Southwest Airilnes Crosses into the Gray

[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