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

Make The Call People

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

Networ-King

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2003
Posts
625
I don't know if this has already been posted or not, but I think we all need to make this call. I just did and will make it numerous times if I have to. Takes a couple of minutes to call the 2024561111 line and leave your comment with the operator. These old geezers are over there lobbying for this thing, so the least we could do is pick up the phone for a couple of minutes a day...... for a week ;).

Net

ps. Sorry if this was already posted before..... Now make the call.....


Fellow pilots,
Late Friday night APA was informed that the House of Representatives had adopted the Senate language in an effort to get the transportation appropriations bill to President Bush before Congress adjourns for the holidays. This bill contains language that, if passed, will change the pilot mandatory retirement age from 60 to 65.
In response to this threat to safety, on Wednesday APA will run newspaper advertising in USA Today and Washington, D.C. publications The Hill and Roll Call. APA has also issued the press release that we have appended to this message.
President Bush has stated that he will veto the bill and our legislative consultants in Washington do not believe that the Senate has the votes to override the veto — but APA still needs your help to ensure that President Bush does veto this bill. We are asking each of you to take a few minutes and call the White House and tell them that you want President Bush to veto the transportation appropriations bill. You may call the White House switchboard at 202-456-1414 or leave a message on the White House comment line at 202-456-1111.
APA National Communications

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT:
Captain Karl Schricker
817-302-2350/214-957-5275
Gregg Overman
817-302-2250/817-312-3901

ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION URGES PRESIDENT BUSH TO VETO SPENDING BILL, PRESERVE AGE 60 RETIREMENT FOR AIRLINE PILOTS

Fort Worth, Texas (November 13, 2007)—The Allied Pilots Association (APA), representing the 12,000 pilots of American Airlines (NYSE: AMR), is urging President Bush to follow through with his stated intention of vetoing a transportation appropriations bill.
The spending bill includes language that would raise airline pilot retirement age to 65 from the current age 60 standard. Congress is expected to pass the bill sometime this week. The legislation will then go to the White House for final approval.
“By an overwhelming majority, our pilots support keeping retirement at age 60,” said APA President Captain Lloyd Hill. “They support the current mandatory retirement age based on numerous safety concerns, foremost among them pilot fatigue.”
Hill pointed out that the National Transportation Safety Board has linked pilot fatigue to 10 commercial aviation accidents since 1993 that killed 260 people. He also noted that the issue of pilot fatigue has generated significant public attention recently. An article in the Nov. 7, 2007 issue of USA Today reported that fatigue led hundreds of pilots, mechanics and air traffic controllers to make mistakes on the job, including six cases where pilots fell asleep in mid-flight. Pilots acknowledged that they “flew to the wrong altitude, botched landings and missed radio calls.”
Hill added that research by the Aerospace Medical Association has shown that older pilots have greater difficulty dealing with the physical demands of overnight flying and long flights across multiple time zones. The Federal Aviation Administration has conceded that older pilots’ accumulated experience does not compensate for the impact of fatigue on their performance.
“President Bush has cited cost concerns as the reason behind his plans to veto the transportation appropriations bill,” Hill said. “We agree the bill would prove costly—but not just in dollars and cents.”
APA plans to run newspaper advertising later this week that calls on airline passengers to make their voices heard. The union will recommend that travelers contact the White House to urge President Bush to follow through with his veto plans.
“We will let our passengers know that for safety’s sake, it’s the right thing to do,” he said.

Founded in 1963, the Allied Pilots Association—the largest independent pilot union in the U.S. —is headquartered in Fort Worth , Texas . APA represents the 12,000 pilots of American Airlines, including 2,246 pilots on furlough. The furloughs began shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Also, several hundred American Airlines pilots are on full-time military leave of absence serving in the armed forces. The union’s Web site address is www.alliedpilots.org.
American Airlines is the nation’s largest passenger carrier and fifth-largest cargo carrier.

# # #​
To view this email on the APA Website, please go here:
 
age 65 will happen.........deal with it.

And I will do whatever I can to delay it for as long as possible.

Just made the phone call.
 
age 65 will happen.........deal with it.

You sound really confident that this will pass...about to hit 60? I would not mind age 62 but in light of the NASA study that was released, I think a lot of folks are going to take a second look at this issue. That being said, I think it is tough to make an absolute assertion like you did. However, I wish you luck and hope life works out for you.
 
