More Age 60 perspective

[LEROY]

Anybody that thinks you'll be able to retire at 60, or whenever you want, if this rule is changed is probably ALREADY smokin' dope. Airline managements aren't going to be willing to hire and pay a new replacement pilot and simultaneously pay a fully funded retirement to someone who still has legal years left in them. I certainly couldn't retire from my airline at age 50 right now without taking a big hit financially.
Couple the fact that pilots with night-flying careers have a considerably shorter life expectancy with a change in the rule that will allow (and subsequently DEMAND) they work until 5 years closer to that average life expectancy, and management scores twice - less retirement to pay and fewer new-hires to pay.
No thanks...

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

Having to wait that 5 years is not a trivial consequence. You get more now, others have to wait 5 years to get it. That's wrong.

The point is, we BOTH get it. Get it?

That's not "wrong," that's seniority. If you have a problem with that, take it up with your parents...they're the ones who determined your seniority number.

Two of my 3 kids don't have any problem understanding this. When the 17-year-old asks to extend her turn on the dirt bike from 15 minutes to a half-hour, the 14-year-old knows that his turn will be extended to a half-hour as well.

It's the 5-year-old that cries because his big sister "gets to ride the motorcycle all the time."

 

[Purpled]

The point is, we BOTH get it. Get it?

That's not "wrong," that's seniority. If you have a problem with that, take it up with your parents...they're the ones who determined your seniority number.

Two of my 3 kids don't have any problem understanding this. When the 17-year-old asks to extend her turn on the dirt bike from 15 minutes to a half-hour, the 14-year-old knows that his turn will be extended to a half-hour as well.

It's the 5-year-old that cries because his big sister "gets to ride the motorcycle all the time."

Don't be so obtuse as to portray that these are logical arguements.

Comparing your kids riding a dirt-bike to taking money from other working adults demonstrates that you don't understand economics...perhaps you're blinded by your own greed.

A more fairer example would be if the sun set and the dirt-bike lost power about 10 minutes after your 17 year old got off it; then your 14 year old died 20 minutes later...think he'd want to spend 10 of his last 30 minutes on earth riding a dirt bike?

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Whistlin' Dan apparently DOESN'T get it!

The point is, we BOTH get it. Get it?

Whistlin ... here's a recycled post I've made before when an old fart tries to con a younger guy into believing he won't be harmed financially by an age change from 60 to 65.

>>Say you are 40 now and delay your upgrade to 45. In those 5 years you would lose 100k/yr (salary and B-fund) at my airline. I don't have a FV calculator handy at the moment, but at 45 you would have given up approx 700k by not upgrading. 700k over 20 yrs (age 45-65) at market 50 yr avg of 10% (actually 10.3%, but we'll round) return would yield approx $5.5 MILLION!

You will need to be paid in excess of $1 MILLION/yr by your airline from age 60-65 to come close to breaking even! The young guys are getting conned by the old geezers into believing this is a good thing for the younger pilots. Quite the opposite, this is a huge financial loss for the young pilots!! <ng> <<

BBB

 

[Deuce130]

So, all these 58+ year old pilots want what's right and good since they had the misfortune of having their pensions yanked. I'm sure when all these guys/gals were 43-45 years old in 1990-1991, they were very concerned about how all of the now out-of-work and out-of-a-pension pilots from Eastern and Pan Am were going to recoup all of their pension losses. I'm sure these then-younger pilots lobbied their airline and union to put all out of work Eastern/Pan Am pilots ahead of them on their seniority lists, to 'help them out.' I'm sure it would have been fine with this group of selfless aviators... delaying their upgrades and pay raises so those poor pilots who were out of work could earn back what was so greedily taken from them. That's how it worked then... didn't it?

I have no clue what happened in the early 90's - I was busy chasing girls, graduating from High School, and drinking beer back then. Nor, frankly, do I care. I never said anyone had unselfish reasons for doing what they do. I merely offered up what I thought was the potential reasoning on thier part. Let's face it, they want the money. Let's also face this, you want the money. We all want the freakin' money! For you to sit there and call BS on this simply b/c you want to upgrade as soon as possible is really no different than the age 60 guys wanting to continue to work. Point fingers and complain all you want, but the same could be said of you or me. it's coming and I would learn to deal with it if I were you.

 

[Deuce130]

Whistlin ... here's a recycled post I've made before when an old fart tries to con a younger guy into believing he won't be harmed financially by an age change from 60 to 65.

>>Say you are 40 now and delay your upgrade to 45. In those 5 years you would lose 100k/yr (salary and B-fund) at my airline. I don't have a FV calculator handy at the moment, but at 45 you would have given up approx 700k by not upgrading. 700k over 20 yrs (age 45-65) at market 50 yr avg of 10% (actually 10.3%, but we'll round) return would yield approx $5.5 MILLION!

You will need to be paid in excess of $1 MILLION/yr by your airline from age 60-65 to come close to breaking even! The young guys are getting conned by the old geezers into believing this is a good thing for the younger pilots. Quite the opposite, this is a huge financial loss for the young pilots!! <ng> <<

BBB

Isn't that assuming you save or invest every nickel of your salary?

 

[MECH]

Whistl'n Dan

I feel your pain! Now every pilot junior to you. Will work hard, to get you an interview for a job overseas or at a 135 carrier. These jobs will be at the bottom of a seniority list, but those are the rules and we must play by them. Just like you did in the early 90's.

 

[Judge]

I think we shouldn't let old people fly, lets throw in women, black people, hispanics, Jewish folks. I flew with a black guy once and he went 300 ft below MDA. That is evidence enough!

I see both sides, but the rule is age discrimination pure and simple. I'm not sure how you can argue that it's not.

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Isn't that assuming you save or invest every nickel of your salary?

Yep. The broader point is the value of compounding that Whistlin' is failing to acknowledge. The numbers are purely illustrative.

Another angle to consider:

The medical FACTS are well documented and unambiguous. As we get older statistically the body starts failing and we require more medical services the older we get. By losing 5 years as a captain when you are young (say 40-45) and then hoping to remain healthy enough to recoup them at the end of your career (60-65) is (statistically) not a wise bet. Again, statistically only a small percentage will medical out late in their careers, but to these few who were "promised" by Whistlin' and others that they would get their same years in the left seat, they're in for a financial surprise should their health fail in those last 5 years. If I were a gambling man, I'd put my money on the captain successfully maintaining his medical qualification from years 40-60, versus 45-65.

BBB

 

[Big Beer Belly]

I see both sides, but the rule is age discrimination pure and simple. I'm not sure how you can argue that it's not.

I take it that you are OUTRAGED that Congress is considering raising it to an equally offensive arbitrary age 65?

BBB