Mandatory Retirement Age at 91K/135 Operations

Jack Mehoff

I PITTY DA FOO!
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Posts
654
Total Time
6000+
Seems to me that it wouldn't be a bad thing? Its commercial flying right? So why should this be any different then the 121 world? The flying is actually a lot more challenging in the 91K/135 world. Thoughts?

Personally I think its time for it. No Hate'n intended. From personal experience I have seen that with the "Good AMEs" out there, the 65+ crowd could be a hazard.
 

Photoflight

AIR rAMBO
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Posts
541
Total Time
2500
i vote for only hot blondes and redheads as pilots from now on. We can all stay on tell retirement...but all new pilots must fit the above requirements.

on the road beer is paid for by the company

all trips must have at least one 18 hour overnight in the islands

And TEB gets bulldozed.

These are ideas i can get behind. Your idea is retarded.
 

CA1900

Big Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2002
Posts
5,436
Total Time
11000+
Seems to me that it wouldn't be a bad thing?
A bad thing for whom, exactly?

So why should this be any different then the 121 world?
So because the 121 world has an arbitrary rule that's rooted in politics rather than science, we should adopt it as well? No thanks.
 

superfly

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
73
Total Time
lots
If you can't lift bags, stay awake for more than an hour in the cockpit, or hear me YELLING at you, time to go!

There are some seniors who are just fine, but some really need to go!

I know the AARP crowd will be all over this. Think of teenagers and their invincibility.
 

Hawkered

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Posts
496
Total Time
10,320
What I think is tragic is these guys who are hanging onto jobs five years past Medicare when there are young guys just struggling to pay bills with small children.

This is not the "me-80's" guys. If you screwed up your finances when things were good, you're not going to make them any better now!!
 

Ypres

Active member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Posts
28
Total Time
Mucho
Did it ever occur to you that maybe it was senior 121 management that caused a retired pilots finances to be "screwed up" by bankrupting the company and terminating the pilot pensions ? There are a lot of 91K / 135 pilots flying for that very reason.
 

Hawkered

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Posts
496
Total Time
10,320
So, then it's okay to just fly and fly...until when?? Didn't mommy ever tell you not to put all your eggs in one basket when you were a pup?

Sorry...it's all about you, I forgot!!!

Enjoy your Social Security checks that we are paying for, but will never see when we retire. What a freakin' Ponzi Scheme that is.
 

o2bflyn

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Posts
482
Total Time
>40
I can't believe someone is stirring up this little gem again.

Here is the bottom line folks. No matter your age, when you can't do the job anymore, hang it up. If you are 35 and can't do it, hang it up......if you are 110 and can still fly the hell out of a plane and lift the bags, talk to pax, and stay awake for the ride....fly the hell out of it.
 

Hawkered

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Posts
496
Total Time
10,320
And drop dead at the controls and hope a passenger can land the plane.
 

o2bflyn

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Posts
482
Total Time
>40
And drop dead at the controls and hope a passenger can land the plane.
For that one, we may want to talk to some AMEs and find out how people still get medicals that probably should not pass.

Dropping dead at the controls qualifies as someone who cannot hack it anymore. I think the AMEs should be held more accountable to whom they give medicals to.

For the record, young guys die unexpectedly too.
 
Last edited:

clickclickboom

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
1,081
Total Time
15k
At Flops we had a guy that aside from a case of halitosis that could melt steel basically slept all day long.

We would land walk into the fbo I would go take a leak and walk into the crew lounge and he would already be asleep.

One day I wanted to keep track and he slept 4:55 throughout the day. We got done at 8PM and he entered his room at 9pm. We had a 12pM van and the company pushed up departure time so i called him at 11:20am and he was still sleeping from the night before. We take off and not even 20 mins into the flight he is fast asleep for over an hour on our repo leg. Heck at least he couldnt breathe on me while sleeping

I will pay $1000 to the flops guy that knows his initials.
 

netjetwife

1 of many w/an opinion
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
Posts
2,741
Total Time
none
A wife's perspective...

Here's a thought that may not have occurred to some of you. Couples have been waiting longer to have children, and women now give birth later than previous generations. That puts those kids in college, getting married, etc when pilots are in their 60s. Expensive times, to be sure. The above scenario applies to my family and it was part of the reason my husband came to NJA--to fly past age 60. That said, we think 65 is long enough and will be looking forward to his/our retirement.

I think that rising wages in the frac industry will probably do a lot to ease the necessity for pilots to keep flying and this sensitive issue could resolve itself over time.
 

