United Pilot Dies After Inflight Heart Attack

[Flopgut]

Dan: Did the Akaka Bill ever get passed? The pre 65 effort to get full PBGC benefits for retired pilots who didn't make the cutoff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Dan Roman]

I've got cancer right now; already had an operation and am waiting on radiation therapy. Odds are good that I'll fully recover and fly again. My wife's classified as a wounded warrior due to injuries in Iraq and is undergoing Medical Evaluation Board where she will either be medically retired from the Air Force or separated without retirement. She will not be able to work in the civilian world due to her injuries. I have to help her get dressed and undressed daily.

?

Andy, with all due respect you are making a point why the opportunity to fly to 65 was the right thing to do. As your post points out, anything can happen to anybody at anytime. In the course of a career no one is immune from bad luck that can devastate their life or finances. Many many really good people need to work longer for 1000's of various reasons. Good on you that you can go out at 60. (Unless you want to be pathologically hypocritical, which I don't think you are) but really difficult things can happen to anyone. Your challenges should open your eyes that their is lot more important things the a couple extra years of seniority and should put in perspective that their are plenty of pilots that aren't "guilty of poor planning and should have known better".
I mean really, elsewhere on here we've got some guy who didn't 't upgrade at SWA after 7 years screaming he is a victim when 1000's of upper 50's pilots have been totally screwed and many of them have stories more tragic than yours. But the simple fact is life's full of ups and downs and age 65 helps a lot more people than it hurts. It just created more opportunity for more pilots to better deal with whatever life throws at them.

Godspeed and best of luck to you and your wife.

 

[Dan Roman]

Dan: Did the Akaka Bill ever get passed? The pre 65 effort to get full PBGC benefits for retired pilots who didn't make the cutoff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Yes, but how sad is that to be reduced to PBGC mins even if he managed to get it a little higher.
BTW age 65 helped a lot of AQ folks that came here after getting raked over the coals. They came to HA and pilots in their fifties are getting a 15% DC matching and the ability to max out a 401k. They can go to 65 and make up much of what was stolen from them at no fault of their own.
AQ was a very sad deal, the older ones that came here are going to be fine thanks to age 65 and our 15% DC as well as a 401k. Without it they would have been hurting.

 

[Flopgut]

Uh, yeah I'm having a hard time understanding you. Probably my fault on this issue: The Akaka Bill was to get already retired pilots who's pensions went to the PBGC a full 47k and change instead of the 28k for retiring early. Those retired pilots are still stuck at 28k, correct? The Akaka legislation went unfulfilled.

You have a strange view on this career IMHO. You really don't have any regard for another pilots desire to see a career advance, do you?

This "no fault of their own" stuff I don't get. It's everyone's responsibility to have a plan. CAL pilots made what they made in the 80s and 90s. I know a lot of pilots who crossed and they've done pretty well. The guys who are hurting are the ones who spent all their time dreaming about what someone else made at another airline. Idk. Guys like you are a real problem. You don't see it and you never will.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Andy]

Andy, with all due respect you are making a point why the opportunity to fly to 65 was the right thing to do. As your post points out, anything can happen to anybody at anytime. In the course of a career no one is immune from bad luck that can devastate their life or finances. Many many really good people need to work longer for 1000's of various reasons. Good on you that you can go out at 60. (Unless you want to be pathologically hypocritical, which I don't think you are) but really difficult things can happen to anyone. Your challenges should open your eyes that their is lot more important things the a couple extra years of seniority and should put in perspective that their are plenty of pilots that aren't "guilty of poor planning and should have known better".
I mean really, elsewhere on here we've got some guy who didn't 't upgrade at SWA after 7 years screaming he is a victim when 1000's of upper 50's pilots have been totally screwed and many of them have stories more tragic than yours. But the simple fact is life's full of ups and downs and age 65 helps a lot more people than it hurts. It just created more opportunity for more pilots to better deal with whatever life throws at them.

Godspeed and best of luck to you and your wife.

Dan, any airline pilot in the last 50 years that was or is counting on a defined benefit plan is dumber than a box of rocks. Pull up a list of defunct airlines. Do a google search of that airline adding 'PBGC'. Note that all of those defined benefit plans got taken over by the PBGC.

A pilot losing his defined benefit plan to the PBGC is NOT something new that happened after 9/11; it's happened for a very long time.

Any airline pilot who wasn't/isn't maxing out his IRA and setting aside a minimum of an additional 10% of their salary is not very bright and is one of the poorest excuses for raising the retirement age that I've ever heard.

Every pilot out there should know that (s)he needs to live well below their current income level because no one is immune to having something bad happen to them. I don't excuse any pilot for not saving a large percentage of their income until they have a net worth in excess of $1 million. And in today's low interest environment, that number needs to be closer to $2 million net worth. Until then, they shouldn't be buying planes, boats, motorcycles, second houses, second wives, or any other toys. It's that simple.
In this business, one bad CEO and senior management can wreck an airline. If a second bad management team follows, the company will usually find itself in chapter 11. A third bad management team in a row and it's chapter 7. All of that can happen to ANY airline in less than a decade.

