Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Please vote NO on S.65!

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
So if a pilot can be PIC if he is over 60 until he is 65, provided that the FO is under 60. Is the guy under 60 going to get some 'compensation' for his new job requirement? Maybe the 64 year old will want to share some of his cash, since without the FO being under 60 airplane no fly. Or better yet maybe we could alternate legs, and salaries of course.
 
I am not sure who on earth wants this job past 60. However ALPA should be pushing to redefine the PBGC payout guidelines, medicare and SS rules if it is going to oppose age 60 extensions.
 
ferlo said:
The better question is "Why" didn't you prepare for retirement?
I am 39, my retirement is being taken care of by my financial planner. Hopefully things will work out.

I would be a fool to think that sometime over the next 21 years the age restriction will not be increased. We might as well just get it over with.
 
Exactly, Boeingman!!!
 
Boeingman said:
I am not sure who on earth wants this job past 60.
Agreed. I watched my old man fly long haul his last five years. He was a vegetable quite often on his days off despite being in good shape. Can't believe some of the big gutted fellas I see walking around today will do much better. Too each their own I guess. I wouldn't want this job to kill me by 65.
 
Based on most of the replies here it looks like it would be a moot point. Not too many pilots want to work past 60 so it should not affect that many if it were to pass.
 
roughneck said:
This law needs to stay as it is. Age 60 is the madatory retirement age and should stay that way.
great reasoning. Count me in!

Not.

The way things are going, I'm gonna need the extra 5 years of 401k just to be able to afford Saltines to gum on during retirment.

Why would I give a shiznit about making room for some dude to upgrade or come onto the seniority list. Shoulda got here sooner.
 
darn mouse
 
Last edited:
really darn mouse
 
Last edited:
Mouse problem fixed .. got computer cat .. back to the subject at hand


Let's see .. arguments against
- That's the way it is ... they should have known that
- It'll delay my upgrade
- We won't be able to hire more lower time people for low wages

... arguments for
- The pilots have experience why lose it
- Mgmt/circumstance has shafted away planned savings
- It's that way in the rest of the world, are US pilots different?


It doesn't say you HAVE to work past 60, it says you can. So if you 1000 hr guys with the ATP written done (maybe) get to be 60 in 2040 (or so) you can just drift away even if the rule has changed. You might even get some decent experience before you upgrade.

I've emailed and had others email an enthusiastic yes.

My personal guess is there will be a deal to set it at age 62 and six months when the dust clears.
 
Last edited:
The age 60 rule makes no sense, us that fly in the 135 world fly all over the globe, and have no schedule of where we are going from 1 day to the next like most 121 operations have, and 135 rules are not that much different from 121 rules, in some ways they are more stringent, and there are pilots that are in their 70's that fly heavy iron corporate jets all over with no problems, so what is the big deal to do the same at the airlines? NONE
 
batsky2000 said:
The age 60 rule makes no sense, us that fly in the 135 world fly all over the globe, and have no schedule of where we are going from 1 day to the next like most 121 operations have, and 135 rules are not that much different from 121 rules, in some ways they are more stringent, and there are pilots that are in their 70's that fly heavy iron corporate jets all over with no problems, so what is the big deal to do the same at the airlines? NONE

What do you mean "heavy iron corporate jets"? What's your definition of heavy? Mine is an A380 going down with 600 pax onboard and a 65 year-old Captain and 59+ FO at the controls. That's heavy.

Call your senators and ask them to vote NO!!

TH>
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom