Mandatory Retirement?

[spinproof]

Does anyone have the "skinny" on raising the retirement age from 60 to 63? I can't find it in the "Homeland Security bill", as it was rumoured to be.

ALPA is pretty quite about it also. Wonder why?!

 

[DoinTime]

I belive it was snipped in the final phase of putting the bill together....I think there was a thread on this in the 'general' section.

 

[dogg]

I think it was lowering the mandatory age to 57 ........ That is what I am hoping for.......If you are not set at 57 you are not going to be set at 60 so retire and figure something else out....... Besides, who wants to work for an airrline that long anyway............and with 10,000 furloughed pilots looking for work and with UA maybe a whole bunch more being added to that list, there is hardly a pressing" pilot shortage" or an " experience drain" which is how that "raise the retirement age" wagon got rolling to begin with..

 

[eaglefly]

Actually, it was/is a small segment of greedy pilots who had no problem benefitting (their own faster advancement) from age 60, by keeping their mouths shut.

When they got to the top of the heap and close to 60, they then declared it to be unfair and wanted to extend it to benefit themselves.

Hypocrisy and greed. Nothing more. nothing less.

 

[Bluto]

Nothing else?

I think it could have had something to do with a couple of 59 year old senior captains wondering why their upcoming birthday magically makes them incompetent. I'm all for the age 60 rule, but quite honestly, for selfish purposes. When I get to that point I'd love to retire, but I don't think I'd want to be forced to. For the vast majority of the concerned pilots I'd guess that greed has little to do with it. Couldn't it just be that they enjoy what they do? How many other professions have mandatory retirement based solely on age? It seems an outdated policy to me. If it's a health issue there are better ways to screen. Anyway, like I said, I'm in favor of the rule. I just don't consider it to be 100% fair.

 

[Purple Haze]

Senator Murkowski of Alaska tried, unsuccessfully to add it to HR5005 this year, and S1447 last year.
This is the senate record of the latest version to be gunned down:

SA 4829. Mr. MURKOWSKI submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 4738 proposed by Mr. GRAMM (for himself, Mr. MILLER, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. THOMPSON, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. HAGEL Mr. HUTCHINSON, and Mr. BUNNING) to the amendment SA 4471 proposed by Mr. LIEBERMAN to the bill H.R. 5005, to establish the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. AGE AND OTHER LIMITATIONS.
(a) GENERAL.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning on the date that is 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act--
(1) section 121.383(c) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, shall not apply;
(2) no certificate holder may use the services of any person as a pilot on an airplane engaged in operations under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, if that person is 63 years of age or older; and
(3) no person may serve as a pilot on an airplane engaged in operations under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, if that person is 63 years of age or older.
(b) CERTIFICATE HOLDER.--For purposes of this section, the term ``certificate holder'' means a holder of a certificate to operate as an air carrier or commercial operator issued by the Federal Aviation Administration.
(c) RESERVATION OF SAFETY AUTHORITY.--Nothing in this section is intended to change the authority of the Federal Aviation Administration to take steps to ensure the safety of air transportation operations involving a pilot who has reached the age of 60, including its authority--
(1) to require such a pilot to undergo additional or more stringent medical, cognitive, or proficiency testing in order to retain certification; or
(2) to establish crew pairing standards for crews with such a pilot.

 

[eaglefly]

Interesting to note that the group is comprised of Major airline captains over 55.

Where were they when the were 45 ?

Enjoying the advancement of the age 60 rule, thats where.

 

[A4Forever]

EAGLEFLY: It's obvious from your post that you are nowhere near the magic age of 60. Let me just say that when you get there, and it will come much faster than you can imagine, then you will wonder why one day you are qualified to fly a 121 trip and the next day, you're not. I still hold a first class medical, fly for hire and pass the checkrides. I will retire again when I am ready and not when the govt decides I'm too old.

 

[spinproof]

Thanks for the help "Dointime and "Purple" and a big well said "Aforever"aparently this is the latest.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:S.361:(link updated)

There are two bills pending action.

 

[DoinTime]

I can't say that I am for raising the 60 year age limit as it would be a negative impact on my career advancement. However, I do believe that it is an unfair rule. I think if they put a little thought into the implementation of an older age limit that they may get the support they need to get the bill passed.

Perhaps they could raise the age limit to 61 right now. In 3-4 years the age limit would go up to 62 and 3-4 years after that up to 63. Maybe even continue to having no age restriction. I would support a program like this as it wouldn't dramatically and instantaneously affect my career. Unfortunately it seems like the battle is being fought by the people that wouldn't benefit much from this type of implementation. Maybe we can someday find some people that are willing to work on this that are more interested in eliminating the discrimination than increasing the financial gains.