasons, a push toward putting them back in the right seat won't happen. It still creates training events.

Side note: It'll be funny to see how many will be in agreement with a backroom political deal from airline management while vehemently denying any backroom political deal from ALPO. Cognitive dissonance; what a beautiful affliction.

We still regard it as a safety issue. CAL pilots are reminded of the 757 enroute to MX when the captain died. That airplane barely got on the ground; The remaining pilot was nearly in cardiac arrest. All US airlines are at extreme risk for that scenario to happen again. Really just a matter of time..

Read my lips. No hull losses. It's not a safety issue until there's a hull loss.

The bigger issue is the near total dysfunction this age change has brought on. From the affects way the rule was changed [ambush] to factoring of older workers into mergers. As you predicted, it stagnated the wages. Additionally, these aren't the brightest guys that are staying and many of them have some real ego problems. In our own merger [UAL] there's a lack of consistent mgt-type pilot leadership. What we're stuck with is two separate hoards of angry, old, mega-egoed pilots with old, failed ways of doing things. It's a huge mess! They are NOT going to get UAL put together right. The Delta guys ran the table on their merger with NWA. And DAL had had a lot of old guys recently retire. They had a sharp, age diverse bunch that made it work. Look at how that deal went togeether compared to ours? Sure, I'll admit, the UAL side should be doing just as DAL did. But the UAL sage pilots aren't leaders. Of course senior CAL guys aren't up to it either! .

It's definitely not the brightest who are staying. These are the 5 watt bulbs who didn't save for retirement and/or can't figure out what to do if they don't have to work every day. They truly want to die in the left seat.

We're just going to have to wait and see what (or if) we have left of an airline job until after old guys start leaving. Retirement age or medicals or whatever starts things moving.

A training pipeline will need to start being built at many airlines no later than next summer unless the age changes again. I don't rule out another age increase within the next 24 months.
Once that training pipeline is rebuilt, a large amount of the excess pilots will be mopped up and regionals will start having manning/reliability problems. If the retirement age doesn't increase, this will probably result in some routes getting less frequency with upguaged aircraft ... an upguage from two RJs to a single 737 or A319. An upguage is cheaper than using RJs but frequency is also a big player for high yield frequent flyers.

Quick question Andy: Did you see Wendy's update two weeks ago? The one that sounded apologetic? It described how being young meant you were junior, and being old meant that you were senior? She touched on how those pasts truths were no longer valid and how pilot leaders have done a poor job of considering all perspectives. It was very interesting.

I don't read much from ALPO anymore. However, I read what you're talking about and have posted it below:

Mentoring
Captain Jay Pierce and I began road shows together this week and we found them very beneficial. We know the frustration that you feel, and as I said to those of you who attended, no one is more frustrated than I. The best part about road shows is they provide an opportunity for an exchange of information – we can inform you about what is going on or not going on, we can clear up misconceptions and we can hear from you. As I have said, we do not have a monopoly on good ideas. Thank you to those of you who took your summer day to meet with us.

For those of you who attended, my message this week will be repetitive, and I apologize in advance. When you do MEC jobs, you find yourself thinking about what is wrong and why things are as they are. You contemplate why guys don’t understand what you consider to be the basic tenets of unionism and how things work. Having “grown up” here at United, I and my peers were mentored by those who came before us. They shared their experiences and beliefs, and told us “the way things were.” They talked about the industry, the airlines, unionism and pensions and why pension funding was so important. In my twenties, pensions weren’t my primary concern, but I listened, and I stored the information. They had all kinds of sayings, advice and wisdom such as “hotels specialize in sleeping, restaurants specialize in eating.” They talked about saving, not using credit, and were sometimes a little outdated in their thinking like don’t use credit cards, not realizing that it was just a means to your money and you pay the bill every month. They had a lot of information about life and living to share. They were crusty old guys, and we listened.

Ok, we didn’t emulate everyone we flew with. Upon realizing that no coffee was coming about an hour into the flight and asking what could be going on and suggesting that it was time to make a request for this important sustenance, the Captain confessed that it might not be too forthcoming. It seemed that his first ex-wife was the A, and his second ex-wife working the aft galley, all with his current wife sitting in first class. From him we learned what not to do.

But we learned about the Railway Labor Act, about the history of our union, and about how to start volunteering at the bottom, as the more active union jobs required seasoning and proving oneself. We were told what the leadership meant and the strategies and considerations involved. There was little question about what he means when he says, “ … because we had been educated.” Captain reps told first and second officer reps new to the MEC table to keep their mouths shut unless something just had to be said, and to listen and learn for the first several meetings. From that how to influence the process was learned effectively. We were well mentored by those gray hairs that came before us.

So what has happened in the years since those guys flew their last flight? We have become the gray hairs, and we have not mentored and held up our end of the bargain. Why is it that we have so stepped over our responsibility?

