Southwest Airilnes Crosses into the Gray

[Dizel8]

"FedEx have over 60 guys on the panel who will be looking to get back to the left seat."

Didn't think about that one, but you are correct. The smartest thing FedEx could do, would probably just to pay them for whatever they could hold, but not actually train them, since if they did, it would probably incur higher cost in training events system wide.

"How about a Delta guy who took a lump sum retirement but now wants to come back?"

Well, he/she might want to, but they would go to the bottom of the list where ever they went, plus the IRS might have issues with it.

 

[Jim Smyth]

I've discussed the age 60 amendment with every CA that I've flown with over the last few months, and it has been my observation (perhaps I'll start an official poll at work!) that the majority (by an overwhelming margin) of these guys want the rule to stay in place!

Ya, right! Thats why it passes every time..........................

 

[FoxHunter]

They knew the rules when they got in this game. Change this rule and hiring/recalls will slow to a trickle for years to come. All the hiring at FedEx - gone. They have over 60 guys on the panel who will be looking to get back to the left seat. How about a Delta guy who took a lump sum retirement but now wants to come back? Have fun sorting that one out.

Turned 60? Go home, pop a few viagra, and step away from the controls.

Hey sonny boy the rules have changed in many ways, deregulation, airline failures. The over 60 guys at Fedex will be back in the left seat. I expect to drop back a few numbers. Their place will be taken by a new hire. Reading the System Chief Pilot's letter regarding the last bid their plans are based on the age 60 rule changing. Many guys approaching 60 today had their years of furlough.

How about a Delta guy with the lump sum? Hell, if you could break away from your M-TV and read the Bills you would know the answer.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

I guess it boils down to this for me. One's advancement should not be at the expense of someone else being forced out of their job by a rule that has no merit.

Geardaddy,

I would bet that another vote would pass with the same approximate margin. I believe that we have voted on this twice so far with very similiar results.

 

[FoxHunter]

"FedEx have over 60 guys on the panel who will be looking to get back to the left seat."

Didn't think about that one, but you are correct. The smartest thing FedEx could do, would probably just to pay them for whatever they could hold, but not actually train them, since if they did, it would probably incur higher cost in training events system wide.

Hell, smartest thing they could do is train them back to the left seat. The back seat they leave could be filled by a new hire, or not at all with the dwindling DC10 fleet.

 

[Dizel8]

But wouldn't that start a big (costly) training cycle? After all who the FEs bump out, would bump someones else out etc.?

 

[alaskaplt]

A general rule of thumb in this business, if your company wants it, you probably DON'T!

Another general rule of thumb. If the corporations want it the Republicans will pass it. The only problem here would be if the union decides to support it. What would be the higher priority, to give in to those corporations or to screw the unions.

 

[skykid]

Hell, if you could break away from your M-TV and read the Bills you would know the answer.

How about explaining it? That's what this forum is for.

 

[FoxHunter]

But wouldn't that start a big (costly) training cycle? After all who the FEs bump out, would bump someones else out etc.?

Not at all. FedEx is now training at 110% of capacity. Not enough Sims, Instructors etc. We are getting 7 more MD11s, 8 MD10s, 9 A300/310s by the end of March 06. Guys going back to Captain would provide some needed relief for the expanding fleets. The DC10 fleet is slowly shrinking.

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Despite all the bluster from the old geezer crowd, this bill is DOA. Congress will defer to the FAA's recommendation which is to keep age 60 retirement in place.

FoxHunter will soon be "Wheelchair Hunter"! <g>

 

[Spooky 1]

Insurance rates

I agree. It's all about GREED!!!

On another note, have any of the airlines looked into the increased insurance rates on their aircraft when pilots over 60 fly??

I know on the corporate side, our insurance rates rise dramatically from age 60 to 70. After 70, it's too cost prohibitive to allow them to fly.

Just checked with our accounting dept./CP and there is absoulutely nothing in the insurance contract that reflects on older pilots period. We have several pilots who are over 60+ and there are no penalties imposed. Perhaps you need a new insurance carrier. I cannot speak to the +70 issue. maybe for recreational pilots this would be a true statement. Can you expand on this subject and cite some actual numbers for us, say for a GV Capt.?

Somebody ought to call NetJets and let them know about this issue, so they can adjust their hiring to a lower age group.

 

[FoxHunter]

Despite all the bluster from the old geezer crowd, this bill is DOA. Congress will defer to the FAA's recommendation which is to keep age 60 retirement in place.

FoxHunter will soon be "Wheelchair Hunter"! <g>

Just like they did with TCAS.

 

[Flying Freddie]

Let me try to figure out this thread. Some of the pilots here are upset that they may have five more years to make a living for their families? What am I missing?

 

[80drvr]

Let me try to figure out this thread. Some of the pilots here are upset that they may have five more years to make a living for their families? What am I missing?

There are ~8000 furloughed pilots that will get an additional few years to watch from the sidelines if this effort succeeds.

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Let me try to figure out this thread. Some of the pilots here are upset that they may have five more years to make a living for their families? What am I missing?

