Pilot forced to retire--Boo hoo! Freaking baby!

[ivauir]

Ok, lets break it down this way shall we? ....

decrease in earnings potential? how? they get 5 more years....you and everyone else gets the same 5 more years......

Not true, some people get five more years in the left seat, some will spend some of that time in the right seat. Working for 2/3s the pay compouded over 20 or 30 years is a lot of money. You'll need to work untill 62 just to break even from a 6 mounth delay in upgrade. This is from my own unions pro change propaganda.

 

[Regul8r]

Not true, some people get five more years in the left seat, some will spend some of that time in the right seat. Working for 2/3s the pay compouded over 20 or 30 years is a lot of money. You'll need to work untill 62 just to break even from a 6 mounth delay in upgrade. This is from my own unions pro change propaganda.

If it's such a thorn in your side why don't you quit your oh so coveted SWA position and get a job where the promotions are handed out in a guaranteed time frame? Get real dude, you're in the same boat with everyone else.

 

[airfogey]

Alpa fought the rule for over 20 years during regulation when careers were stable, no one got hired over age 30, and salaries and pensions were generous. However since deregulation the industry is five times bigger than it was, so for every upgrade because of someone retiring at 60 four or five occured because of expansion. With the change to ICAO standards last November 23 ALPA lost the last pretense of trying to claim their support of age 60 has anything to do with safety, it is merely affirmative action for younger crewmembers at the expense of their older and longest dues paying members.

Airfogey

 

[FNG_that's me]

Alpa fought the rule for over 20 years during regulation when careers were stable, no one got hired over age 30, and salaries and pensions were generous. However since deregulation the industry is five times bigger than it was, so for every upgrade because of someone retiring at 60 four or five occured because of expansion. With the change to ICAO standards last November 23 ALPA lost the last pretense of trying to claim their support of age 60 has anything to do with safety, it is merely affirmative action for younger crewmembers at the expense of their older and longest dues paying members.

Airfogey

Just becuae ICAO changed their age doesn't mean that it is a safer age. Do you want the international standard on all safety related issues?

 

[whalepilot747]

>>>Age 60 should be repealed because it is bad law. NO ONE should be forced to give up his chosedn profession because of an arbitrary date on a calendar.<<<

Great point, well thought out..... So an age 65 mandatory retirement is far less discriminatory, absolutley. (note the sarcasm) Spin it however you want but the bottom line, its all about greed, I got mine so screw the rest of you. Never mind all the people on furlough. If I was age 58 I would be working hard to get rid of the age 60 rule. But I am not, I am of the "younger" generation and want to keep it. Hypocritical? Absolutely. After having numerous jobs (furluoghs) in this profession, 1 picket line, 1 strike etc..... One thing I have learned, its all about me. Cynical? You bet, but true. I think well know this to be true but not admitting it, well, at least in public anyway. So fire away.........

 

[Flashbang]

Perhaps someone can tell me why does one crewmember have to be under 60 if the other is over 60?

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Perhaps someone can tell me why does one crewmember have to be under 60 if the other is over 60?

This may be a good indication as to WHY we should retain the age 60 rule. Apprently they view those over 60 to possess a greater health risk (based on their AGE) to the flying public and therefore require one pilot to be under the new age proposal to ensure a safe flight should excrement hit the fan.