Again, when you do an MEC job, you think about the whys. It used to be that you couldn’t be hired after age 31. As a result, old guys were senior and young guys were junior. The line was a consistent incline with age and seniority laid over one another. We flew first and second officer for Captains that made it to the left seat after 20 years or more, and who retired off of the 727. Things changed sometime thereafter. I don’t remember when it changed, but it changed. You no longer had to be 31 or younger to get hired. We hired retired military guys in their 40s, unheard of previously. We hired corporate guys who had been around the industry for a while. So our young Captain group was met with first officers our age and older. These guys were experienced aviators but new airline pilots and union members. Our society is set up for the old to lecture the young, and we were taught to respect our elders, but not the other way around. As a result we did not mentor and the education has not been continued.

Having said all this, it is important to note that mentoring can be two way. We have had CLR for 30 years. Information, education and wisdom can be passed in both directions. It is our obligation as union members to explain the history, what things mean and why to each other, and to pass it on. Hopefully someday soon we will have some new hires to pass our knowledge along to.

So please, let’s all step up and start educating each other. It is long overdue.

Too long a post. Continued below.

 

[Andy]

Here's my mentoring to wendy and the rest of the senior idiots at ALPO. SPEND LESS MONEY THAN YOU EARN. Max out your 401k (b fund/c fund/whatever you want to call it) and max out your and your spouse's Roth IRAs. After that's done, bank a minimum of 10% of net pay remaining in your paycheck. Stop being financial morons. That way you can enjoy your 'golden' years rather than having to push tin until you die.


Second mentoring to wendy. The old guys didn't fukc you over at every turn, yet you and your peers do it to the junior members of the list at every turn. What kind of mentoring is that? I hate these jerkoffs who live in mirrorless houses.


Anyway Flop, I look forward to being below you on a combined seniority list one day. I don't have high expectations to have any CAL pilots below me, as I am ~halfway up the UAL furlough list.
Frats,
Andy

 

[sleeves]

Ya have to die sometime. Can't raise the age limit there. I want a few years to myself, not chained to the boat rowing for a few pieces of silver.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Age 60 was artificially low. Age 65 made it a little less artificial. Age 67? Probably in 10 years or so (but then it will be pushed by the Flopguts, etc. of the world that railed about the injustice of changing the age to begin with)

I think you'll see more pilots willing to give up pay to protect their health insurance in the coming years, unless the airlines just dump everyone into ObamaCare. Then any medical issues arising become everyone's/no one's problem and the airline's could care less about retirement age. This will parallel the push by airlines for pilots to pay for their own recurrent and upgrade training.

But, SURPRISE, the pie won't get any bigger moneywise.

 

[Flopgut]

It's not a safety issue until there's a hull loss.

It will be a safety issue. Probably sooner than later. I don't think we're going to make it through these next few years without some more in-flight heart attacks.

I hope we are on a seniority list together some day and we have stable work.

 

[Flopgut]

Age 60 was artificially low. Age 65 made it a little less artificial. Age 67? Probably in 10 years or so (but then it will be pushed by the Flopguts, etc. of the world that railed about the injustice of changing the age to begin with)

I think you'll see more pilots willing to give up pay to protect their health insurance in the coming years, unless the airlines just dump everyone into ObamaCare. Then any medical issues arising become everyone's/no one's problem and the airline's could care less about retirement age. This will parallel the push by airlines for pilots to pay for their own recurrent and upgrade training.

But, SURPRISE, the pie won't get any bigger moneywise.

Why don't you go lick your cat's butt! If any of that crap happens I will be long gone...

 

[Fubijaakr]

I agree with you on several points:

It won't be a grassroots effort this time around. And it will be a much more effective plan of attack.

Especially since it makes economic sense for the bean counters to do it. If the corporate overlords get on board, especially considering they're in full control of the Supreme Court, it will be a done deal.

And don't mistake the public as caring how young or old their pilot is. They don't care. All they care about is cheap tickets and airlne management can deliver cheaper tickets if they don't have a large annual pilot training bill.

I would argue that the public prefers older, experienced pilots, especially in the left seat. Everyone's heard, "Man, am I glad to see some gray hair up there." Its usually after they've connected from "Teen Air" Regional.

Read my lips. No hull losses. It's not a safety issue until there's a hull loss.

EXACTLY. And considering the last hull loss was with a young Captain at the controls, the "safety" issue is non-existant. The last two pilot flight deck deaths were pilots well younger than 60.

There goes the "safety" argument.

If the retirement age doesn't increase, this will probably result in some routes getting less frequency with upguaged aircraft ... an upguage from two RJs to a single 737 or A319. An upguage is cheaper than using RJs but frequency is also a big player for high yield frequent flyers.

The upgauge issue will be driven by economics, though I believe it will be more direct costs than training costs, but you might be right. The cost of flying 50 seat RJs is already prohibitive and the 70 seaters are quickly becoming too costly as well.