Dear Confused,

Go do something worthwhile with your few remaining years before you push up the daisies! It's a sad testament that your whole ego is wrapped up in your job. Open your eyes Freddie and imagine yourself lying on your death bed wishing you had done something other than flying a tube another day.

Trust me, some young furloughed father trying to support his small children will thank you for not being greedy! You've benefitted long enough with the current rule, so gracefully slide your old wrinkled fanny out of the seat for the last time and go do something else.

Hope this clears up your confusion! <g>

BBB

 

[Flying Freddie]

Dear Belly,

I not only was one of the furloughed from 9-11, I have spent over six years of my career being one of those furloughed pilots you talk about. Next, you need to get some anger management help.

I have many years left, I was just asking a question and you showed why folks like you should not be flying at any age.

Five years helps everyone. Please see your chaplain for some direction. Thank you and have a nice evening.

 

[Jim Smyth]

Dear Confused,

Go do something worthwhile with your few remaining years before you push up the daisies! It's a sad testament that your whole ego is wrapped up in your job. Open your eyes Freddie and imagine yourself lying on your death bed wishing you had done something other than flying a tube another day.

BBB

How rude!

 

[grinder]

I saw a study many years ago on the average death age of airline pilots. Good subjects for a test since we are healthy and have frequent physicals. I don't remember the details, but the gist was that night/international flying takes many years off your life, and, as a group, "healthy" pilots on average died alarmingly young. I would think the benefits of flying a senior guy longer would be quite clear to those companies paying certain pensions, medical benefits, etc. and save them significant cash. Maybe some furloughed guy, now an actuary, could elaborate.

They would be more than happy to fly you to death. Just keep asking for it.

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Dear Belly,

I not only was one of the furloughed from 9-11, I have spent over six years of my career being one of those furloughed pilots you talk about. Next, you need to get some anger management help.

I have many years left, I was just asking a question and you showed why folks like you should not be flying at any age.

Five years helps everyone. Please see your chaplain for some direction. Thank you and have a nice evening.

Anger management? LOL! Freddie ... there's more to life than flying airplanes. I repeat that I find it sad that people like you apparently are so hung up with your job that you are blinded to this concept. To some (apparently like yourself ... based on what YOU said about your desire to work more years to earn more money) the accumulation of wealth/material possessions is the end-all of one's purpose here. I fail to see how this is an "angry "concept, but I'll accept that you find it so.

As far as religion ... well, I'm pretty sure you don't want to hear my feelings on that either. Cheer up Freddie ... often the tone of one's message is poorly relayed on a message board out of concern for brevity.

BBB

 

[NoJoy]

BBB has a few good pts. Five years only helps the few and not very many-especially at the regional level. Hopefully we will be able to vote on this and see what the majority wants....

 

[DesertFalcon]

"my guess is that it will be a conservative change to something between 62 and 65....so it jives with soc sec."

But why 65? Particularily in light off, that we may see changes in SS rules and that the longer your delay taking SS the more you get. Still strikes me, that any specific number proposed would be arbitrary.

Why not just make it, that as long as you are medically fit and can pass the training, you may continue to fly?

Personally, I would rather see change to the SS rules, that allows pilots to collect at 60, since it is a federally mandated law that forces retirement. Of course, since the general population thinks we a "overpaid fat cats", that would probably never happen.

I agree! Fly till you can't qualify anymore.
The younger pilot can take over when the airplane starts into its dive!

Seriously, if you can get a medical and pass the checkride you should be qualified to fly.

 

[Mach 80]

>>>as a group, "healthy" pilots on average died alarmingly young.<<<

This is another in the long list of urban legends. Though widely circulated, it's not true.

 

[Flying Freddie]

Dear Belly,

As long as I have an F/O to help me in the cockpit and tell me when my Depends are leaking or smell bad I should be able to fly. Besides, my cane can be used against someone trying to get into the cockpit. I gotta go take my nap now.

 

[LuckyDad]

In my opinion, I don't see where its a seniority issue, if everyone flies five years (or whatever) longer, unless you are furloughed and older.
What I don't support is every Capt. that I fly with says "Yea, I'd love to fly past 60... I'd give most of my trips away and fly a reduced schedule to keep the insurance and not dip into savings"
So I'm out there, with the rest of the company trying to save a few bucks here and there, and a 60+ guy could fly a couple of trips a month and cost the companty in benifits. I hope if they do this, the company will at least impose some kind of minimum. I have heard our flight attendants can do this, (give everything away), and I don't agree with that either.
Also, I really dont know about the medical standard. Like most of us, I have flown with guys that were sharp as a tack at 60, and it was sad to see them retire. But I have also flown with guys that are slipping, and still passed their last medical. At least the way it is now, its absolute, and a retirement is not the result of a bunch of complaints by F/O's and visits to the chief pilot. A guy walks out with some dignity.
Lastly, I really think this will impact out LOL insurance. By definition, if you couldnt pass the FAA Medical, you would be entitled to the LOL benifit. I think we can all expect to pay a lot higher premium when this age group (60+) is included in the demographic.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[Spooky 1]

Loss of lisc. premiums?

