SWA and Age65... lets get this straight.

[AA767AV8TOR]

Maybe the solution lays in tying the manditory retirement age of pilots, to the minimum age required by the Federal Goverment to access Social Security and Medicare....

Skipper

Skipper,

I think the fairest solution if in fact this POS does pass, since we were all hired under the Age 60 rule, all those over age 60 should be put at the bottom of the seniority list. That way, no one receives a windfall at the expense of others.

Those seeking age 65 + want to keep their seats and seniority, all at the expense of the junior guys. They want their cake and eat it too. They want it under the pretense of “loving to fly” and “it’s age discrimination,” but don’t be fooled, it’s all about the money.

Follow the money trail. For those guys hanging on to their Captain seats – it’s another five years at $200,000 plus and not having to dip into their retirement savings, translation – the windfall could be over $1 million plus for them. All those junior will be impacted as retirements halt and the progression train slows. At slow/no growth carriers such as the legacies, the financial results will be especially devastating. Where’s the money coming from, you ask? Why the junior pilots of course.

I realize SWA is growing like a weed, but it may not always be like that in the future. All it takes is for fuel hedges to run out, an external event to occur, or a couple of crashes and/or incidents, throw in a few bad management decisions, and suddenly the quick progression to the left seat comes to a screeching halt. How do I know, I lived it.

This is bad legislation!

AA767AV8TOR

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

By DENNIS CONRAD
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- For 37 years, Allan Englehardt has been a pilot for
United Airlines, flying hundreds of passengers at a time to such faraway
places as Honolulu and London.

Barring an act of Congress, his career will end in six months.

Under a Federal Aviation Administration rule, pilots for both passenger and
cargo airlines must quit flying at age 60. For Englehardt, a Lake Bluff,
Ill., resident, that not-so-happy birthday arrives on Jan. 29.

Englehardt, along with some other fellow pilots facing forced retirement,
have gone to Capitol Hill to press for legislation to enable them to fly
until age 65, as long as they are fit and healthy. Meanwhile, the Ohio-based
Airline Pilots Against Age Discrimination, has hired the prominent lobbying
firm of Patton and Boggs to fight for a higher retirement age. There are
bills pending in the House and Senate that would raise the age to 65.

What stands in the way are some members of Congress, the FAA, and even the
leadership of the Air Line Pilots Association International, the largest
pilot union in the world with some 61,000 pilots.

They argue it's too risky to let older pilots, who might suddenly be struck
by some health problem, to keep flying.

But even if Congress doesn't act, some older pilots - foreign ones - will
still be flying American skies.

Under current international standards, foreign pilots over age 60 may fly
into the United States as co-pilots. Effective Nov. 23, the International
Civil Aviation Organization will raise the age limits for pilots, too.

That means foreign pilots will be able to fly in the United States up to age
65, so long as they're accompanied by a co-pilot under 60 and they undergo
medical testing every six months.

"What is so special about foreigners that they can fly into the same U.S.
airports, fly over the same U.S. airways and in the same types of airplanes
which are full of passengers, while U.S. citizens and military veterans who
are the same age are to be grounded and prevented from earning a living in
their profession?" asked Englehardt.

The retirement rule doesn't make any exceptions for pilots in good health or
who routinely pass physical exams. An estimated 1,631 will be forced to
retire this year, and a total of about 35,000 by 2017.

The Senate Appropriations Committee in mid-July approved a multi-agency
appropriations bill that includes a temporary, one-year provision that would
let pilots continue to fly after they hit 60.

Pilots have twice questioned Illinois Sens. Dick Durbin and Barack Obama
about the issue at their regular weekly constituent breakfasts, but the two
Democrats are not ready to support a change, at least on a permanent basis.

Durbin, the Senate's second-highest ranking Democrat, supported the
Appropriations Committee's move toward a one-year exception.

"From the senator's perspective," Durbin spokeswoman Sandra Abrevaya said,
"we need to strike a balance, being fair to airline pilots while ensuring
the safety for airline passengers."

Permitting a change for one year would be a temporary fix that would allow
for the debate to continue, she said.

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said the freshman lawmaker has met with pilots
on both sides of the age argument. He said Obama is sympathetic but, because
of safety concerns, wants to hear more from the FAA.

FAA spokesman Les Dorr said that the age 60 rule has served the purpose of
aviation for four decades, and there is "no compelling scientific or medical
evidence that would cause us to reconsider the current age limit." He noted
that Congress could require a change in the age-60 rule, and the FAA would
have to adhere to that.

Duane Woerth, president of the Air Line Pilots Association, testified before
a Senate aviation subcommittee last year that a survey of members found that
56 percent supported maintaining the current rule on age, while 42 percent
wanted to change it. On the question of whether it should be changed to age
65, only 39 percent backed that.

Woerth said the age-60 rule is based on fundamental principles of medical
science that are indisputable.

