Mandatory Retirement Age at 91K/135 Operations

[NachoMamma]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[netjetwife]

The safety of pax and crews is paramount...that's a given. That said: I'm suggesting that it would be discriminatory to single out a pilot based solely on his/her age, regardless of their health and safety.

The FAA age restrictions aren't applied in the fracs, right? Thus the balancing act (far from easy) between equal treatment of pilots and maintaining high safety standards is more of an issue in this industry.

Considering that every crew has an obligation to bring any safety hazard to the attention of the Union and/or their Company, I don't see the issue being left just to voluntary disclosure.

The lack of a mandatory retirement age, while a good thing for those older pilots who are still mentally sharp and physically fit, can be too tempting for those who aren't. Perhaps NJA's early out offer will prove to be more tempting for those having to push themselves too hard to get thru the day--whatever their age.

Final thought: Everyone ages/declines, but not at the same rate. That's why it is laudatory that a joint effort is being made at NJA to address the issue objectively. I wish them success. NJW

 

[Jack Mehoff]

NJA Wife. This is beyond just NetJets, Flex or CS ect. Look at last week. Pilot dies in flight and the pax had to land the plane. Was he really passing a medical??

I know that was 91 flying but my point is in the world of no age limits I don't think that most pilots will admit when its time to hang it up. Our nature makes us to proud to admit we're past our prime.

In the world of flying we have hard numbers for everything. Aircraft limitations, Approach mins, VFR/IFR mins, High mins and low mins Capts. Fuel reserves. Rest and Duty days. These are set in stone because too common pilots will make excuses to push the limits for whatever reason to accomplish the job. Having that hard number is a cutoff to standardize the operation for safety. 121, 135, 91K you are still flying a jet powered aircraft with pax in the back. Also there are still the same people on the ground. There is no difference and thats the reality.

The paycheck will win in the end for a pilot that's never got enough cash or never planed ahead. They know there is another pilot to watch their back and pick up the slack. That is not how it should be.

I know for the older crowd its a sensitive subject. However with the Frac word becoming bigger and a mainstay it needs to be addressed.

 

[NachoMamma]

I'm suggesting that it would be discriminatory to single out a pilot based solely on his/her age, regardless of their health and safety.

The airlines are doing this today. It is not considered discriminatory. On the contrary, if the airlines didn't have this rule, and an 80 year old pilot ends up killing a couple of hundred passengers because he couldn't remember how the autopilot works, then the airline would inevidably be held liable for criminal negligance and for disregarding public safety. This is ultimately going to be the trigger for similar legislation for 135/91k ops.

The FAA age restrictions aren't applied in the fracs, right?

My point in all of this, is that in the interest of public safety...they should be.

Considering that every crew has an obligation to bring any safety hazard to the attention of the Union and/or their Company, I don't see the issue being left just to voluntary disclosure.

Ideally, this sounds great. Unfortunately, we have too many pilots who would rather not 'rock the boat' or hurt an older pilot's feelings.

 

[realityman]

This whole thread is BS. Before I get started, let me just tell you that I'm 39, so not defending anything because I'm an "oldster".

Does anyone have any hard and fast statistics on aviation accidents caused by the ineptness of 'older' pilots? When you hear about fatal accidents, how often is it because of an old pilot? How old were the crew flying the recent Continental Dash 8? How old were the total jagoffs that crashed that Pinnacle CRJ (fortunately with no pax on board)? How old was the co-pilot of the American A300 that crashed on Rockaway Sound (I ask about the co-pilot because I believe he was the one flying at the time of the accident)? What about the ages of the crew of the Comair Lexington accident? Shall I keep going?

Maybe, if you start looking at REAL accident statistics and not hard-to-measure things like cognitive decline, it might come out that the public safety would be better served if no one could fly these oh-so-difficult jets who is UNDER the age of 45.

So there was ONE pilot who was older who died while flying recently. Looking at aviation accident statistics I'd say it's the 'younger' crowd who pose the greater danger to public safety.

My wife worked for a State Farm insurance agent. Do you know what demographic had the highest number of accidents and incidents in cars? Hint: It wasn't the 'oldsters'. It's the under 25 crowd! And after that, 35-45.

Now, if you want to argue based strictly and only on the 'pulling your weight' thing, you may have a point. The older folks are definitely not so great with the bags. And they aren't quite as detail-oriented about cabin cleaning and stocking. Although I find that most have better interactions with the pax than I do.

I'd really love to know where all these mythical cognitively impaired older pilots are. Almost all of them I've flown with have been fantastic pilots. There have been a few who weren't so good, but no more than the few younger pilots I've flown with who weren't so good.

