Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Judge rules against pilots

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web


Well-known member
May 16, 2005
Judge rules against pilots

Associated Press

July 2, 2009, 12:06AM

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by older pilots who sued their union over an interpretation of a law that raised the mandatory retirement age for airline pilots to 65.
The judge ruled that the pilots, who are over 60 and still work for Houston-based Continental Airlines, have not been hurt by the union’s interpretation, which would strip the older pilots of seniority.
Lawyers for the pilots and the union, the Air Line Pilots Association, were notified late Tuesday of the decision by U.S. District Judge James Robertson in Washington.
Kathy Bailey, attorney for the pilots, said she did not plan to appeal but would file a new lawsuit if any of the men lost their jobs or if the union wins a fight with Continental over interpretation of the law.
The 12 men — a 13th died in an accident involving an experimental plane — still work for Continental, mostly as instructors, but two handle regular passenger flights, Bailey said. They charged the union with age discrimination and failing to represent their interests as union members.
In 2007, Congress raised the mandatory retirement age to 65 from 60, a standard that had stood for a half-century.
Under a provision of the law, pilots who were already 60 when the new law took effect could continue to fly but would lose their seniority unless they were a “required flight deck member,” a term that is in dispute.
The union doesn’t believe the term covers instructors, but Continental — “and apparently only Continental,” the judge said — believes it does.
In September, the union filed a grievance against Continental over the issue
The way I read it, the ruling is telling the oldies to f- off.
This is a fairly important issue to bring to a conclusion. I think it will have a bearing on any future lawsuit that seeks to inordinately expand rights of the older crowd.

I know who one of the guys flying the line is and I find it ironic that he cares so much about union representation now. He didn't care too much when he crossed the picket line.

Latest posts

Latest resources