"First, the risks of incapacitation and unacceptable decrements in
performance increase with age," he said. "Second, medical science has not
developed a regimen of reliable tests that can be administered effectively
to determine which aging pilots will become incapacitated, or whose
performance will decline to an unacceptable level."

Nancy McKinley, a spokeswoman for the International Airline Passengers
Association, said her group does not object to pilots being allowed to fly
up to the age of 65 with similar controls to those applied in Europe and
other areas where it is permitted.

"Our understanding is that the evidence supports such a policy and no
reduction in safety would result," she said.

For Englehardt, the question is not just a matter of principle. He needs to
keep earning money.

United Airlines terminated its pilots' pension plan in 2004, meaning
Englehardt won't get the $142,000 annual retirement income he once counted
on. Instead, the government's Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. will pay him
$36,000 a year in retirement benefits.

For pilots like him, flying an extra five years could mean close to an extra
$800,000 to $1 million in income.

"My big problem if I am forced to retire this coming January 29th,"
Englehardt said, "is how am I going to support my family that includes my
wife and my 15-year old son?"

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Feel free to negotiate with your company for whatever you can get in your contract. However when you lobby congress to change a rule that will impact every airline pilot in America it is just the same as JBLU pilots trying to change the 8 hour block rule.

The difference is.....whatevr the JB pilots are lobbying for....they are doing it on their own. Whereas, with the age 60 change, other pilots from all airlines and unions are joining the SWA pilots in thier lobbying efforts.

And, not that I am in favor of it, but, for all the gloom, despair and agony expressed here of the JB pilots efforts to change the 8 hour rule....anybody know how that is coming along? ....and is it really a JB pilots effort or a JB management effort?

Tejas

 

[Tejas-Jet]

By DENNIS CONRAD
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- For 37 years, Allan Englehardt has been a pilot for
United Airlines, flying hundreds of passengers at a time to such faraway
places as Honolulu and London.

Englehardt, along with some other fellow pilots facing forced retirement,
have gone to Capitol Hill to press for legislation to enable them to fly
until age 65, as long as they are fit and healthy. Meanwhile, the Ohio-based
Airline Pilots Against Age Discrimination, has hired the prominent lobbying
firm of Patton and Boggs to fight for a higher retirement age. There are
bills pending in the House and Senate that would raise the age to 65.

"What is so special about foreigners that they can fly into the same U.S.
airports, fly over the same U.S. airways and in the same types of airplanes
which are full of passengers, while U.S. citizens and military veterans who
are the same age are to be grounded and prevented from earning a living in
their profession?" asked Englehardt.

Capt. Englehardt....now theres a good ALPA guy

Tejas

 

[Widow's Son]

If 42% of ALPA pilots now support changing age 60, thats over 33,000 ALPA pilots fighting for change. That makes about 10 ALPA pilots for every one Swapa pilot on the issue. Sure makes it kind of hard to say that it is the SWAPA pilots standing alone on the issue.

 

[SWA/FO]

If 42% of ALPA pilots now support changing age 60, thats over 33,000 ALPA pilots fighting for change. That makes about 10 ALPA pilots for every one Swapa pilot on the issue. Sure makes it kind of hard to say that it is the SWAPA pilots standing alone on the issue.

Now, you're just going to look for something else about Southwest/SWAPA that pi$$es you off. Now that we have this one covered. I blame ALPA for all of this, I think you should too.

 

[canyonblue]

If the rule changes it will be because of SWAPA lobbying .

Get a clue man. Name one thing that SWAPA has done that change the pilot profession. NONE. We have a few guys that are lobbying Congress using the results from a vote taken a couple of years ago where only 60% of the guys voted to spend money on AGE 65. It's not a SWAPA mandate, more like a few opportunists. There are more guys running (or using a walker) around Capitol Hill dressed in other airline uniforms, then SWA pilots. Believe it.

 

[Flopgut]

Get a clue man. Name one thing that SWAPA has done that change the pilot profession. NONE. We have a few guys that are lobbying Congress using the results from a vote taken a couple of years ago where only 60% of the guys voted to spend money on AGE 65. It's not a SWAPA mandate, more like a few opportunists. There are more guys running (or using a walker) around Capitol Hill dressed in other airline uniforms, then SWA pilots. Believe it.

SWA pilots care about only about SWA pilots. Period. I'm sure you don't think that's bad, and maybe it's not. ALPA cares about the profession as a whole, and it has proved to be a detriment.

What is fascinating to me is that this age change push continues at SWA and it may not even represent the majority. Nice job guys.

 

[Flopgut]

What a pin head!
It's the fault of all the LCC's that are the down turn of this industry?
Look in the mirror to find one of the many culprits.

It's a valid question. What are you going to do next to mess up this job? You guys going to start repairing the plane? Fueling it? Doing the pushbacks? Because that's all better than picking up the trash. You've got zero legitimacy in this debate, if your company told you to color your hair blue you would do it!