In my opinion, I don't see where its a seniority issue, if everyone flies five years (or whatever) longer, unless you are furloughed and older.
What I don't support is every Capt. that I fly with says "Yea, I'd love to fly past 60... I'd give most of my trips away and fly a reduced schedule to keep the insurance and not dip into savings"
So I'm out there, with the rest of the company trying to save a few bucks here and there, and a 60+ guy could fly a couple of trips a month and cost the companty in benifits. I hope if they do this, the company will at least impose some kind of minimum. I have heard our flight attendants can do this, (give everything away), and I don't agree with that either.
Also, I really dont know about the medical standard. Like most of us, I have flown with guys that were sharp as a tack at 60, and it was sad to see them retire. But I have also flown with guys that are slipping, and still passed their last medical. At least the way it is now, its absolute, and a retirement is not the result of a bunch of complaints by F/O's and visits to the chief pilot. A guy walks out with some dignity.
Lastly, I really think this will impact out LOL insurance. By definition, if you couldnt pass the FAA Medical, you would be entitled to the LOL benifit. I think we can all expect to pay a lot higher premium when this age group (60+) is included in the demographic.
Just my 2 cents.

Yes I would agree that some pilots may exhibit deteriorating skills as they age, but at what point alone does this define a retirement age? I am sure that there are those who start downward at say age 45, or for that matter peaked at age 35? The fact that it is fairly hard to define or at least quantify the results of these evaluations, and they are debateable and perhaps should not in and of it's self be the sole determining factor in this hotly contested issue. Assuming the pilot passes the physical and passes the checkrides and does not have their flying partners reporting substandard performance what do you do to define that breakover point. I know that I am reading something into this in that I am assuming that the guy gets a legit physical and that the P-checks are applied evenly and fairly to all, but at some point you would need to have this to be a level playing field so you could really define the performance required for the job.

As for insurance premiums? The carriers will either increase the amount necessary to cover these pilots, or if it is a bad risk reward issue, not make it available at any price. I don't support the trickle down therory that you have suggested, but then I don't sell insurance. Let those that want it and need it buy it if it makes sense at the premium rate. The providors can design a program around this age group that does not impose a penalty on the younger pilots who want this coverage.

I would tend to agree with one of the other members that this bill is unlikely to pass this time around. But who knows starnger things have happened. Maybe when BBB is about age 58 it's time will come.

 

[cxcap]

If they raise the retirement age the pilots are going to end up getting screwed in the end. Do you really think they are going to pay a guy $200 grand for five years longer than they expected to when they hired him? Lets say they raise the age from 60 to 65. Now insted of topping out after 12 years (or 18 at the regionals), you wont hit the top of the pay scale until 17 years (or 23). The raises will also be lower each year. So in the end you will not make all that much more money, you just will have worked a lot more. Lets hope this thing doesnt pass!

 

[semperfido]

sorry but i don't follow...pls elaborate...i think you have some assunptions that have no basis in reason. example: raises smaller; top of pay scale stuff.

 

[cxcap]

If they do indeed raise the mandatory retirement age, where is the extra money going to come from to pay the salaries? If a guy whos topped the pay scale were going to retire at 60 and now decides to retire at 65, its going to cost the airline more money. Take Southwest for example. Lets say the highest paid pilot as SWA makes a base of $185,000. If he were to leave a new hire pilot would be there in his place being paid $48,000. That means it will cost roughly $137,000 more multiplied by 5 yrs which is equal to around an extra $700,000 per pilot. (for each one that decides to stay that otherwise would have left) Now, is SWA really going to pull that money out of their a$$ for every single pilot who tops the pay scale and decides to work and extra 5 yrs?? Yeah right. Instead they will adjust the payscales so that in the future, the amount of money they pay each pilot over the span of their career will be equal to the amount that it was before the age 60 rule was lifted. How will they do this? By paying a lower salary in the earlier years.

 

[SWA/FO]

Dude, pilots top out at 12 years of pay at SWA.

 

[Jim Smyth]

The big pay raise isnt flying to age 65 or whatever age they try to change it to. At that point you are already topped out at the top of the left seat pay pyramid. The big pay raise (at least for me) was moving over to the left seat. With that being said most of the FO's want this seat as fast as possible. At SWA its still in the 5-6 year range (not bad for a major airline especially these days) and this upgrade time should stay in that range as long as we continue to make money which equals expansion. The only way to achieve this 5-6 year left seat is through expansion, not retirements. Sure retirements help but its the small picture. Costs have to stay down to let the Comapany be able to buy equipment to expand. Now you get guys that are out on the street (not from SWA) that want me to leave at 60 so they can get hired. You have guys that are current FO's that want me to leave at 60 so they can get my left seat slot. You have Captains that want to stay until they turn into dust (I'm not one of them). Its all "GREEDY" from ones own perspective and where they are currently at in life. This perspective also changes as you age. YMMV