UNBELIEVABLE! - CAL ALPA supports change to Age 60 Rule

[Tejas-Jet]

Many CAL pilots have a long and distinguished history of F'ing other pilots just to get something for themselves. Understand that fact and this shouldn't surprise you either. Gee, SCABS want to throw younger guys under the bus? Go figure.

I don't know if you remember or not, but the CAL strike was almost 25 years ago. I don't even work there but common sense would tell me that the remaining scabs are a very small miniority of the total number of Pilots at CAL.

Even as a voting block ( assuming they all think the same) wouldn't give them a majority.

Anyway, I still think this vote is GREAT !!!

 

[ToThePain]

Let me ask those against the rule change just what is your objection? Is there any imperical evidence that pilots are not capable of meeting medical standards beyond age 60? Is there any imperical evidence that there would be a higher bust rate on checkrides for those over 65? Just what are your objections based on? The only arguement I've heard that isn't complete Bulls**t is that it will delay YOUR upgrade/transition/payraise. It is the very same greed that you accuse the senior pilots of guiding their decision. Did anyone notice that your said upgrade/transition/payraise will still happen, just at a higher rate as you acquire longevity? And those last 5 years, should you choose to accept them, will also be at a higher rate. But I will be assuming that all objectors will voluntarily retire at 60, right? Or are your arguements just oral diahrrea?
This retirement age was determined, as previously stated, in 1949 and was established at the request of airline management. It was created simply to hold down payroll of all the WW2 vets that made up the bulk of the seniority lists of the day. It was a purely financial decision, backed up with smoke and mirrors medical science. Even if it was remotely applicable in 1949 the average life expectancy of a US citizen has increased almost 20 years since then. All credible contributors agree that there is no longer any medical reason to require retirement at age 60.

So, have at it, gentlemen and ladies. Come up with something other than "get the f**k out of MY seat" and I'll be happy to listen. Otherwise, wallow in the same greed that you accuse others of.

This is not to hard but I will take a stab......
I’ve grown tired of reading all the reasons why “junior guys” should want to work till 65. We will make more money and have more saved up for retirement. I decided to run the numbers myself. This is based off CAL current contract, which is a concessionary contract and will get better which will further skew the numbers against the junior guys.
These calculations are based off:
1. 2008 contract rates:
2. Figuring 20% 401k (includes companies 12% defined contribution)
3. 76 hours guaranteed (also a low number but that’s our reserve B number) any increase in hours will increase the difference between delay and no delay.
4. 6% compounded interest over the career to the age of 60.
5. All these numbers are base on a 3 year delay in upgrade. (Just a guess, no one really knows the exact affect, obviously more than 3 makes it worse on the junior guys, less makes it better)

No delay-
Total salary earned $3,096,968
Total 401k savings $1,257,321
Total $4,354,289

With delay
Total salary earned $2,821,468
Total 401k savings $1,182,318
Total $4,003,786

Total difference $350, 503. This means that I would have to work an additional 2 ½ years to break even with the loss of income putting me at 62 ½ years of age, essentially working for no pay given that I would have had that with no delays. That leaves me 2 ½ years to “make more money” These numbers are all conservative, you can see that with a better contract the differences in total income would increase. This also does not include the quality of life issues especially with PBS. There are also several recent studies that show the longer you work the average person has a shorter life span. I have listed a current report ALPA has. Here is the link to it, very interesting: http://www.mytruebrain.com/Creativity%20&%20Longevity.pdf
I don’t plan on working past age 60. I am planning on the age change to happen and am increasing my retirement savings to 24% a year (including CAL contributions) to offset this loss in wages. I shouldn’t have to.

 

[xjhawk]

now my two cents for the idiot who is angry about the change in the age 60 rule. lets see, most of us do not have defined pensions, some of us do not even have much of a 401K (since anyone like me has been stuck as an Fo getting crappy pay and before that I was busy getting crappy pay while serving my country for years, oh yes and going to college). Oh yes and some of us think we will NEED to work past 60 in order to survive.

