Mica trying to fast-track Age 65 - 12/6/07

[XJTAv8r]

Thanks for the site...sent my message supporting the new legislation.

You guy's time would be better served by writing Congress for a change to the near criminal AMT tax situation.

That's why Congress should be focusing on more important things like the AMT instead of Age 60

 

[Indy319FA]

I support the current rule (that these older pilots pushing for change benefited from for many years) and I'm also planning on a bankrupt SS system and am thusly loading up my 401k each year. It's called planning ahead, not trying to screw those junior because of your own retirement problems

Hmmm......sounds familiar....

Blacks can't work techinical jobs because they are mentally inferior.....

Women can't work management positions because they don't have the same mental abilities as men.....

We shouldn't change Jim Crow laws because of the disruption to the social structure....

Discrimination is discrimination, plain and simple, no matter how you try and spin it to make yourself feel better. If you support age 60, then you are no better than those that supported discrimation in the past.

I want to get ahead just like anybody else, but I'm smart enough to understand that if I support arbitrary discrimination against someone else, then the worm may turn and I'll be the one getting the shaft. To support pilots losing their jobs for anything other than performance is not smart, no matter how it will help me in the short term.

 

[RogerMOSA]

Two points. These arguements, "fitness to fly" and "experience" are a bunch of total BS. I'll give you the right to fly to 65 when we have a medical that is not a worthless rubber stamp. Many a time in the squadron and crewroom I've overheard....."Yeah, just got back from 'Ol Doc Brown. Set a new record. In and out in 3 minutes." Not a peep out of the '65 crowd' for a stricter medical(to really show that those motor/cognitive skills/the 'ol ticker aren't slipping)!

And the one I really love... "We're losing our most experienced pilots....50 per day!!" God help us all!! Given this devastating hemmorraging of aviation experience in the skies, I must be missing all the airliners crashing due to inexperienced flight crews. That Mil experience, that 5000 hrs RJ PIC, those 10 yrs spent in the right seat, those 10-15 yrs as a Captain don't really count. You really don't have any experience and skill doing this job until you're 58 1/2. GMAFB!!!

Give and take my friends. I'm sure 65 will pass at some point, but unless there is a middle ground, such as gradual phase-in or stricter medical standards or whatever, you guys will go to your grave as the "Greatest ME,ME,ME Generation. Enjoy.

RM

 

[XJTAv8r]

Hmmm......sounds familiar....

Blacks can't work techinical jobs because they are mentally inferior.....

Women can't work management positions because they don't have the same mental abilities as men.....

We shouldn't change Jim Crow laws because of the disruption to the social structure....

Discrimination is discrimination, plain and simple, no matter how you try and spin it to make yourself feel better. If you support age 60, then you are no better than those that supported discrimation in the past.

I want to get ahead just like anybody else, but I'm smart enough to understand that if I support arbitrary discrimination against someone else, then the worm may turn and I'll be the one getting the shaft. To support pilots losing their jobs for anything other than performance is not smart, no matter how it will help me in the short term.

That's just plain stupid to compare Age 60 to race and sex discrimination (especially the old school ways). They're not even close! That rule sets a standard age/safety threshold (like age 16 driving, etc.) for the "greater good" and doesn't discriminate based on race or sex. You're insulting those who suffered during the civil rights movement to make such a comparison. Like I said before, you might as well fight age 16 driving, age 21 drinking, and other retirement rules with your logic.

 

[PCL_128]

Hmmm......sounds familiar....

Blacks can't work techinical jobs because they are mentally inferior.....

Women can't work management positions because they don't have the same mental abilities as men.....

We shouldn't change Jim Crow laws because of the disruption to the social structure....

Discrimination is discrimination, plain and simple, no matter how you try and spin it to make yourself feel better. If you support age 60, then you are no better than those that supported discrimation in the past.

I want to get ahead just like anybody else, but I'm smart enough to understand that if I support arbitrary discrimination against someone else, then the worm may turn and I'll be the one getting the shaft. To support pilots losing their jobs for anything other than performance is not smart, no matter how it will help me in the short term.

Have you ever flown an airliner? Maybe you should spend some time flying with these geezers before you start talking about "discrimination" and such.

 

[Mach 80]

FAA medicals were purposely designed to primarily simply check eyesight, hearing, and a few other basic things such as blood pressure. They never meant or wanted it to be a full blown physical because this would greatly increase the costs and time involved for pilots.

The vast majority of physically disqualifying events are SELF disclosed and would not be discovered by more intense physicals anyway.

 

[Indy319FA]

That's just plain stupid to compare Age 60 to race and sex discrimination (especially the old school ways). They're not even close! That rule sets a standard age/safety threshold (like age 16 driving, etc.) for the "greater good" and doesn't discriminate based on race or sex. You're insulting those who suffered during the civil rights movement to make such a comparison. Like I said before, you might as well fight age 16 driving, age 21 drinking, and other retirement rules with your logic.

Please explain the reference to safety in your previous statement:

It's called planning ahead, not trying to screw those junior because of your own retirement problems

If you want to support the FAA getting stricter with medical and pilot certification and performance that applies equally to everyone then I have no problem with that. Be careful, because in your zeal to get these old geezers, you may end up nailing yourself in the process. Not that it has anything to do with this argument, but I think if you are old enough to take a bullet for your country, you should be able to take a drink no matter what MADD thinks. The age 16 argument is ridiculous because you are talking about minors, and not adults.

Maybe you need to look up the definition of discrimination. Ol Daniel Webster defines it as making a distinction between persons based on age, race, sex or religion rather than personal merit.

So to say these geezers need to get retired just so you can move up the seniority food chain means you support discrimination, and are no better than those who have supported other types of discrimination in the past.

 

[Indy319FA]

Have you ever flown an airliner? Maybe you should spend some time flying with these geezers before you start talking about "discrimination" and such.

I'd rather fly with some of these geezers, than some of these PFT wonders that are getting hired with the minimums and upgrading with minimums right now.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

That's just plain stupid to compare Age 60 to race and sex discrimination (especially the old school ways). They're not even close! That rule sets a standard age/safety threshold (like age 16 driving, etc.) for the "greater good" and doesn't discriminate based on race or sex. You're insulting those who suffered during the civil rights movement to make such a comparison. Like I said before, you might as well fight age 16 driving, age 21 drinking, and other retirement rules with your logic.

In 1860 the southern states essentially admitted that slavery was wrong but that the negative economic impact of abolition was a good enough reason to keep slavery on the books. No, slavery and the age 60 rule are not in the same ball park, but the principle for keeping or doing away with the rule is essentially the same.

If the age 60 rule did not exsist today, is there any way you could get it passed? Could you cite the "safety" basis by which this rule was enacted. FARs change all the time. Some make our careers easier, some don't.

 

[Pocono Pilot]

It's so sad watching these old geezers losing their dignity grasping at straws like this right before they retire.

It is also sad that they have nothing else to look forward to other than more of the same old same old. Retirement should be spent with grandkids.

Plus, I do not want to be flying with a guy that wears Depends undergarments. Imagine how that cockpit will smell with a 65 year old geezer up there!