S. 65 and H.R. 1125 still alive (age 65)

[XJTAv8r]

Could this change happen sooner than the 18-24 months previously mentioned?

At its May meeting, ALPA’s Executive Board will consider a resolution from the Executive Council to modify the union’s Age 60 policy if it decides that such efforts are in the best interest of ALPA pilots.

The resolution comes on the heels of the FAA’s announcement that it will propose a new rule to allow pilots to fly until they are 65. The proposed rule would parallel the ICAO standard—either pilot or copilot may fly up to age 65 as long as the other crew member is under age 60.

Since the announcement, ALPA’s president, Capt. John Prater, established the ALPA Age 60 Blue Ribbon Panel to study the long-range effects of potential changes to the FAA Age 60 Rule and to identify issues connected to possible changes to pilot mandatory retirement age.

The Panel presented its preliminary report to the Council on April 24 which included issues that need to be addressed in legislation to change the Age 60 Rule. Currently, Congress is considering legislation—S. 65 and H.R. 1125—that would raise the upper age limit to 65 in multi-crew operations as long as the other required pilot is under 60; sunset the current FAA Age 60 Rule 30 days after the effective date which is the date of enactment; require the Secretary of Transportation within 30 days after the effective date to modify the regulation making it consistent with the statutory change; and establish that it would not be a basis for a claim of re-employment or seniority under any labor agreement.

ALPA expects that attempts will be made to attach or include S. 65 and H.R. 1125 in each chamber's version of the 2007 FAA reauthorization bills which the committees of jurisdiction are scheduling to debate and vote on in May or June.

The Blue Ribbon Panel concluded that provisions in both bills do not sufficiently address ALPA’s issues. Those issues include:

• 
  [*]appropriate language to prevent retroactive application of a change to the rule,
  [*]appropriate language to ensure stronger liability protection for airlines and pilot unions in implementing a change to the rule,
  [*]assurances that FAA normal retirement age language in certain defined benefit plans would not cause a cutback in accrued benefits
  [*]opposition to any additional age-related diagnostic medical testing,
  [*]any attempt by the FAA to obtain greater access to medical pilot records, and
  [*]support of FAA Air Surgeon Fred Tilton’s recommendation to require a first class medical certification every six months for pilots over age 60, and
  [*]appropriate language , modeled on Akaka bill, which requires the PBGC to calculate pilot pension benefits as though they worked to the more traditional retirement age of 65.

ALPA continues to collect information on this critical topic. For your opinion to be heard, eligible members MUST take the ALPA Age 60 Blue Ribbon Panel Survey. Although the survey results will not be the only factor the Board considers, it is an important aspect of the Board’s deliberation regarding the FAA Age 60 pilot retirement regulation.

More than 14,500 ALPA pilots have registered their opinions on the FAA Age 60 pilot retirement regulation via ALPA’s online survey. As of April 30, the top-10 pilot groups with the highest percentage of submissions are America West, FedEx, Northwest, ASTAR, Continental, Delta, United, Alaska, Hawaiian, and Atlas Air. The web-based survey began earlier this month and will remain open until May 10. Please log onto Crewroom.alpa.org to access the survey.

 

[sandman2122]

As one of the 14,500 pilots who registered, I said DON'T change the current age 60 rule.

 

[shroomwell]

The way I read it was:

"Thanks for taking the survey, but we are going to go ahead and make the decision ourselves without considering what the majority wants. Thanks for continuing to pay your dues, and have good day."

 

[Flopgut]

The way I read it was:

"Thanks for taking the survey, but we are going to go ahead and make the decision ourselves without considering what the majority wants. Thanks for continuing to pay your dues, and have good day."

I read it the same way! Hope we're wrong.

 

[PCL_128]

Remember, the decision hasn't been made yet. The Executive Board will be the one to make this decision. The EB is made up of the MEC Chairmen from every ALPA carrier. So, if you're like me and don't want ALPA's policy to change, then you need to talk with your reps (especially your MEC Chair) and tell them how opposed you are to this rule change. If you have an LEC or MEC meeting before the EB meets, then bring a resolution. Get involved!!! Don't let your reps make this decision without your input.

 

[Dizel8]

"The Executive Board will be the one to make this decision."

And here I thought it was supposed to be the members!

 

[PCL_128]

And here I thought it was supposed to be the members!

Ever heard of representative democracy? It's worked pretty well for this country for a few hundred years. Works pretty good for unions too. You just need to get involved and let your reps know what you think. When only 14,500 members out of 60,000 even bother to respond, the reps are left to think that the majority of the membership doesn't care, and then they are free to make the decision themselves. If the membership gave a clear signal (say 50,000 members responding to the survey with a strong majority opposed to a change) then the EB would certainly follow the direction of the membership. As it stands right now, it's hard to argue that the membership has given any clear direction at all on this issue.

 

[filejw]

And lets remember that ALPA is just one factor in this issue.As I read the info ALPA has sent out I think they realize what an up hill battle this is.Way more people/organizations are saying yes to 65 than ALPA saying no.

 

[filejw]

And lets remember that ALPA is just one factor in this issue.As I read the info ALPA has sent out I think they realize what an up hill battle this is.Way more people/organizations are saying yes to 65 than ALPA saying no.

 

[Andy]

prater continues to push for a change in ALPA policy and has been acting behind the scenes with politicians to make this change happen as soon as possible.
Representative democracy? Yeah, my a$$ it's a representative democracy. prater is going to take the polling data and twist it to make it seem like the majority of ALPA wants to help push for a change.
I wasn't happy with the way that the poll was written and can see how they'll manipulate the results. It's definitely NOT an unbiased poll.

Congress had taken a laissez faire attitude toward the change and planned on leaving it to the FAA. Now all of a sudden there is talk of this change being fast tracked and buried in the DOT's appropriations bill. It is inappropriate for legislation to be included in appropriations bills and is not the normal procedure for getting legislation through Congress.
The ONLY way that this is happening is because some of ALPA national is lobbying Congress behind closed doors in favor of the change. If ALPA had continued to oppose any change, this would not be happening.

Yeah, I'll be calling my ALPA reps. Every freaking one of them. What a bunch of crap!