Please vote NO on S.65!

[roughneck]

Now is the time to write your Congressmen and tell them to please vote NO for changing the AGE 60 Rule. Proposed Legislation (S.65)will be voted on Thursday. They are trying to change to law to allow Captains to fly to age 65. The law will require any Captain over 60 to be paired with an FO under 60. This law needs to stay as it is. Age 60 is the madatory retirement age and should stay that way. Below is a link to the Congressmen on the committee voting on this issue Thursday. Please write them and say NO!

http://commerce.senate.gov/about/membership.html

 

[G4G5]

Why??

 

[75M]

Personally, I'm OK with it. I'll need the extra five years to make up for the last four.

 

[lostplnetairman]

Now is the time to write your Congressmen and tell them to please vote NO for changing the AGE 60 Rule. Proposed Legislation (S.65)will be voted on Thursday. They are trying to change to law to allow Captains to fly to age 65. The law will require any Captain over 60 to be paired with an FO under 60. This law needs to stay as it is. Age 60 is the madatory retirement age and should stay that way. Below is a link to the Congressmen on the committee voting on this issue Thursday. Please write them and say NO!

http://commerce.senate.gov/about/membership.html

You've got your facts all wrong!

HR Diva

 

[alaskaplt]

Now is the time to write your Congressmen and tell them to please vote NO for changing the AGE 60 Rule. Proposed Legislation (S.65)will be voted on Thursday. They are trying to change to law to allow Captains to fly to age 65. The law will require any Captain over 60 to be paired with an FO under 60. This law needs to stay as it is. Age 60 is the madatory retirement age and should stay that way. Below is a link to the Congressmen on the committee voting on this issue Thursday. Please write them and say NO!

http://commerce.senate.gov/about/membership.html

You don't want to fly with grandpa?

 

[SWA/FO]

Maybe the NWA and Delta guys think differently of this now?

 

[alaskaplt]

Maybe the NWA and Delta guys think differently of this now?

Like the ones that would be furloghed for 5 (approx) additional years? Or just the ones that had there cake and now want to eat it too? Or maybe the senior guys over at Delta that used to make 2-300k and were not able to save for retirement? Personally I look forward to 5 more years as an fo. Especially in a career that when times get tough you can always just eat the young?

 

[canyonblue]

You don't want to fly with grandpa?

He might keep hitting on Grandma in the back.uke:

 

[ferlo]

Why??

The better question is "Why" didn't you prepare for retirement?

 

[warbirdfinder]

Planning is easier said then done!

I did plan for retirement, after 39 years and several airlines, I retired comfortably. On January 1, the medical cost went from "0" to $350.00/month. Then on October 1, Delta cut my pension check by 93%, to $410. I assume by the end of the year, Delta will have retirees assume all medical insurance costs, probably to the tune of $800.00/month for me. When they terminate the pension plan, the $410.00 will go away. In 2001, a separate IRA I had lost 60%. I did get 1/2 of my lump sum though.
Don't tell me carefully planning equals security at the end of a career.

 

[HalinTexas]

I have been preparing for my retirement as much as my ever diminuative ALPA contract, corporate malfeasance, cyclical economics, and public perception, via government policy, will allow.

I turn 40 in 4 days, I have over $100,000 in my retirment now, inclucing my wife's. That won't be enough to make it to 80-90 if I retire at 60. Even though I would like to retire at 60. There will probably be at least 2 more downturns similar to this one in the next 20 years should I continue in this profession. My taxes will probably be raised to support those baby-boomers in their retirements. That not withstanding, I will not be a burden to my children.

 

[Steve Di.]

Walk a mile....

The better question is "Why" didn't you prepare for retirement?

You have to have been there to understand. Many pilots thought they were prepared for retirement, but with A-plans being stolen, stock market crashes in the 90s, displacements back to the right seat, pay cuts, furloughs, etc. Need I go on????

I once thought the age 60 rule should stand. But now that I am older and my career was up ended I can see why many pilots not only want the rule changed, but actually need it changed. I lost my A plan to Carl Icahn, was displaced out of the left seat to the street, started from scratch a career that was on track to retire at 60, was unable to contribute to my 401(k) for 2 years. I have 2 kids just about ready for college.....

I am not looking for one shred of sympathy. I just want the right to work, just like the folks working in other professions.

 

[Flopgut]

You've got your facts all wrong!

HR Diva

OK Diva, what are the facts please?

You said you were an attorney on another thread, so lets here some good info.

 

[El-Rushbo]

You have to have been there to understand. Many pilots thought they were prepared for retirement, but with A-plans being stolen, stock market crashes in the 90s, displacements back to the right seat, pay cuts, furloughs, etc. Need I go on????

I once thought the age 60 rule should stand. But now that I am older and my career was up ended I can see why many pilots not only want the rule changed, but actually need it changed. I lost my A plan to Carl Icahn, was displaced out of the left seat to the street, started from scratch a career that was on track to retire at 60, was unable to contribute to my 401(k) for 2 years. I have 2 kids just about ready for college.....

I am not looking for one shred of sympathy. I just want the right to work, just like the folks working in other professions.

But don't our furloughed brothers and sisters also deserve the right to work? Extending the age 60 rule will prolong jobs for those of us who are lucky enough to currently have one, while it will deny work to those who lost theirs for several more years. Seems a bit glutinous to me.

 

[Terry Hunter]

I support raising the mandatory age rule.

To receive the full benefits of Social Security, the retirement age the government has determined for me is 67, not 65 as it was for several years. Now, I'm not here to argue the health of the SS system, or to claim that as a legitimate source of income at retirement.

My point is that the government has upped the full-benefit age (for people in my age group), and I can assume that it is because of increased life expectancy, or maybe the government is just delaying payment to fix the shortfalls.

Anyway, if it's increased life expectancy, then raise the Age 60 rule; at least to 62. I'm probably going to have to work until 65 anyway. I would prefer to fly, even as a FO for the last 5 years.