I know the reasons why a lot of pilots do not want the rule changed, its typical pilot greed and idiotic reasoning. You want the speedy seniority when all these guys retire, you want movement, you want to relax and live in your retirement home at 60, all these things. And in wanting this, you are forcing guys to look for jobs at 60 when they are forced out, even though they are medically able to fly . ALPA has done many things, and by not supporting the change to the rule is about as low as they can be. For those of you who want to retire at 60, there is nothing stopping you, just do not make up reasons why I should have to.

Oh cudos to CAL MEC, I wish XJ's had that kind of leadership in our MEC

 

[Whiskerbizkit]

I don't know if you remember or not, but the CAL strike was almost 25 years ago. I don't even work there but common sense would tell me that the remaining scabs are a very small miniority of the total number of Pilots at CAL.

Even as a voting block ( assuming they all think the same) wouldn't give them a majority.

Anyway, I still think this vote is GREAT !!!

Oh no, there are LOTS of scabs still there.

 

[ToThePain]

now my two cents for the idiot who is angry about the change in the age 60 rule. lets see, most of us do not have defined pensions, some of us do not even have much of a 401K (since anyone like me has been stuck as an Fo getting crappy pay and before that I was busy getting crappy pay while serving my country for years, oh yes and going to college). Oh yes and some of us think we will NEED to work past 60 in order to survive.

I know the reasons why a lot of pilots do not want the rule changed, its typical pilot greed and idiotic reasoning. You want the speedy seniority when all these guys retire, you want movement, you want to relax and live in your retirement home at 60, all these things. And in wanting this, you are forcing guys to look for jobs at 60 when they are forced out, even though they are medically able to fly . ALPA has done many things, and by not supporting the change to the rule is about as low as they can be. For those of you who want to retire at 60, there is nothing stopping you, just do not make up reasons why I should have to.

Oh cudos to CAL MEC, I wish XJ's had that kind of leadership in our MEC

I'm not sure is this was directed at me considering it was written directly after my post but here goes: Is it any less greedy that you want to work past 60 and delay others what was expected according to the rules that we have all been hired in so that you can make more money because your company doesn't offer a 401k and you won't have enough to retire with at 60? How about the fact that most of the Captains that retire over the next 10 years will get social security while others like myself will probably never see it. Changing the rule will force many FO's to HAVE to work till 65. Are you aware that they are already pushing for age 70 in Europe? Once the age has been changed once it will be easily changed again, and it will when social security gets moved to 67. Have you seen any of the reports of what the age change may do to our insurance and disability plans? Do you understand what the airlines will do to wages if this passes? The over all percentage increase per year and postition (FO) will be smaller.
By the way I also served my country (10 years active and now on year 2 of the reserves) and paid my way through college while also getting my MBA.

 

[Jonny Sacko]

I know the reasons why a lot of pilots do not want the rule changed, its typical pilot greed and idiotic reasoning. You want the speedy seniority when all these guys retire, you want movement, you want to relax and live in your retirement home at 60, all these things. And in wanting this, you are forcing guys to look for jobs at 60 when they are forced out, even though they are medically able to fly.

You mean like you did, you greedy pompous arrogant ass.

 

[pkober]

Oh no, there are LOTS of scabs still there.

Define lots. I looked at our seniority list and us normal non scabs far out weigh those low lifes. The scabs point of view is never taken seriously and since we out number them it will mean even less now.

In the end remember that ALPA will do what is best for increasing their payroll and bank account. Our desires are of little concern to ALPA national.

Why are pilots who don't work for CAL so concerned about what goes on at CAL? Last I checked we don't fly A320's.

 

[COpilot]

Oh no, there are LOTS of scabs still there.

Tell us how many are there; how many are on the total list? We would love to know the number.

Come on smart a$$...

For the record I'm 45, '87 hire, and pro 60.

 

[Pocono Pilot]

Tell us how many are there; how many are on the total list? We would love to know the number.

I think it may be down to less than a thousand by now, but they do control the union, the chief pilot offices and the training center.

 

[catIIIc]

I think it may be down to less than a thousand by now, but they do control the union, the chief pilot offices and the training center.

There is not one SCAB working for the union right now . Things are definately going to change here. Ponoco you made your decision move on, we know you hate CAL and think you are better then everyone here, so be it. People like you will eventually get what is coming to you one way or another. Good luck with your career.