canyonblue
Everyone loves Southwest
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 2,314
[font=verdana, arial, helvetica]WASHINGTON, D.C. - Normally, Washington isn't a town full of obvious win-win solutions. Think tax reform. Think Social Security.
But try this fix on for size. With the U.S. airline industry's economic crisis continuing, airlines are seeking to abandon or restructure their pension plans. Meanwhile, graying commercial airline pilots are feeling pressured by a longstanding Federal Aviation Administration rule requiring them to retire at the age of 60. And the airlines are looking at a big bill for recruiting and training replacements.
So senators Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) have proposed a rational solution: Tie the commercial pilot retirement age to the Social Security retirement age. Let the geezers fly.
Isn't that unsafe? A little history here might be instructive: The age 60 rule didn't start out as a safety issue. The airlines began instituting age 60 retirement rules as company policy in the late 1950s to avoid the expense of training older pilots, who were soon to retire anyway, how to fly jet aircraft. When that caused labor problems, federal regulators stepped in and obligingly issued the age 60 rule, citing medical data suggesting anyone older could be too senile for take-off. Well yes, and a 50-year-old could have a massive coronary. And a 40-year-old could have a drinking problem. And a 30-year-old...You get the idea. Fitness to fly is one thing, age is another.
Over time, the Air Line Pilots Association came to love the 60 and out rule. After all, pilots at legacy carriers like AMR's American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and Continental Airlines could retire at 60 with fat defined-benefit pensions and start new careers or putter around the golf course.
But times have changed. Pilots at such discount carriers such as AirTran Holdings , JetBlue Airways and Southwest Airlines want the retirement rule abolished. They have defined-contribution 401(k) retirement plans, which means that the longer the discount carrier pilots work, the bigger their nest eggs. (Defined-benefit plans, by contrast, traditionally have been structured so that the additional pension earned from working past a certain age is minimal.)
Now pilots at the economically strapped old-line carriers are looking at diminished defined-benefit pensions. And ALPA says it is reexamining its position on the FAA's Age 60 rule.
The time would seem to be right for a change.
Gibbons and Inhofe have introduced bills before to boost the retirement age before. Those went nowhere. But this time around, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation, has signaled a willingness to hold hearings this Spring on the proposed rule change.
Someone all these very smart people might want to hear from on this topic? Michael Melvill, 63, who last year became the first pilot to fly a commercial aircraft into space.[/font]
But try this fix on for size. With the U.S. airline industry's economic crisis continuing, airlines are seeking to abandon or restructure their pension plans. Meanwhile, graying commercial airline pilots are feeling pressured by a longstanding Federal Aviation Administration rule requiring them to retire at the age of 60. And the airlines are looking at a big bill for recruiting and training replacements.
So senators Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) have proposed a rational solution: Tie the commercial pilot retirement age to the Social Security retirement age. Let the geezers fly.
Isn't that unsafe? A little history here might be instructive: The age 60 rule didn't start out as a safety issue. The airlines began instituting age 60 retirement rules as company policy in the late 1950s to avoid the expense of training older pilots, who were soon to retire anyway, how to fly jet aircraft. When that caused labor problems, federal regulators stepped in and obligingly issued the age 60 rule, citing medical data suggesting anyone older could be too senile for take-off. Well yes, and a 50-year-old could have a massive coronary. And a 40-year-old could have a drinking problem. And a 30-year-old...You get the idea. Fitness to fly is one thing, age is another.
Over time, the Air Line Pilots Association came to love the 60 and out rule. After all, pilots at legacy carriers like AMR's American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and Continental Airlines could retire at 60 with fat defined-benefit pensions and start new careers or putter around the golf course.
But times have changed. Pilots at such discount carriers such as AirTran Holdings , JetBlue Airways and Southwest Airlines want the retirement rule abolished. They have defined-contribution 401(k) retirement plans, which means that the longer the discount carrier pilots work, the bigger their nest eggs. (Defined-benefit plans, by contrast, traditionally have been structured so that the additional pension earned from working past a certain age is minimal.)
Now pilots at the economically strapped old-line carriers are looking at diminished defined-benefit pensions. And ALPA says it is reexamining its position on the FAA's Age 60 rule.
The time would seem to be right for a change.
Gibbons and Inhofe have introduced bills before to boost the retirement age before. Those went nowhere. But this time around, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation, has signaled a willingness to hold hearings this Spring on the proposed rule change.
Someone all these very smart people might want to hear from on this topic? Michael Melvill, 63, who last year became the first pilot to fly a commercial aircraft into space.[/font]
