New AGE limit discussion

[laker4284]

You are right. There's also the pathetic loser factor. Congrats Gramps, the only thing that gives you meaning in life is flying a jet. That's what I call a renaissance man...

Name calling is never effective. What gives ME meaning in life is my family, God, community service, interactions with co-workers and career. The fact that my career is flying an airplane is icing on the cake.

And I'm not a Grandpa. At least not yet. ;-)

 

[outerlimits]

Name calling is never effective. What gives ME meaning in life is my family, God, community service, interactions with co-workers and career. The fact that my career is flying an airplane is icing on the cake.

And I'm not a Grandpa. At least not yet. ;-)

Amen.

He and several others here love to name call. Shows a lot about them.

 

[laker4284]

The fact that many airlines outside the US use seniority as only part of command evaluation, is the worst idea ever according to the same old guys!?

Answer this: Article 23.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says this about "right to work": Everyone has the right ot work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemplyment" Thousands of pilots were put out of work because of 65. Hundreds have been furloughed the entire 5 years. Yeah, there were other factors at play, but 65 was the tipping point. If 65 doesn't happen, thousands would have kept their jobs and others would have been hired, and the older workers would be retired or have sought other employment. Should the rights of the older worker take precedence over the younger worker to the extent that has taken place in US commercial aviation? Your campaign for 5 more years infringed on the rights of others.

I still think you are extrapolating something that has no bearing on the issue. Advancement of pilots out of seniority has no bearing on the age change. I've never even heard that concept discussed. I'd suggest that some older guys think the seniority system is best is that many KNOW the mess that non-seniority based systems were in the past. What might work for a small company with a dozen pilots would never work in one with 5,000.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights a UN resolution, yes? With countries such as France voting on said resolution? Those countries have institutionalized and subsidized the idea of "protection against unemployment". It's not working too well...in Greece, for example.

In any case, one doubts the idea that unemployment of the younger should be avoided by mandating the unemployment of the older. That's not even done in Greece. Too, saying that the age change was the PRIMARY cause for unemployment is a reach. It was the deepest recession since the depression of the 1920s and 1930s that flushed jobs. It was an absolute shame that it happened. No one could argue that the age change came at just about the worst time. However, it was not the driver of all the ills that beset the airline industry.

 

[dooork]

Doesn't seem to be the case with me. I'm in my sixth year in the right seat on reserve with no improvement in sight. My airline will only lose two people this year to age 65.

Does your airline advance based on your performance?

 

[laker4284]

Keep telling yourself that the Dems are the solution for labor.

Beware thread creep! Thread creep is what got the Canadian age thread bounced off the Major site and moved to Siberia.

Age 65 - the bill originated in Congress. Which party controlled both houses when this came about?

THIS is back on track.

The answer is the Democrats.

The 2006 election saw the Dems in the House picking up 30+ seats and taking outright control. The Senate ended up 51-49 in favor of the Dems (two independents who voted overwhelmingly with the Democrats are included in the Dem total.

The fact that the age changed in late 2007 UNDER A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS is absolutely amazing.

From Wiki (re the Senate)

Elections for the United States Senate were held on November 7, 2006, with 33 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate being contested. Senators are elected for six-year terms, with one third of the Senate seats up for a vote every two years. The term of office for those elected in 2006 runs from January 3, 2007, until January 3, 2013. Senators who were elected in 2000 (known as Class 1) were seeking reelection or retiring in 2006.
The Senate election was part of the Democratic sweep of the 2006 elections, in which no Congressional or gubernatorial seat held by a Democrat was won by a Republican. Democratic candidates defeated six Republican incumbents: Rick Santorum (Penn.), Mike DeWine (Ohio), Lincoln Chafee (R.I.), Jim Talent (Mo.), Conrad Burns (Mont.), and George Allen (Va.). Incumbent Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman (Conn.) lost an August Democratic primary challenge but won re-election as an independent. Democrats kept their two open seats in Minnesota and Maryland, and Republicans held onto their lone open seat in Tennessee. In Vermont, Bernie Sanders, an independent, was elected to the seat left open by independent Senator Jim Jeffords.
In the 2006 election, two new female Senators (Claire McCaskill and Amy Klobuchar) were elected to seats previously held by men. This brought the total number of female senators to an all-time high of 16.
Following the elections, the party balance for the Senate stood at 51-49 in favor of the Democrats (including independent Bernie Sanders and Independent Democrat Joe Lieberman, who caucused with the Democrats). The Democrats needed 51 seats to control the Senate because the Vice President of the United States, Republican Dick Cheney, would have broken a 50-50 tie in favor of the Republicans.

 

[instructordude]

Any limit on age is gross discrimination as a society we should fight!

 

[Flopgut]

I still think you are extrapolating something that has no bearing on the issue. Advancement of pilots out of seniority has no bearing on the age change. I've never even heard that concept discussed.

Well then why don't you re-read the regulation that resulted form the "Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act". You know, the law that raised the retirement age? Read carefully the part about seniority. When the +60 guys couldn't come back with any seniority, [almost] none of them did. That's what made this clearly a seniority grab. That's why the random pilot walking thru Congress right now trying to raise the age again can't get thru the door. Congress understands now, in hindsight, that the compromise they thought was being reached, was not. Your statement is absurd! The very law that raised the age addressed seniority!!

Right to work is not some aloof-EU-only thing. This country has right to work states where something like seniority is more balanced for every worker. Example: Striking workers can be replaced in some states, in others it's illegal.