Actually, it's not all your [LCCs] fault. Wait to flatter yourself like SWA/FO continuously does. We have no national air transportation policy in this country, and that is what is hurting us. We need to think about what we are doing to our largest flag carriers ability to make money in the world marketplace. Are ultra cheap domestic airfares so important that we should throw our nations best airline brands in the junkpile?

 

[Andy]

"My big problem if I am forced to retire this coming January 29th,"
Englehardt said, "is how am I going to support my family that includes my
wife and my 15-year old son?"

This $hit pisses me off. Let's lower safety standards because these people didn't make any contingency plans and were busy spending every frickin' dollar of their 6 figure salaries.
37 years at United. This fine captain (small c) is #11 on United's seniority list. That means he's been pulling down top dollar for quite a while. And he's so piss poor with his finances that he has to ask this question?

Sounds like captain englehardt doesn't have another skillset to earn a living. On the bright side, I don't think that being a Walmart greeter requires a skillset.

Those that fail to plan plan to fail.

 

[Benhuntn]

I am so ready for this legislation to pass so we can move on. I think it is going to be great when it does and 10 yrs from now no one will care. Who on this site remembers what it was like 40 yrs ago before the age 60 rule came into effect?

Don't worry be happy you will all get your shot at that extra 1 mil.

 

[canyonblue]

SWA pilots care about only about SWA pilots. Period. I'm sure you don't think that's bad, and maybe it's not.

Nobody else is looking out for me. Every airline out there has wanted to destroy SWA since it's inception, so yes I only care about my fellow Southwest pilots and myself, everone else is the enemy trying to destroy me.

...........throw our nations best airline brands in the junkpile?

What best airline brands are you talking about? You lost all the high paying customers to NetJets and the rest. Poor service did more harm to you than SWA ever could.

 

[miles otoole]

This $hit pisses me off. Let's lower safety standards because these people didn't make any contingency plans and were busy spending every frickin' dollar of their 6 figure salaries.

Yes, but having both pilots Typed at WN makes up for any reduction in safety by pilots who are between 60 and 65.

 

[Stan]

Get a clue man. Name one thing that SWAPA has done that change the pilot profession. NONE. We have a few guys that are lobbying Congress using the results from a vote taken a couple of years ago where only 60% of the guys voted to spend money on AGE 65. It's not a SWAPA mandate, more like a few opportunists. There are more guys running (or using a walker) around Capitol Hill dressed in other airline uniforms, then SWA pilots. Believe it.

The SWAPA guys walking around Capitol Hill say they represent the 4500? members of SWAPA. The ALPA dorks walking around Capitol Hill in there uniforms only represent themselves and the ALPA lobbyists make sure congress knows this.

 

[SWA/FO]

The SWAPA guys walking around Capitol Hill say they represent the 4500? members of SWAPA. The ALPA dorks walking around Capitol Hill in there uniforms only represent themselves and the ALPA lobbyists make sure congress knows this.

See there you have it! We have over 5000 so SWAPA is not talking about all of us either!

 

[Stan]

See there you have it! We have over 5000 so SWAPA is not talking about all of us either!

Dude, sorry I don't know the up to date pilot #'s at SWA. My apologies.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

What is fascinating to me is that this age change push continues at SWA and it may not even represent the majority.

Actually, it does represent the majority of those that took the time to vote. If this bothers you, tell us how you handle those at "your house" that don't participate.

Tejas

 

[SWA/FO]

Dude, sorry I don't know the up to date pilot #'s at SWA. My apologies

Thats ok dude..... They are probably saying something like "the majority of our pilots want it changed"

 

[Flopgut]

Actually, it does represent the majority of those that took the time to vote. If this bothers you, tell us how you handle those at "your house" that don't participate.

Tejas

It represents the majority of those that took the time to vote...a He!! of a long time ago! ALPA freshened up the vote with a very comprehensive survey PRIOR to the recent push. Sounds like if SWAPA did the same, things might change.

Does SWA have a pilot base in SLC? CALALPA legislative affairs has told me that SWA is receiving disproportionate favor in this cause through Sen Hatch in UT.

 

[Flopgut]

What best airline brands are you talking about? You lost all the high paying customers to NetJets and the rest. Poor service did more harm to you than SWA ever could.

We've (legacies) lost a lot of business to NJA. However, we are demonstratively superior to them in price and demonstratively superior to you in service. There should be a spot in the market for us going forward.

There was once a common fabric that made this profession a sort of "society" or "guild". One element is/was age 60 retirement. Another was the way our contracts sort of overlapped or patterned each others' (usually ALPA) contract. That might be gone; maybe it should be. But remember, all it's going to take is for another to come along with a whole new level of selfish ambition and change it again for everybody. My position is: "hey, this pretty much sucks for all of us". You get to say: "I work for the company that started this".