Please vote NO on S.65!

[FoxHunter]

What a crock of s**t: If you're over age 60 your F/O has to be under 60.

They just admitted there's an underlying SAFETY problem.

Let's wait til next year to see if it's even addressed by the icao GEEKS.

Hopefully the full Senate has some common sense and disapproves it.

I agree. The Captain and F/O should both be allowed to be over age 60 but it was the JAA that originated the rule of only one pilot over the age of 60 on the crew. The age 60 rule has never been about safety, only about your upgrade.

 

[Dizel8]

"As in the underlying bill, the Burns substitute allows pilots, who have previously been terminated or had a cessation of employment at a commercial air carrier because of the Age 60 restriction, to seek re-employment at a commercial air carrier. However, pilots cannot file suit to gain re-employment and cannot file suit to reclaim seniority under any labor agreement in effect."

Yep, just until someone mounts and wins a class action lawsuit. If age 60 is changed, why do you think this part of the amendment will become permanent?

 

[Flopgut]

And you, sir, are making far too many assumptions....you don't know other people's circumstances just like we don't know yours. Ready? Ready for what? To retire when YOU say so! I don't think so. That is akin to me saying that you should get another job if you don't like it but that is, of course, nonsense. Nobody is saying forever, just the "normal" retirement age. Nobody is making a fuss about the rest of the world and other industries. Why are we so special? We are NOT!
It's about CHOICE, not mandating what you and I should do. Either way, it's on the way. Get prepared.....change is always painful and oftentimes resisted.

My circumstances were the worst possible scenario. And so from that experience I look at this with a certain degree of disgust. My family pulled ourselves together after an airline shut down unexpectedly. Turning age 60 should not surprise anyone. Knowing that in this business many things, including your retirement plans, are quite provisional one should be better prepared. Additionally, with a lot of hard work we were able to do pretty well after the big change. If any of you truly had the amazing faculties, wisdom, and talents that you cite as credence for flying past 60, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I have known a lot of change and I am prepared. Do you suppose you could muster the least amount of grace or professionalism? Or do you prefer to rub it in?

 

[Flopgut]

probably not forever, but maybe 62 or 63. It should be a personal choice, up to the individual. It isn't all about finances and i sure don't want you deciding what i can live on.

Oh, but aren't you deciding how much others can live on? Are you not deciding [supporting] that those on furlough, can stay on furlough, while you hoard the most wealth and esteem this business has left?

I'm prepared for this to change. But what I want to verbalize here is that I don't want it to change it twice. I think that it is about finances enough so, that what we should do is garnish the wages of those over 55+ and save for them. Obviously you folks have a problem with your finances. Afterall, we are about to change federal law so you can make more money, uniquely to the detriment of many more than it helps. So, I think we should be able to tell you what you can live on. That way we won't have to endure this bullsh!t again when you get to 65 and your still broke.

 

[Flopgut]

The age 60 rule has never been about safety, only about your upgrade.

About YOUR upgrade. Not mine. Mine will take longer, evidently. It will be both more significant and harder earned.

 

[fox51ramprat]

Flopgut,
Most of my friends feel as though they have been fired for turning 60. This has nothing to do with money. It is Age Discrimination. It is about time that the U.S. look at this the same as they look at all other discrimination. This is a Civil Rights thing as much as a money thing.....Unless you are in Airline Mgmt. Just as C.R. Smith was. This was a Union busting trick in the Fifties, and it is still wrong.

 

[hr2eternity]

Okay I get your drift. Can you point to any airline distaster as in the above case, where the Capt. or F/O was in his/her late fifties that age was a casual or primary factor? If so, please show us where it happened. Since there are B747's being flown all over the world and in some tough places at that, by guys who are 60+, can you document any accidents where age was a factor in these cases. I am over 60, and I fly an airliner into places that have never seen airliners much less the one I fly. Yes, I have slowed down since I was in my forties simply because there is no need to rush. This is not a competition, it's a profession, nothing more nothing less. Supermen need not apply for these jobs unless of course you are flying combat missions, then conditioning is everything. I don't expect you agree with me, just acknowledge what is driving your real concern.

I'm sorry but you're not 'getting my drift'. Its all about the perception that age=liability. We all (pilots) know there's little difference between the abilities of a 40 year old and a 60 year old--except maybe more experience witht he latter. But try telling that to the aviation-ignorant masses. The same public who buys that the jet blue airbus is out dumping fuel to reduce it's weight before landing at LAX. Its the perception that will kill this reform now or later. (And you're still in my seat).

TH

 

[hr2eternity]

So with that reasoning, if the media and the public say that airline pilots are overpaid, then it must be true. Oh, but I'll bet you are the first one to throw the newspaper guys under the bus and call them and the rest of the public idiots.

I'm not saying it's right for them to draw the conclusion in the event of an accident that age=liability. I'm just saying they will.

 

[Full of LUV]

Age discrimination???

Let's take the greed quotient out of it and just make the age 60 rule vanish in 20 years, I wonder how much support it would garner then if anyone over 40 wouldn't immediately profit?

 

[JohnDoe]

quote:
"It is Age Discrimination. It is about time that the U.S. look at this the same as they look at all other discrimination."



Oh please. Are you going to start banging the drum against the age 23 for an ATP as well?? Whats to say a 22 year old is any less qualified than a 23 year old?? Or how about 18 for your commercial?

I doubt you would expend much effort against those because it most likely doesn't affect you. Which brings me to the point of drop the age discrimination crap......its all about what an individual stands to gain or lose. "Age discrimination" is just pretty wrapping paper.