You're characterizing the notion that anything but strict seniority is a complete failure, and that is not the case. There are some very large, sophistcated airlines that don't use seniority only. The fact that that exists is the only thing that makes retirement age increases work. If we ever raise the age again, we will have to abandon seniority only.

 

[flyboyike]

Does your airline advance based on your performance?

It doesn't, and that's my point. DP suggested that in a seniority system performance is somehow rewarded. Outside of probation, I haven't seen that yet.

 

[waveflyer]

Keep telling yourself that the Dems are the solution for labor. Can you tell me who invoked emergency powers to cancel American Airlines' pilot strike? My memory's rather fuzzy ...
Neither party is better than the other when it comes to labor. The best condition for labor is a well functioning economy. There's a balance that must be struck between too little government regulation and excessive government interference. At the present time, we have excessive interference.
Age 65 - the bill originated in Congress. Which party controlled both houses when this came about?
You can tell me how great the Dems are for labor until you're blue in the face but their history is spotty.

Clinton- why wouldn't he? APA did not support Clinton, nor are they affiliated with any group that did. I've wrote about this extensively- pilots are a walking contradiction: highly paid union workers who politically are militantly anti-union. We disenfranchise ourselves.
I agree with a well functioning economy- but disagree that any republican voodoo Econ is good for that- it's bubble economics- I agree we have excessive government at the moment, but it is in response to an economic meltdown and I agree with it for now. But it is not sustainable and we must roll that back-
Age 65 depends on your point of view. This is a fight against each other- not a clear pro-labor/anti-labor side. If you were a captain in 2007, I'm sure you'd view this as very pro labor.

I also apologize for the drift- but again- the president directly appoints the NMB, and the director of the PBGC, no other decision affects our contracts and ability to negotiate more.
We must, either support our unions - or work on decertifying, repealing the airline connection to the RLA, and open our seniority lists to competition-

The race to the bottom is all about our desire to want it both ways.
Age 65 is just an asinine way to make up for the lost income/retirement.

 

[Singlecoil]

Clinton stopped the APA strike the minute it happened. Bush announced ahead of time that there would be no major airline strikes allowed on his watch. There is a fundamental difference there. Clinton sat back and let the process play out without tipping his hand ahead of time. Bush reached across the table and pulled all the aces out of the hand of labor, then let the parties work from there. Big difference.

 

[The Prussian]

Age 65 is just an asinine way to make up for the lost income/retirement.

Then so is 60, or 55, or 50, or 45, or....

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Does your airline advance based on your performance?

You gentlemen are talking about two very different subjects here, my comments were in the context of the comparison of the merit system vs. the seniority based system, not about the effects on stagnation that has been experienced due to the rewrite of the rules and the movement of the gol post.
Under the seniority system, your date of hire will determine the start of your upgrade training, there is no assessment ( at least not anywhere near a command assessment like you would experience in Cathay, ANA, British Airways, Emirates) you pretty much are going to class when your date comes provided there is movement, if there is stagnation, there is no movement in any of the two systems, the only thing that will prevent you from reaching your command is if you fail training, hence my comment that it is mostly your performance that will be the determining factor. Under the merit system, there is a selection criteria that has to be met, all you records will be brought into the mix, your performance during your initial, recurrent, your record of missed days and the reasons, your personnality, how you get along with your coworkers, even the cabin attendants and ground staff sometimes have a say in your overall grade, it is an elaborate pleasing of the tribal elders ritual that in some companies is quite frankly demeaning. Evidently under neither of the two systems there would be movement if the sircumstances affecting the US industry today were present.

 

[waveflyer]

Then so is 60, or 55, or 50, or 45, or....

I don't follow-
Are we in your hypothetical world, or the real one?

 

[dedazo]

BS.... retire at 65 and be done....we need the retirements so we can all climb up the ladder (seniority, upgrades, quality of life). It was bad enough to extend the age to 65. Those old timers had their run, it is now our turn to become old timers.

 

[GG747]

BS.... retire at 65 and be done....we need the retirements so we can all climb up the ladder (seniority, upgrades, quality of life). It was bad enough to extend the age to 65. Those old timers had their run, it is now our turn to become old timers.

I agree, let us make the big bucks in the left seat so we can plan to retire. As long as these old timers have the left seat we can't upgrade.

 

[relief tube]

should have never gotten to 65 even. Worst case-take it to 62... a decade or so later 65 maybee, but not a 5 year "you're f-ed" all in one.

And nothing past 65, or we will find a way to revolt.

 

[waveflyer]

and nothing past 65, or we will find a way to revolt.

+1 ^^^

 

[flyboyike]

And nothing past 65, or we will find a way to revolt.

No, we won't. We'll take it lying down, just like we took age 65.

 

[laker4284]

Remember how quickly they shoved through 65, practically in the dead of night.

What in the world makes you think it was "shoved through, practically in the dead of night"?

Can't really respond to that on an IPad in my mother's living room but I found that comment to be un-freakn'-believable! Do you really believe that?

 

[Andy]

What in the world makes you think it was "shoved through, practically in the dead of night"?

Can't really respond to that on an IPad in my mother's living room but I found that comment to be un-freakn'-believable! Do you really believe that?

Please walk us through your scenario where you see it differently. The legislation was bottled up in subcommittee by Rep Mica. ALPA had Rep Mica release it from subcommittee on 5 Dec 2007. Bush signed it into law on 14 Dec 2007 after passing both the House and Senate. If that's not 'dead of the night' in Washington lawmaking terms, let me know how you define 'dead of the night'.