NachoMamma

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Posts
181
Total Time
Plenty
While its very cute to get on the "politics - not science" bandwagon in an attempt to exonerate one's self from the obvious truth, the safety of the situation simply cannot be ingored (at least not by thinking, responsible, and yes...honest people).

I don't give a rat's a$$ what FAR you're operating under, the same people (on the ground and in the air) get killed when Grandpa Pasthisprime decides that his paycheck is more important than the public's safety, yet still can't seem to remember what he had for breakfast this morning; let alone an ATC frequency, Vspeed, or emergency procedure. It's still tons of metal and jet fuel being hurled through the air at hundreds of knots by incompetant, and unsafe pilots that threatens peoples' lives.

While it can be debated as to where the age cutoff should be that encompasses the majority of older folks susceptible to cognative decline (and yes, we all get that there are incompetant young and old pilots alike), it simply cannot be debated that the problem of true CD exists, and that leaving it up to the individual pilot (who has a significant financial incentive not to admit it), is effectively ignoring the problem. The sad thing here is that people will need to die before any legitamate measures are applied to the 135/91k world by regulators.

This is obviously a sensetive topic, and the elderly community will obviously disagree with everything I've said here, but the true arguement behind these opinions should be obvious to everyone...its all about money.
 

Jack Mehoff

I PITTY DA FOO!
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Posts
654
Total Time
6000+
There are multiple problems. 1 guys that never properly planned for retirement. 2. have ex-wives to pay for. 3. Because of no retirement age, they have no one to send them to the beach when its time. 4. They have that "good ame" that passes them when they are not fit to fly anymore.

I've seen some 60+ guys that are fine and 40 somethings that shouldn't be allowed to drive a gokart.

More then not I'm seeing some very old pilots that can't load bags, stay up past 9pm eastern or get out of their seats once in them. Hell I even flew with a guy that kept forgetting to fully shut down the plane before opening the door. Yet they say the same thing. I'm flying til I drop dead because there is no retirement age in 91k/135 flying.

Its your fault you racked up ex-wives, didn't plan your retirement or save any money. Now others have to pick up the slack for you to keep things safe.

This is not a ME first thing but rather I shouldn't have to pull your load as well statement.
 

netjetwife

1 of many w/an opinion
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
Posts
2,741
Total Time
none
It's a sensitive issue because you can't (legally and fairly) discriminate against those older pilots who can still pull their weight and are not a safety risk. And some of them are there for the love of the job, not the money.

I'm pleased to say that NJASAP is working with NJA on the CD/Fitness for Duty issue. My husband tells me that the new committee's work is another industry leading joint effort. Kudos to those involved. NJW
 

bluepost

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Posts
171
Total Time
6000
Every talks about it as if it is a money issue....it is not for many, if not most. It is what they like to do...if they can do it, I say go for it, if not, hang it up.

My partner and I were walking out to the plane the other day in SHV....Sunday, clear skies, 72 degree, 10 kts of wind. We had 17 hours off, it was noon, and we both commentd on the weather.....he said "man I wish I was golfing", and I said "man, what a beautiful day to fly"

We had a .6 down to houston, then a .4 ferry to Austin, and we were done. Shut off at 4pm, downtown hotel is Austin.

This job is retirement for some, depends on your perspective.
 

NachoMamma

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Posts
181
Total Time
Plenty
It's a sensitive issue because you can't (legally and fairly) discriminate against those older pilots who can still pull their weight and are not a safety risk.
With all due respect, 'discrimination' isn't even remotely the issue here. The issue is safety...plain and simple. If this wasn't the case, then the FAA would not have imposed an age limit in the first place (no, it isn't political - that's just a conveniant excuse). Again, I'm not advocating that the age be 60, 65, 70, or any other number. That's for the data to justify (and yes there are many studies out there).

It would be nice to be able to accurately identify which older pilots could still pull their weight, and which ones couldn't. Unfortunately, this just isn't realistic as it lends itself to far too much subjectivity, variability, and external influence (like dishonest AME's). Therefore, it is incumbant upon the regulating authority to set a limit that encompasses the statistical majority (so far, the verdict appears to be age 65).

And some of them are there for the love of the job, not the money.
The reasoning behind why someone would be motivated to stay here until they are unsafe to fly is arbitrary...the public's safety is endangered just the same.

I'm am familiary with the efforts being undertaken by our union to address these issues and agree that the effort is laudatory. Philisophically however, I am not convinced that a policy of voluntary self disclosure is going to mitigate the danger. These folks aren't just going to give up their cushy jobs because they might not 'have it' anymore...they'll pick the paycheck every time. This is the definition of a conflict of interest.
 
Top