Over AGE 60 PILOTS TO FLY IN UNITED STATES

[Boeingman]

In a completely unrelated topic, Holy K-rap Boeing! If your posts are indicative of your verbosity in general then I have great sympathy for your passengers.
Just kidding. Type on, John Donne, type on!

LOL!!!, nah my PA's are quick and to the point.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Well....what does a over 60 pilot do right now for a 1st class? Why change anything where thats concerned.

The point of my post was that the pro-Age 60 defenders cite safety as their rationale. When they cry foul at higher medical standards across the board (which could add some marginal degree of safety albeit at a very high cost) their safety argument becomes quite specious.

 

[ivauir]

So then its not about my greed then is it since I am already topped out at the 12+ year pay scale at our company?
But you get to stay their an extra 5 years/
My comments were aimed at the few that continually keep ripping on me in here. You try to use logic and try to make compromises or offer constructive ideas that may benefit everyone. But then you get the comments about keeping your orginal wife ( I only had and still have just 1). Buying your second home ( I only have 1). Making good investments ( I have lived within my means my whole career).
First I hope you don't hink I'm ripping in to you. I respectfully disagree with your position. I cannot recall any compromises you have offered (maybe you did and I missed it)- I offered over 60 in the right seat and was completely ignored.
But all alot of the younger guys see is getting into the left seat and maybe having to wait a few more years to get there if its does go to 65. Most Pilots attitudes to this issue start to change around 40 years old.
You scoff at our perspective, but maybe if you could see it from our point of view we could come up with a compromise that the whole group could support and then you changewould have a much better chance.
If they made it 65 I would probably only go to 62 (current situation) when my Social security kicks in unless I dont have any medical coverage at that time which would probably force me to go to 65. Medical is a hugh deal to me. I have seen lots of bad things happen to people over my life in reguards to health and if you arnt covered you loose big time. Now I am sure the same smart A$$es will come in and say then go buy some. I have health insurance with my work and will buy it if and when its needed and not a moment sooner.

All these guys say they want the change, but won't stay much past 60. I don't buy it. In the heat of the moment with the temptation that fat paycheck dangling I bet almost all stay. There are great reasons to change the rule, but why should one generation reap the full benefit at everyone else's expense?

 

[Occam's Razor]

The point of my post was that the pro-Age 60 defenders cite safety as their rationale. When they cry foul at higher medical standards across the board (which could add some marginal degree of safety albeit at a very high cost) their safety argument becomes quite specious.

I think you misunderstand the argument.

The argument is that the current testing and standards (none and none) are adequate because age is not a statistically significant contributing factor in Pt 121 mishaps. Age 60 is a low enough age to preclude the requirement for standards and/or testing.

The status quo is safe. Changing the age limit would require more testing...and that is not good.

 

[Boeingman]

Changing the age limit would require more testing.

Says who?

 

[32LT10]

LOL!!!, nah my PA's are quick and to the point.

Do you tell them about your Big Watch, L-39, Citation, Investments and some other verbose BS .

Ever wonder why you never fly with the same F/O twice?

 

[32LT10]

Says who?

ALPA took a poll and the old gompers lost. You CO guys wanted to be forgiven and ALPA let you back in. Do you not support your association and what the majority of the membership wanted? That is right, it is all about you. I keep forgetting what I am dealing with.

 

[Boeingman]

The Brain Surgeon Is Back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you tell them about your Big Watch, L-39, Citation, Investments and some other verbose BS .

Ever wonder why you never fly with the same F/O twice?

Now that is odd I seem to see the same guys on a regular basis. Is this something you speak from experience Brain Surgeon? I wouldn't know this problem.

I love the jealousy that drips with each of your posts. You asked for it and you got it. I want to thank you for making my point as well.

P.S. It just dawned on me that my Aero has the same dark green color stripes as your envy. Imagine that!

 

[Bringupthebird]

I think you misunderstand the argument.

The argument is that the current testing and standards (none and none) are adequate because age is not a statistically significant contributing factor in Pt 121 mishaps. Age 60 is a low enough age to preclude the requirement for standards and/or testing.

The status quo is safe. Changing the age limit would require more testing...and that is not good.

Any safety issue regarding age must be viewed as a health issue. If these Age 60 proponents champion the cause of safety (actually, " the world would be safer if I was captain") then they must also advocate stricter medical standards for all pilots. Why stop with just kicking out the old guys? Why not fat guys with high cholesterol? Why not disallow all special issuance medicals and waivers? Why not bring back 20/20 vision?

The answer is simple. They cannot hide behind the safety straw man. They use the defense when it suits them and abandon it when it doesn't. The sixty-year-old of today in no way resembles the sixty-year-old of 1958. In fact to gain an actuarial equivalent you would have a retirement age of 71, so 65 is no great stretch.

We can't pretend that advances in health and medicine haven't been made since 1958. And it is proper that the retirement age will be raised over and over, or simply replaced with a medical and skills-based testing to reflect these advances while insuring public safety. Raising the retirement age to 65 doesn't solve everything, but it is a small, very small step in the right direction.

 

[Boeingman]

ALPA took a poll and the old gompers lost. You CO guys wanted to be forgiven and ALPA let you back in. Do you not support your association and what the majority of the membership wanted? That is right, it is all about you. I keep forgetting what I am dealing with.

I'd like to see that poll today after the NWA and DAL bankruptcies. I would also like to see how the retirees that you and yours hosed would vote today if they would have known then what some of the backstabbers like yourself planned on doing to them. All in the name to save your skins...right I forgot your excuse du joir.

Thats right, I forgot what I am dealing with. A pathetic little man that has no life outside of Uni...er YONITED. You gladly bent over for not one, but two paycuts while screwing your peers who left a legacy for you to destroy.

As far as ALPA, I never asked nor needed to be forgiven. Fact is, ALPA came groveling back to CAL. With ilk like yourself in the association, it is hard to suport anything with ALPA these days.