The frequent flyers might just have to take a hit on this one. Look at Japan...how many years have they flown widebodies in domestic service? Why? Primarily airspace restrictions and slots. Same thing is happening here, especially at the large hub airports. An RJ uses the same slot a 777 does. At some point it will be so congested the RJ will have to give way.

The good news, more mainline jobs.

 

[wanagethi]

Baby boomers or the entitlement generation, need to go, lower the age to 55!!!

 

[Sacha]

Age 60 was artificially low. Age 65 made it a little less artificial. Age 67? Probably in 10 years or so (but then it will be pushed by the Flopguts, etc. of the world that railed about the injustice of changing the age to begin with)

I think you'll see more pilots willing to give up pay to protect their health insurance in the coming years, unless the airlines just dump everyone into ObamaCare. Then any medical issues arising become everyone's/no one's problem and the airline's could care less about retirement age. This will parallel the push by airlines for pilots to pay for their own recurrent and upgrade training.

But, SURPRISE, the pie won't get any bigger moneywise.

Why don't you go lick your cat's butt! If any of that crap happens I will be long gone...

Bringupthebird,

I think you are dead on unfortunately.

Flopgut,

One can only hope you are long gone way before it happens. Your fellow employees thank you.

 

[Andy]

Age 60 was artificially low. Age 65 made it a little less artificial. Age 67? Probably in 10 years or so (but then it will be pushed by the Flopguts, etc. of the world that railed about the injustice of changing the age to begin with).

How come you didn't direct that comment at me? You and I have clashed on this topic many a time.
Is it because, due to the age 65 change, I've been furloughed for the last 2 1/2 years?

 

[Andy]

I agree with you on several points:

Excellent. This is a contentious topic. Let's see if we can keep it somewhat civil, even on FI, for a few days. I know, I know, I might as well try parting the Red Sea...

Especially since it makes economic sense for the bean counters to do it. If the corporate overlords get on board, especially considering they're in full control of the Supreme Court, it will be a done deal.

For carriers with a diverse fleeet, you're probably looking at ~8 pilot months in training (students, instructors, LCAs). That's only the labor cost; there are facility and logistics costs associated with training events. If three of four students are from other domiciles, each retirement generates three months' hotel and per diem bills. It's not an inexpensive proposition to have a widebody captain retire.

The Supreme Court is a bit too much conspiracy theorist stuff for my taste. Nor is the Supreme Court pertinent to the discussion.

I would argue that the public prefers older, experienced pilots, especially in the left seat. Everyone's heard, "Man, am I glad to see some gray hair up there." Its usually after they've connected from "Teen Air" Regional..

1) Are there any 'teen air' regionals left?
2) Gray hair works for a while but there is a point at which it will raise some concern. 70? 75? Every individual is different.

EXACTLY. And considering the last hull loss was with a young Captain at the controls, the "safety" issue is non-existant. The last two pilot flight deck deaths were pilots well younger than 60.

There goes the "safety" argument..

Let's not open that can of worms. Whenever I discussed this issue prior to 2009, I was always told that 'you can't prove age was a factor'. And I could pull up the graphs of accidents per 100,000 flight hours based on age. There's a definite upturn in the graph.

The upgauge issue will be driven by economics, though I believe it will be more direct costs than training costs, but you might be right. The cost of flying 50 seat RJs is already prohibitive and the 70 seaters are quickly becoming too costly as well.

The frequent flyers might just have to take a hit on this one. Look at Japan...how many years have they flown widebodies in domestic service? Why? Primarily airspace restrictions and slots. Same thing is happening here, especially at the large hub airports. An RJ uses the same slot a 777 does. At some point it will be so congested the RJ will have to give way.

The good news, more mainline jobs.

The economic models are MUCH more complicated than pure CASM. Otherwise, we would see very few RJs.
Frequency is hugely important to business travelers - I speak from experience as a former 1K on that one.
Let's just look at one city pair - DEN to OMA on 28 Sep. There are 6 daily flights; 4 RJs, 1 A319 and 1 A320. I remember going through Independence Air's quarterly reports and their CASM on the A319 was ~6cents while their 50 seat RJ was ~25cents. I'm sure that those numbers are tighter for UAL but I'm not going to try to dig them up because UAL contractually pays for fuel and that never gets factored into UAL's RJ CASM.
United could cut DEN-OMA service down to 4 A319/320s per day and reduce costs. But then those flights would need to synch up with the banks of flying done daily. I'm sure you'll find that the current 6 flights (756A, 954A, 128P, 349P, 744P, 951P) all line up with DEN's departure banks. Which of those departure banks will not have a DEN-OMA flight? And what happens to the passenger that can go to Southwest or Frontier instead of waiting 5 hours for the next flight to OMA?