Latest Age 65 BS...Group wants them all back...

[SkiFishFly]

The lawyers smell big money and are playing the already retired guys like a fiddle
I just hope they lose - if they win, we will all somehow end up contributing to the legal fees...
I hate our legal system and fricken lawyers...

 

[Draginass]

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knew that many of the already retired guys are going to demand "equal protection". I don't see how the current badly crafted law will stand up to a constitutional challenge. Congrats you guys who wanted the change. You've now opened Pandora's Box and have thrown the piloting career into an even faster tailspin than it was already in. And, thanks SWAPA . . . you dorks.

 

[Quimby]

Hallo,

It makes me sick to my stomach to watch all these guys show their true nature.

They only look out for themselves and could care less about anybody else.

Every once in a while, however, one of the good guys shows true class and retires at 60, the retirement age he has known for 30 years, or close to it. He will go out the door KNOWING that a majority of his colleagues appreciate it and that we will ALWAYS remember his example as being the only right way to leave.

Rgds,

dane

...gonna be a rare breed in the next few years

 

[whymeworry?]

Yeah, like the ATA is going to let this one fly. I beleive they got caught with their pants down on the age-65 deal. They won't rehire $180K/yr pilots when they can get new-hires for $30K/ yr at the beginning of the longevity scale. No way.

 

[ReverseSensing]

I actually feel bad for these guys who were forced in to retirement. THEY were discriminated against because of their age and thrown out into the cold street with nothing else.

I think we owe it to bring these folks back with seniority and make a statement against discrimination! As a society we need to fight discrimination and hate. Together we can make it a better world.

Your stuff is mostly junk, but this one made me giggle.

 

[Lear70]

Yeah, his posts are usually so juvenile they don't even qualify as humor, but that one was pretty good for a change.

It's an excellent question, it IS questionably legal, but will the Supreme Court hear it?

I hope it takes 2-3 years to sort out to minimize the impact. Looks like a better time than ever to be at Netjets...

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Looks like democracy prevailed. at least there is a winner and a loser. The winners simply see another chance to furhter thier win? And why not? the Age 60 guys are unorganized and beaten down.. why not go for more?

Its better than not have demorcacy at all......

 

[Lear70]

Looks like democracy prevailed. at least there is a winner and a loser. The winners simply see another chance to furhter thier win? And why not? the Age 60 guys are unorganized and beaten down.. why not go for more?

Its better than not have demorcacy at all......

Come here a second... I've got something I want to show you.

Take a look at this pail of cement...

 

[mdf]

Yep,

Being a 60 year old millionaire aint what it used to be

 

[kwick]

Sometimes you have to right a wrong. Age 65 should have been implimented with the international rule change over a year ago. I, for one, would be willing to give up some seniority so that those folks can come back to their rightful places on the seniority list.

 

[handlesaregay]

I hope they all get to come back. Every single one. Kharma's a -----.

 

[Lear70]

Sometimes you have to right a wrong. Age 65 should have been implimented with the international rule change over a year ago. I, for one, would be willing to give up some seniority so that those folks can come back to their rightful places on the seniority list.

What you're talking about is likely the wholesale FURLOUGH of HUNDREDS of F/O's across the industry so these guys can come back at their 6-figure salary.

I don't mind giving up my upgrade by a few years, which is one of the reasons I supported age 65, because it was the right thing to do, but I have NO intention of being kicked out on the street so the retirees can come back at full seniority.

The whole POINT was to allow them to continue to work until age 65 so they could bridge the gap between mandatory retirement and full social security benefits. They can do that working as an F/O or at a supplemental, so long as it doesn't cost anyone THEIR JOB.

Fair is one thing. Pure greed at another's expense of their ability to feed their family is just wrong.

 

[Spooky 2]

Everyone ......take a deep breath. Ah that feels better now. This is simply not going to happen and will never get any traction in the courts. Simply let the old guys throw their $$ at some money grubbing law firm and sit back and smile.

 

[instructordude]

Take a stand against Discrimination!

You work for Delta right? If all those retired guys come back you will lose your job. How do you feel about it now?

I think it is time to unite and kick this ugly monster called "Discrimination" in the nuts and make a statement showing unity and the desire to help our elderly pilots get back on their feet.

Did I just write this???:laugh: :laugh:

 

[Spooky 2]

I think it is time to unite and kick this ugly monster called "Discrimination" in the nuts and make a statement showing unity and the desire to help our elderly pilots get back on their feet.

Did I just write this???:laugh: :laugh:

Intructordude. You are simply a troll playing in a mans world. Please settle down and go back to your PlayStation, thus sparing all these guys anymore high pressure. It's over, end of story, finie'e.

 

[Poahi]

Hey, I know what.... Why don't we double our ALPA dues to help those guys out. Give them the equivalent of their lost Social Security money. Kind of a reverse Robin Hood pay as you go system.

 

[FlyByNight1]

How about instead of donating to this fund, we donate to all the guys who were already retired before 911, and got their retirement wiped away in the bankruptcy courts. They were awarded the federal guarentee around $27,000 a year max. What about them? They lost their entire lifes work in one foul swoop, and were to old to go back to work in the only profession they new. Now thats a shame...

 

[Skater]

What you're talking about is likely the wholesale FURLOUGH of HUNDREDS of F/O's across the industry so these guys can come back at their 6-figure salary.

I don't mind giving up my upgrade by a few years, which is one of the reasons I supported age 65, because it was the right thing to do, but I have NO intention of being kicked out on the street so the retirees can come back at full seniority.



If you were stupid enough to support this, I would love to see you on the street to have a little time to think about your idiocy and it's consequences.

