Rebuttal against age 65 (for FoxHunter and Jim Smith)

[General Lee]

I vote yes for lowering the drinking age and decriminalizing drugs. The voting thing I'm not sure about. If we issue drivers licenses based on demonstrated ability with the same rigor as we test pilots, then sure, why not allow younger folks to take the test. These older pilots have demonstrated ability and as long as they continue to demonstrate that ability, let them fly. We all win then!

Should we lower the driving age if the kids can demonstrate ability? I will tell my nephew to hit the go cart track after school everyday. He is 10 years old, but by 12 he could probably handle highway driving and parallel parking...
Would you agree to that too? You can't do one without the other. Then you would be a hypocrite.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[instructordude]

Great posts General.

 

[ils2minimums]

My question is if Age 60 is "age discrimination" why is age 65 not age discrimination. We raise the age to 65, and how does the age disc argument get nullified?

The answer is it doesn't... What'll happen is this: When the current batch of guys who are trying to change the rules during the 11th hour of their career turn 65, they'll start whining again about how 65 is discriminatory and they have never been healthier and 75 is the new 45, and on and on and on...

So we'll get to endure another 5 or 10 years of stagnation while Great Grandpa wakes from his trans-Atlantic nap, puts his teeth in, and slams one on at JFK, then goes out to his Oldsmobile and heads for the early bird special at Hometown Buffet...

Man, wouldn't it be great if we could pull this crap in other areas of our lives? Imagine paying for a movie, watching it, and then when you're supposed to leave, you decide to keep your seat and watch the movie again while another guy who paid the same amount you did has to wait in the lobby because the theater is full.

Amusement parks would be a blast! You could wait in line for the best roller coaster, then once you get the primo seat, you could just KEEP IT ALL DAY!!!
(of course it'd suck to be the guy waiting next in line). But hey, I GOT MINE, SO SCREW THAT GUY!!!

I hope it doesn't change, but if it does, I'll just live with it and wish it hadn't...

 

[UpNDownGuy]

Ouch..my head hurts....

Did you hear about the AA 777 Captain who died of a heart attack landing in RDU from LGW?

Did I miss AA starting 777 service from London to Raleigh?

The age 60 rule is a joke. Invest 30 seconds of your life and learn about the history of the age 60 rule. It has, and never has, had the slightest possible thing to do with safety.

What I don't get is the reason most youngsters have for hating it. So we change the age 60 rule to 65, and it takes you 5 more years to upgrade. You then fly to 65, and hold Captain for exactly the same amount of time, except that now you have additional years as a pilot as income. You make more money overall.

Other than the fact that you have to wait to be a Captain a little longer, why are you against it? Do you need that 4th stripe RIGHT NOW, or you're going to cry about it? Seems like a pretty good indication you're not emotionally ready to be in command anyway...

I say this as a relatively young FO on the bottom of the seniority list...

 

[satpak77]

If you go to the DOT comments site, all you hear is "age discrimination" and the rules is "out of date" etc

But raise it 5 years? How did we determine 5 years, not 3,4,6, or 7? What scientific evidence for this?

Here are some gems of comments ( on public internet)

http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/p87/420437.tif


http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/p87/420440.tif


http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/p87/420375.txt


http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/p87/420384.txt

 

[satpak77]

Double Post - Sorry

 

[3BCat]

If the French get wine with their crew meals, we should too. Why fight it? Sometimes you just have to defer to the older established societies to learn how it should be done.

 

[ils2minimums]

UpNDownGuy wrote:
Did I miss AA starting 777 service from London to Raleigh?

Apparantly you did:
AMERICAN AIRLINES 174 RDU-LGW
Raleigh/ Durham
06:45 PM
London
0700AM 777Economy
7 hr 15 min




AMERICAN AIRLINES 173 LGW-RDU
London
12:40 PM
Raleigh/ Durham
04:15 PM 777Economy
8 hr 35 min





What I don't get is the reason most youngsters have for hating it. So we change the age 60 rule to 65, and it takes you 5 more years to upgrade.

Do you seriously want to put your life on hold for 5 years? I don't. I didn't intend to fly to 65 either. I wanted to get out at 60 like the TENS OF THOUSANDS OF GUYS BEFORE ME DID!!! (They'll most likely change the retirement plans also, which'll make it more penalizing if I actually choose to leave at 60)

Other than the fact that you have to wait to be a Captain a little longer, why are you against it?

See above answer

I say this as a relatively young FO on the bottom of the seniority list...

Come on now... How young can you be with 13000 hours?


AA has served London from RDU for as long as I've been here. (1991)

 

[satpak77]

BOTTOM LINE

There is no valid "age discrimination" argument for changing age 60 to age 65. To simply change age 60 and require ongoing medicals and sim checks, fine. But to raise it five years because the "60 part" was "age discrimination" and make it Age 65 which somehow is not age discrimination, that won't fly.

BET ON IT.

Too many pilot lounge experts and old head captains who think ATP also means "law degree" are about to be disappointed when the rule is kept in place.

AGAIN - I can GUARANTEE that not one court/legislative body/etc is going to abolish Age 60 and change it to Age 65 because "Age 60 is age discrimination"

I flat out guarantee this.

 

[ils2minimums]

If the French get wine with their crew meals, we should too. Why fight it? Sometimes you just have to defer to the older established societies to learn how it should be done.

My sentiments exactly! I'm gonna do it how the French do it!

Tomorrow I will:

-Stop wearing deodorant,
-Start smoking 3 packs a day,
-Hate Americans (except Jerry Lewis)
-Become a coward...