 

[Dan Roman]

Well as my posts indicate, I know lots of AQ pilots that got a second chance and are going to have a decent retirement that would not have been possible with out the change to 65. No debate there. I also see we're "your side" of the argument is being made with examples of a SWA guy upset because he didn't upgrade at 7 years. I'm blown away by that one. So yes, a couple years of slower progression balanced out by the chance to work more if they want hardly seems as serious to me as a guy 60 years old being forced out of work with a gutted pension and not being old enough to collect SS.

 

[Dan Roman]

Dan, any airline pilot in the last 50 years that was or is counting on a defined benefit plan is dumber than a box of rocks. Pull up a list of defunct airlines. Do a google search of that airline adding 'PBGC'. Note that all of those defined benefit plans got taken over by the PBGC.

A pilot losing his defined benefit plan to the PBGC is NOT something new that happened after 9/11; it's happened for a very long time.

Any airline pilot who wasn't/isn't maxing out his IRA and setting aside a minimum of an additional 10% of their salary is not very bright and is one of the poorest excuses for raising the retirement age that I've ever heard.

Every pilot out there should know that (s)he needs to live well below their current income level because no one is immune to having something bad happen to them. I don't excuse any pilot for not saving a large percentage of their income until they have a net worth in excess of $1 million. And in today's low interest environment, that number needs to be closer to $2 million net worth. Until then, they shouldn't be buying planes, boats, motorcycles, second houses, second wives, or any other toys. It's that simple.
In this business, one bad CEO and senior management can wreck an airline. If a second bad management team follows, the company will usually find itself in chapter 11. A third bad management team in a row and it's chapter 7. All of that can happen to ANY airline in less than a decade.

Your preaching to the choir about saving as much as possible in a DC plan no matter who you work for. But it's a little high and mighty ( pun intended) to think anyone's portfolio can accept the loss of an A plan and not feel it. That's a huge hit and flying to 65 is a totally understandable response.
Pretty harsh judgement of your fellow pilots. Parents like to do things like pay for college, weddings or whatever. What if you have a child and they want to go to graduate school? Kind of nice to be in a position to help them. What if you have a child that has a head injury...again you want to be there for them.
Everyone has their own story, an extra 5 years to be productive in our chosen career is an opportunity for everyone.

 

[Twotter Driver]

I've been at CAL for 8 years now. During this time period I can recall 3 inflight deaths, 4 inflight heart attacks( survived) requiring diversion, and 5 deaths while on a layover. One guy died in the line at customs in sjo (this same guy got revived in the jetway in EWR only 2 years prior after suffering a major heart attack, he was 62 when he passed. Of the inflight deaths, the pilots ages were 59, 61, and 63(almost 64). Food for thought.

 

[Flopgut]

Dan: DC plans do not favor younger pilots. They favor all pilots equally. I know you have a hard time with that because to you "equal" is not fair. You don't feel you're getting your fair share if a young guy isn't taking a hit. If you care to disagree with that just consider your own account of how things are working out for the AQ pilots.

Funny thing about grad school and weddings for kids: those things keep marching on. Most guys I know at that stage of their life are doing it on FO pay. Just like this kid you have such contempt for with his welder father. We're talking about SWA pay here. Imagine what he could do for him with that money. Instead he can't move up and windows of opportunity will be missed. So a wrinkly old bastard doesn't have to sell his toys.

Anyway, I'm sure no one is going to change your mind. Just keep this in the front of it: it's over. Retirements have started again. It won't change again. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. Tell your friends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[densoo]

I've been at CAL for 8 years now. During this time period I can recall 3 inflight deaths, 4 inflight heart attacks( survived) requiring diversion, and 5 deaths while on a layover. One guy died in the line at customs in sjo (this same guy got revived in the jetway in EWR only 2 years prior after suffering a major heart attack, he was 62 when he passed. Of the inflight deaths, the pilots ages were 59, 61, and 63(almost 64). Food for thought.

This kind of data, more than anything else, could stop the age 67 consideration.

 

[The Prussian]

This kind of data, more than anything else, could stop the age 67 consideration.

Fear not....I don't think age 67 has anywhere near the support that raising age 60 did. JMHO.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Your previous words:

I have thrown you multiple olive branches over the years.

This is totally untrue.

 

[waveflyer]

This pretty is pretty typical of the argument the anti 65 crowd makes. Thousands of pilots had their pensions stolen with little warning and at an age were it's impossible to save enough in DC plan to make it up. The retirement plans for most we're changed to DC plans that favor younger pilots. Younger pilots now have the option of working to age 65 if they want and every year later in their career means huge gains to their DC plan.
Yet you are incensed that you didn't upgrade after 7 years with your company and had to spend an extra few years in the right seat. That sounds pretty "selfish and elitist " to me. Let a guy at 59 be kicked to the street (and denied Social Security till he is 62) just after his pension has been stolen rather than wait a couple years to upgrade. Amazing.