 

[NuGuy]

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knew that many of the already retired guys are going to demand "equal protection". I don't see how the current badly crafted law will stand up to a constitutional challenge. Congrats you guys who wanted the change. You've now opened Pandora's Box and have thrown the piloting career into an even faster tailspin than it was already in. And, thanks SWAPA . . . you dorks.

Heyas Dragin,

You hit the nail on the head. Once these guys prove that the law is FUBARed, not only will they sue to come back with their OLD seniority, but they will sue to recover lost longevity, pay, retirement contributions, benefits PLUS damages.

The final monetary toll will be HUGE.

ALPA will no doubt be listed as a co-defendant along with the airlines. If they send me an assesment, I'll send it to Prater.


Nu

 

[Skater]

Excellent point. This is hands down the worst generation ever in America. We are stuck with a bunch of hippies who run our universities, law firms and congress and a bunch of greedy corporate executives and senior pilots who will never be happy despite all the robbing they have done to their companies. We are going to pay for this last f. u. for the rest of our rapidly diminishing careers.

 

[Spooky 2]

Excellent point. This is hands down the worst generation ever in America. We are stuck with a bunch of hippies who run our universities, law firms and congress and a bunch of greedy corporate executives and senior pilots who will never be happy despite all the robbing they have done to their companies. We are going to pay for this last f. u. for the rest of our rapidly diminishing careers.

Your appear to be full of yourself or or simply full of BS after looking at your profile. Only in your dreams di&k head. BTW what branch of the service were you in anyway. You f'n *************************! Have you ever done anything for anyoine but yourself? I doubt it. Please oh please tell me who you work for, I just gotta know.

I do agree with most of your post about the losers that are running the country however.

 

[Skater]

Have you ever done anything for anyoine but yourself? I doubt it. Please oh please tell me who you work for, I just gotta know.

I do agree with most of your post about the losers that are running the country however.[/quote]

Other than serve my country.... Didn't notice that in you profile you f'n *********** p***y

PS. Thanks for agreeing with most of my post, though. Happy New Year

 

[Lear70]

If you were stupid enough to support this, I would love to see you on the street to have a little time to think about your idiocy and it's consequences.

Well, I guess that just goes to show you...

Some of us have ethics.

Some of us don't.

I'll live with my choice, even if that becomes the consequence. Age discrimination is age discrimination.

I'm sure you have no problem sleeping at night though; most people with a deficit of ethics don't even know it.

 

[Skater]

Because you voted for this you have ethics???? How does that offer any proof. I will say it shows you to be a sap. Age discrimination is age discrimination if they kick you out of the cockpit at 55, 60, 65, 70 etc. and on the front end 21, 22 etc. Ethics, that is classic. Whatever........

 

[Lear70]

Because you voted for this you have ethics???? How does that offer any proof. I will say it shows you to be a sap. Age discrimination is age discrimination if they kick you out of the cockpit at 55, 60, 65, 70 etc. and on the front end 21, 22 etc. Ethics, that is classic. Whatever........

I wouldn't expect anyone who lacks the ethics to back the change to actually understand what part ethics plays in it.

Your response proves my point; complete lack of any meaningful argument and, moreover, you prove my point for me. Age discrimination IS wrong; no matter WHAT age they choose arbitrarily.

Sorry you lack the depth of character to understand it. Maybe someday...

 

[Box-Hauler]

Is not the FAA responsible for SAFETY. I do hope they have some age discrimination. I do not want a 90 year old flying just the same as I do not want a 16 year old. There are times when the government can and does use age discrimination for good reasons, (driving, drinking, joining armed services ect....)

The cry of age discrimination is just that, a cry. If the FAA came out and said we have new data that supports the age increase fine, but they did not. They did it to satisfy the CEO's, SWPA, ALPA and the E.U. Now lets talk about ethics with that group of people......

 

[Skater]

I wouldn't expect anyone who lacks the ethics to back the change to actually understand what part ethics plays in it.

Your response proves my point; complete lack of any meaningful argument and, moreover, you prove my point for me. Age discrimination IS wrong; no matter WHAT age they choose arbitrarily.

Sorry you lack the depth of character to understand it. Maybe someday...

Maybe someday you will be furloughed because of it so you can fall back on your "depth of character" you pompous a$$

 

[pipe]

I wouldn't expect anyone who lacks the ethics to back the change to actually understand what part ethics plays in it.

Your response proves my point; complete lack of any meaningful argument and, moreover, you prove my point for me. Age discrimination IS wrong; no matter WHAT age they choose arbitrarily.

Sorry you lack the depth of character to understand it. Maybe someday...

Please explain to the rest of us how your ethics are better than everyone else's because you support a different arbitrary age.

 

[PCL_128]

I wouldn't expect anyone who lacks the ethics to back the change to actually understand what part ethics plays in it.

Your response proves my point; complete lack of any meaningful argument and, moreover, you prove my point for me. Age discrimination IS wrong; no matter WHAT age they choose arbitrarily.

Sorry you lack the depth of character to understand it. Maybe someday...

Pretty big words to be telling everyone of us that opposed the change (the majority of us, by the way), that we have no ethics. You know better than that.

 

[Lear70]

I wasn't aiming those comments at everyone, just the hater who was wishing a furlough on everyone who supported the change. You know better than that...

There are those who can simply agree to disagree, then there are those who simply aim their anger at the closest available target, as evidenced by his first post:

If you were stupid enough to support this, I would love to see you on the street to have a little time to think about your idiocy and it's consequences.

For someone to wish that kind of suffering on someone (I've been furloughed before. Twice. It sucks.), PLUS having such bile in their heart over the issue, leaves me no alternative but to believe they have a serious ethics issue, in more ways than one.

It wasn't ONLY his position, it was that PLUS his overall hatred and anger over the issue and those involved.