Let's drop it to 55 and make the skies even safer. No reason some grumpy 55 year old should be behind the wheel.
 
You sound really confident that this will pass...about to hit 60? I would not mind age 62 but in light of the NASA study that was released, I think a lot of folks are going to take a second look at this issue. That being said, I think it is tough to make an absolute assertion like you did. However, I wish you luck and hope life works out for you.
thanks............and i am far away from 60.
 
I for one know a captain who was forced to retire at 60, guess what? No medical coverage, and his regional career and no pension (we should all be in the no pension club) made him search for a career for 5 years. So now he finds himself driving a truck in northern minnesota to pay the bills. I do not want to have to be forced to do that. So I am all for having our retirement age be 60. More pilots should look beyond the greed of a higher (QUICKER) seniortiy climb with a stalled changed age 60 rule. Yes, thats right, its your short term greed! Can other professionals work to 65? does the government give us benies at 60? No, this age 60 rule was to lower pilot costs and pilots agreed because of great pensions.........we no longer have this.

I was not happy that ALPA fought the change. Especially with euro pilots who were 65 flying in our airspace.
 
Yes, thats right, its your short term greed!

Dude, you are such a hypocrite!

The only short term greed I see is some greedy old bastard trying to create a five year windfall.

If this language changed the age limit by five years over a 30 year period, you would have some moral ground to stand on.

What about those that have just retired the day before this quicksilver law changes? Do they have the right to claim damages in a lawsuit?
 
Last edited:
Another Arrogant Airlines stupid move, just like the "B" scale. They should have spent the money from the ad on safety related problems that they have. Rudder pedal usage in swept-wing aircraft and terrain avoidance, come to mind. Maybe it is safer if AA pilots retire at age 60, they certainly have that choice, and could contactually agree to that. When the law changes, we will see the true AA hypocrites emerge.
 
age 65 will happen.........deal with it.

I think we should all start lobbying for age 55. Are you going to deal with it?

Too many ex-wives eh? :laugh:

I know, I know, it's not about that, it's about "discrimination" right???? LOL!
 
I for one know a captain who was forced to retire at 60, guess what? No medical coverage, and his regional career and no pension (we should all be in the no pension club) made him search for a career for 5 years. So now he finds himself driving a truck in northern minnesota to pay the bills. I do not want to have to be forced to do that. So I am all for having our retirement age be 60. More pilots should look beyond the greed of a higher (QUICKER) seniortiy climb with a stalled changed age 60 rule. Yes, thats right, its your short term greed! Can other professionals work to 65? does the government give us benies at 60? No, this age 60 rule was to lower pilot costs and pilots agreed because of great pensions.........we no longer have this.

I was not happy that ALPA fought the change. Especially with euro pilots who were 65 flying in our airspace.

OMG! How about fighting for Medicare to kick in when you retire at 60, instead of trying to work longer? This is the same b.s. that started all this age 65 crap. Management takes all pensions so instead of fighting and suing to get them back from all the greedy little bastards, we try to work longer. MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER!

And, no Sparky, it's not a greed thing, it's a "I don't want to work my entire life and drop dead at my retirement party" thing. :rolleyes: Wake up.

Euro pilots are given a schedule every month instead of bidding like we do. Should we do that too? If they jump off a bridge, should we?
 
If we don't raise the age for US pilots to 65 then we must forbid foreign pilots from operating in the US over age 60.
I'm not willing to have my government tell me I can no longer do a job based soley on my age while it allows non US citizens to do the same job 5 years beyond that age.
 
If we don't raise the age for US pilots to 65 then we must forbid foreign pilots from operating in the US over age 60.
I'm not willing to have my government tell me I can no longer do a job based soley on my age while it allows non US citizens to do the same job 5 years beyond that age.

There are some legitimate arguments for raising the limit to 65, however this is one of the most bogus arguments that the pro-65 crowd makes. If this issue were simple age discrimination, then it would be an entirely different debate. However, it's not about simple age discrimination. Age discrimination is only a small part of the larger issue involved with age-65.