Dan, do you really believe this??^^^

Let me ask you? Has this group of boomers been good stewards of the career? Or has it grown weaker and weaker?

And don't get me started on how the republicans voted in influenced how those pensions were stolen-
How many then 59 year old captains weren't republicans who voted in the same people who didn't protect their earned pensions?

 

[Quimby]

Dan, any airline pilot in the last 50 years that was or is counting on a defined benefit plan is dumber than a box of rocks. Pull up a list of defunct airlines. Do a google search of that airline adding 'PBGC'. Note that all of those defined benefit plans got taken over by the PBGC.

A pilot losing his defined benefit plan to the PBGC is NOT something new that happened after 9/11; it's happened for a very long time.

Any airline pilot who wasn't/isn't maxing out his IRA and setting aside a minimum of an additional 10% of their salary is not very bright and is one of the poorest excuses for raising the retirement age that I've ever heard.

Every pilot out there should know that (s)he needs to live well below their current income level because no one is immune to having something bad happen to them. I don't excuse any pilot for not saving a large percentage of their income until they have a net worth in excess of $1 million. And in today's low interest environment, that number needs to be closer to $2 million net worth. Until then, they shouldn't be buying planes, boats, motorcycles, second houses, second wives, or any other toys. It's that simple.
In this business, one bad CEO and senior management can wreck an airline. If a second bad management team follows, the company will usually find itself in chapter 11. A third bad management team in a row and it's chapter 7. All of that can happen to ANY airline in less than a decade.

Well said.

 

[Dan Roman]

Dan, do you really believe this??^^^

Let me ask you? Has this group of boomers been good stewards of the career? Or has it grown weaker and weaker?

And don't get me started on how the republicans voted in influenced how those pensions were stolen-
How many then 59 year old captains weren't republicans who voted in the same people who didn't protect their earned pensions?

Almost didn't see this Wave since this thread got moved.
Believe what? Clearly DC plans favor the young. The longer you are in them the more you have the compound interest in your favor. That's a no brainer and now having the option to work till 65 means that much more time if someone wants to put more in their plan. The other point I made is the example of the many AQ pilots here at HAL, through no fault of their own, had to start over, many in their 40's or 50's. Our 15% DC and a separate 401K account means they can recover nicely by flying to 65. I know their story and to say they are selfish or greedy is ridiculous. A SWA pilot complaining that he didn't upgrade after 7 years and would rather have seen those guys forced out at 60 is pathologically narcissistic.

 

[Flopgut]

Almost didn't see this Wave since this thread got moved.
Believe what? Clearly DC plans favor the young. The longer you are in them the more you have the compound interest in your favor. That's a no brainer and now having the option to work till 65 means that much more time if someone wants to put more in their plan. The other point I made is the example of the many AQ pilots here at HAL, through no fault of their own, had to start over, many in their 40's or 50's. Our 15% DC and a separate 401K account means they can recover nicely by flying to 65. I know their story and to say they are selfish or greedy is ridiculous. A SWA pilot complaining that he didn't upgrade after 7 years and would rather have seen those guys forced out at 60 is pathologically narcissistic.

So DC plans favor young "clearly", but the AQ pilots recovered "nicely" with them!? Interesting...

DC are a level playing field. If you happen to be younger then you'll get more, but they're good for old guys as your own example shows. What you reveal in this post is the contempt you have for a fair deal and the bias you have against younger pilots. With you, it's as though any young guy ought to be happy to take any hit that helps an old pilot. Never goes the other way... Hmmmm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Flopgut]

A SWA pilot complaining that he didn't upgrade after 7 years and would rather have seen those guys forced out at 60 is pathologically narcissistic.

I'd say timing is more important than (possible) extra years at the end of career. Having had his timing stolen by age 65, and having a merger hit at almost the same time, the last five years are probably a wash for this SWA guy. I mean, he'll work those last 5 for free just to get the earnings he would have. Time value of money trumps compound interest in this case Dan. Not only that, he (and all of us) will be 5 years older. Can't get those years back. We're all being force fed this sacrifice so a bunch of old guys, who squandered the timing and time value of dollars they had, can have a mulligan!? And we're narcissistic!? GMAFB




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[WYOMINGPILOT]

And yet, as Asiana proved, these highly fit, medically superior pilots managed to ramp strike at SFO!!!

As if US pilots have a better safety record. Don't be so hypocritical as to stereotype all Asian pilots as what happened in SFO. Take a good hard look at:
1. UPS A-300 recently in BHM.
2. Southwest at LaGuardia recently
3.American Airlines 737NG in Jamaica.

Accidents happen for a myriad of reasons. Asia has one of the best flying safety records in the world. The bigger point of this thread is the failure of FAA medicals to adequately assess the pilots via a thorough screening. Asia has much stricter standards with flight physicals and a much lower pass rate with extensive testing which will not weed out all problems but greatly eliminate pilots from dying at the controls.