I'm just not buying this safety argument. There's absolutely ZERO proof that older pilots are less safe. It's all heresay. "I flew with an older guy who couldn't stay awake". "Yeah, I flew with one who dribbled food and farted a lot!" "Me too, only mine smelled bad and refused to keep his teeth in while flying!"

Whatever guys. This just sounds like "You've had yours, now I want mine so get out of the way!" Real nice.

 

[netjetwife]

Jack, I was just confining my comments to the industry I know best. I agree that the temptation to keep going can cause problems. Considering that money often does play a big part, the issue is just more evidence of the damage that is caused by underpaying pilots. They take the direct hit, but the ripple effect is far-reaching. When pilots are paid professional wages their entire career, I think more of them will retire earlier to enjoy the leisure time they earned. I'm sure most aviation family members would welcome that, especially those who have a pilot who's gone a lot.

I see the NJA early out offer as one way to help address the pay part of the issue. It'd be great if other companies followed suit.

 

[realityman]

The airlines are doing this today. It is not considered discriminatory. On the contrary, if the airlines didn't have this rule, and an 80 year old pilot ends up killing a couple of hundred passengers because he couldn't remember how the autopilot works, then the airline would inevidably be held liable for criminal negligance and for disregarding public safety. This is ultimately going to be the trigger for similar legislation for 135/91k ops.



My point in all of this, is that in the interest of public safety...they should be.



Ideally, this sounds great. Unfortunately, we have too many pilots who would rather not 'rock the boat' or hurt an older pilot's feelings.

This is so ridiculous I hardly know where to begin. So by your logic, NO ONE would be flying ANY planes today. After all, I'd hazard a pretty safe guess that people have been killed by pilots of ALL age demographics.

But more importantly, WHY did any of these accidents happen? You're automatically assuming that if a plane crashes piloted by an older pilot, that it MUST be because of age-related problems (of the pilot, not the plane). Can you provide some proof of this? I'm guessing probably not.

Once again, this whole thread appears to be more based on just a general dislike of older pilots and/or a mistaken sense of entitlement by a younger pilot. If you can pass a medical and a checkride, then keep on trucking! (and flying!). Until someone can provide me proof positive that older pilots are really a safety problem (REAL proof, not heresay!) then I see no problem with flying as long as you can.

 

[gunfyter]

Right on Reality. I am 51 and I will be flying at least 15 more years but not past 70. I will be fishing then.

60 is the new 40.

 

[critter]

Reality... Very well put. This is turning into a world of greed and this topic has its roots there. These people who are asking for others to step down are only looking at moving up the seniority sooner. When its their turn to make the decision, there will be a whole new list of excuses why they should be able to work as long as they want. I am under 40 and I don't mind at all helping more with the bags if someone can't lift. Someday I hope very much that someone will return the favor. The older and experienced people are the ones that we stand to learn the most from and like Reality posted, where are these accidents that people are referring to? There are still two people in the cockpit. If these people who are "concerned" don't think they have the chops to land a plane on their own should the occasion present itself, then they should look at themselves and not at others. Having anyone over sixty being paired with someone under sixty is a good idea. Having them forced out is ridiculous as long as they can still pass their recurrent and physical. Mind your own business and be careful what you wish for.. Your in line to get old too.

 

[glasspilot]

I got it! I know how to fix the whole thing!

REVERSE THE PAYSCALES!

That's right, as a new hire you get deep six figures but every single year you take a paycut. That way towards the end of your career your making $12,000 a year and eating Ramen Noodles in your apartment with 4 roomates. That would get the old guys out the damn door and make room for us "up and comings".

No thanks are necessary.

PS
I've long thought this should be done for flight attendants as well....I'm serious about that one

 

[av8trinabarrel]

Fear and anger make a person say things they normally wouldn't say. I'm sitting here 250 from the bottom at NJ, scared as hell about my future at 36 years old. I had one of our really really old crusty captains save my a%$ a few weeks ago. I forgot to preselect my inbound course for a VOR approach going into New Orleans. With a low overcast sky, he noticed right away that something wasnt right.... Rather than dive for the deck, we got a 360 heading to re-intercept the course.He was calm, cool and collected. I apologized over and over for making a stupid mistake. No big deal in his eyes and we went on our merry way without having to hear the young punk jokes.

I see both sides of the arguement, but I just wanted to let people know that it's not always the young guy saving the old guy. When people lose sight of the fact that its a team and we are there to back each other up under any circumstances, then its time too hang it up...Age has nothing too do with it. It goes both ways!