Most of the folks I've talked to in the pro-65 crowd were also very much for the war in Iraq...despite the fact that the vast majority of nations were very much in opposition to an invasion. You know the guys who I'm talking about; the FOX-news-watching, freedom-fry-eating, the-WMDs-were-really-there-swearin', Al-Gore-bashing true-blue, full-on members of the me generation. In the run-up to the war, these guys didn't give a dang what France or Sweden or China or the Vatican thought. They ballyhooed about how America can't be brought under the influence of foreign nations. America has got to do what is right for America. Well guys, it's time to apply the same logic to your age-65 stance. It shouldn't matter what France or Sweden or China or the Vatican does with their rules, right? America is not held captive by the whims of foreign nations, right? America does what is right for America regardless of what other nations do. In America, the retirement age for airline pilots is 60. That's been the right age for American airline pilots to retire for a long time now. Simply because some foreign countries start doing things differently doesn't mean that we have to. BTW, where were all of you guys 20 and 30 years ago? Why weren't you raising a stink back then about age 60? Seems to me the age-65 crowd is full of hypocrisy.
 
There are some legitimate arguments for raising the limit to 65, however this is one of the most bogus arguments that the pro-65 crowd makes. If this issue were simple age discrimination, then it would be an entirely different debate. However, it's not about simple age discrimination. Age discrimination is only a small part of the larger issue involved with age-65.

Most of the folks I've talked to in the pro-65 crowd were also very much for the war in Iraq...despite the fact that the vast majority of nations were very much in opposition to an invasion. You know the guys who I'm talking about; the FOX-news-watching, freedom-fry-eating, the-WMDs-were-really-there-swearin', Al-Gore-bashing true-blue, full-on members of the me generation. In the run-up to the war, these guys didn't give a dang what France or Sweden or China or the Vatican thought. They ballyhooed about how America can't be brought under the influence of foreign nations. America has got to do what is right for America. Well guys, it's time to apply the same logic to your age-65 stance. It shouldn't matter what France or Sweden or China or the Vatican does with their rules, right? America is not held captive by the whims of foreign nations, right? America does what is right for America regardless of what other nations do. In America, the retirement age for airline pilots is 60. That's been the right age for American airline pilots to retire for a long time now. Simply because some foreign countries start doing things differently doesn't mean that we have to. BTW, where were all of you guys 20 and 30 years ago? Why weren't you raising a stink back then about age 60? Seems to me the age-65 crowd is full of hypocrisy.


So... You are OK with your government allowing foreign pilots to fly in and out of USA past the age at which your government tells you that you have to retire?
If France (Nigeria, Mexico- whoever) says it is OK for their pilots to go to age 70 - you think our government should allow them to continue to fly in and out of the US (esssentially allowing them to work on US soil)?


I won't even go into all the ignorant stereotypes included in your post...
 
So... You are OK with your government allowing foreign pilots to fly in and out of USA past the age at which your government tells you that you have to retire?

No, they should be prohibited from flying here.
 
So... You are OK with your government allowing foreign pilots to fly in and out of USA past the age at which your government tells you that you have to retire?
If France (Nigeria, Mexico- whoever) says it is OK for their pilots to go to age 70 - you think our government should allow them to continue to fly in and out of the US (esssentially allowing them to work on US soil)?


I won't even go into all the ignorant stereotypes included in your post...

Let's take your argument to the extreme. If France or Nigeria or Mexico decided to let pilots fly without any kind of medical screening whatsoever, would you say that the US should also allow it here? In other words, if France or Nigeria or Mexico allowed epileptics, the mentally ill, the handicapped, the legally blind, etc to fly should the US reciprocate by also eliminating medical qualifications for flying? Should US law and policy always mirror that of France or Nigeria or Mexico? Heck, Canada and Belgium have legalized gay marriage. Does that mean the US needs to legalize it here as well in the interest of fairness to homosexuals? Since when have you been okay with other nations dictating law and policy to us?
 
Safety? Really you are using safety as the reason?

Sorry bro, I am no where near 60 and that doesn't hold water to me. I know plenty of 60+ that are fine mentally and physically. I think we need some more additional testing like a Cog test above 60. People are living longer and mentally age 60 isn't what age 60 used to be. If you want to retire at 60 I understand. If you don't want people hanging around longer than 60 so you can move up I understand. But really. Safety?
If you go nuts before 60 they remove you, and if you go nuts after 60 they remove you. So is it the age or the testing system?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom