Southwest Pilots Aggressively Push Age 65

[1BigRodeo]

Dont lump us all together on the age 60 thing, our union has been highjacked by a couple of age 65ers and we are in the process of getting it back under control. I think a fresh survey of our pilot group would probably give a more sobering view on the for/against ratio. I dont think the president, or his cronies at SWAPA want to hear the majority view. They say they have a mandate from a poll from four years ago. Id venture to say that a vote today would be a bit different.

Just my .02

 

[SWA/FO]

If you think that had ANYTHING to do with age, I think you're a few apples short of a bushel.

As far as the age 65 thing, the ONE thing that ticks me off about being forced BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to retire at 60 is the fact that we're not allowed to receive social security or medicare until after we turn 65. In my opinion, changing that for all workers forced to retire prior to 65 is where we pilot's legislative efforts should be concentrated.

this is what I was trying to say.

 

[chris69]

I kind of agree with Judge and 1BR. Wholly in the middle myself. Age 60 is discrimination, but so is not letting those already retired come back in the event of a change. What date does a change start? I'm not for anyone getting a windfall. Whatever happens, it's gotta be fair. One example would be an immediate end to the rule on an arbitrary date; those turning 60 on Dec 31 2006, sorry you're done. Those turning 60 on Jan 1 2007, you just got 5 more years. Some windfall. If it changes, it's gotta be prorated and phased in. 61 in 2007, 62 in 2008, 63 in 2009 etc. Then the furloughs at least have a shot at a career and some semblance of normal upgrade patterns prevail.

 

[Uppercrust]

So what is fair and what is not?? Is a 100 meter race unfair compared to a 1500 meter race just because it is shorter. It's not, if everyone agrees upon the rules and understands the distance. Can't take credit from that analogy, it was from a Steve Prefontaine movie. I do like it.

When it comes to the age 60 rule it has been there for some time and people have agreed to the rule. My gut feeling is that some sort of compromise will come about this year and it will slowly be phased in over several years. Guyd over 60 or close can't complain, since their race is close to done and the rules when they started were there. Guys 57ish and below all just have to agree and understand the new terms. Kinda like a 100 meter race!

 

[Fly-diver]

Thanks Falcon and SWA/FO for the honest estimate. My honest question is: If your going to have over 3 mil. why work?

"For the love of the game"

Here's a headline for ya... SWA pilots LUV to fly airplanes!!! Who knew?

 

[roughneck]

Southwest pilots as a whole don't support age 60 going away in my opinion. SWAPA says we do, but we haven't voted recently on the issue. 60% of the seniorty list wasn't even on property when the last vote was held.

SWAPA leadership and a few over zealous guys are making the push. Not SWA pilots as a whole. They had 40 something guys turn out to lobby congress. Not an overwhelming turnout if you ask me. Most guys I talk too don't want the rule to change.

It is a matter of some wanting their cake and wanting to eat it too. Unfortunately for most of us, it probably will change.

 

[vetrider]

Foxhunter, I'd bet that you are wrong. It is widely expected that the FAA will file an exception to this change. IF the US files an exception, no foreign pilot over 60 will be permitted into US airspace.

And FWIW, the US has the most exceptions to ICAO rules of any country.

Hi Andy, I'm curious if you have anything specific to make you believe that the FAA will file an exception to allowing ICAO rule folks over 60 into the US? This is the first I have heard from anyone saying such a thing and I hadn't even thought of it till you brought it up.

Since Marion Blakey is on record saying that if asked to testify the FAA would be neutral on upping the age, I would think that the FAA would not be thinking of filing an exception to the ICAO this fall.

Personally I think the age 60 rule works, but I'm not really opposed to 65 either. I think it will all come out in the wash anyway.

 

[thruthemurk]

I kind of agree with Judge and 1BR. Wholly in the middle myself. Age 60 is discrimination, but so is not letting those already retired come back in the event of a change. What date does a change start? I'm not for anyone getting a windfall. Whatever happens, it's gotta be fair. One example would be an immediate end to the rule on an arbitrary date; those turning 60 on Dec 31 2006, sorry you're done. Those turning 60 on Jan 1 2007, you just got 5 more years. Some windfall. If it changes, it's gotta be prorated and phased in. 61 in 2007, 62 in 2008, 63 in 2009 etc. Then the furloughs at least have a shot at a career and some semblance of normal upgrade patterns prevail.

Interestingly enough, these two methods produce nearly identical results. If you turned 60 before Jan 1, 2007 you would be out. Otherwise the limit would bump up each year as you aged one year and you would be good all the way to 65. Am I seeing that wrong??

Murk

 

[xanderman]

well...

Why you hanging out on a Southwest Airlines thread?

'Cause if we didn't all of you SWA folk would be in here all by yourselves jumpin' around and slapping each other on the a$$ as though you giving "high-fives!"

Who the he11 wants to work until 65 anyway? Plan ahead and start a savings of some sort to fill in the gap...

I know.... Not that insightful but...

Andy

P.S. I loved the "Southwest invented oxygen" comment. That was funny!

 

[b747dogg]

I think that dork who petitioned for a vote to extend the contract should of petition a vote for support of the age 60. There is no way it would pass, it only passed by a couple percent last time.