Urgent Action Required To Keep Age 60!

[sydeseet]

Dairy Air,
Corporate aviation does NOT have the best safety record, in fact is is far worse than 121. However, neither one is shameful by any measure. I'm speaking as a corporate pilot who just read the latest numbers a few weeks ago.

Everyone else,
I cannot believe that some of us are asking those nearing 60 to retire so that furloughed pilots may return to work sooner. How pathetically short sighted we really are. Do you honestly believe that said 747 captain making 200K was blessed with that position by some sort of divine placement??? Don't you suppose he/she has probably been furloughed a time or two, been on strike, been displaced, been JA'd, sat reserve, and all the other goodies of this career?! They EARNED that seat boys and girls just like the rest of us are EARNING that seat as we speak. They earned the seat through years of toleration of BS, hard work, a few lucky breaks, and playing the game. It is morally, leagally, medically, and logically wrong to say "happy birthday captain, now get out........." If said pilot is able to pass the same First Class Physical they did when they were 40, 50, & 59+1/2 then they should be welcomed to stay, thanked for the experience and please try to pass it on to the next generation who WILL get their turn sooner or later.
I'm furloughed 121 and I'm just as unhappy about it as anyone. I am thankful everyday that I have the oppurtunity to keep flying and earn a living during this mess. But I want to return to work the right way when it is truly time to do so. The age 60 rule is outdated, inappropriate, and WRONG and we all know it. The 747 pilot didn't cause any of this yet it seems that many of you want to tell them how much money they should earn and when they should leave their job. Like somehow in some warped way that would allow you to upgrade sooner, make a little more money, and fix all of YOUR problems. Who is the seflish person in this equation???? The age 60 rule affects us as a group, whether today, next year, or in 30+ years. Let's do the right thing in this case so that our group, our stance, and our future is strengthened. Look down the runway, not at the pavement directly in front of you.

Just an opinion.

 

[46Driver]

Same as above, thanks for the heads up. I wrote in as well. Regardless of who is in the majority, it is discrimination which makes it illegal.

 

[tdvalve]

I'd like to see the reactions of the 60-99 year old Senators when they read comments about needing a babysitter.

 

[Boeingman]

I agree that at some time in the future we should eliminate the age 60 rule. Now however, is not the right time. We have thousands of pilots out on the streets and I'm supposed to feel sympathetic to the 747 captain making 200k a year who wants to fly 5 more years to get more retirement money? Give me a break. Wait a few years when the furloughed pilots are back on the job and then increase the retirement age. There is not reason to change this rule at a time when so many pilots are on the streets. Let's stabilize the industry a little before we start shaking things up like this.

And we call those who scab opportunists.

 

[Andy Neill]

I think that since 1959, the national health has improved. I believe that ailments which were once fatal are now easily controlled with medication or surgical procedures. I think that since 1959, qualifying age for receipt of Social Security has increased in response to the trends cited. I think the flight deck workload has decreased since 1959.

Do YOU think today's 60-63 year old is better equipped to handle airline work than his/her counterpart was in 1959? I do.

 

[Boeingman]

CCDiscoB,


Change the SS and medicare ages? Talk about a generation used to entitlements!

When you look at the thousands upon thousands of dollars over a career put into the system, it is only fair to be able to benefit from that immediatley upon retirement. Especially if it is forced.

If not, refund my money, stop taking it out of my pay and I'll worry about myself.

 

[DairyAir]

Sydeseat

Thank you for pointing out my mistake, my information came from a report that I read a few years ago and the data may be a bit dated, but I guess the point I was trying to make is that very few accidents have occured soley because of the incapacitation of either pilot due to his or her age. Stupitity, ignorance of procedure, laziness, these factors cause many of the accidents that are attributed to pilot error and if you did study the ages of all of these pilots you would probably find that more of them are younger than older. P.S. thanks for supporting my arguments regarding age 60.

 

[FD109]

Say that again?

Actually, Al Haynes did have a baby sitter. The much younger DC-10 instructor pilot who came up from his seat in first class, and took over flying the airplane with nothing but the throttles.

michael707767,

You must not have read the same accident report and or listed to the same tapes I did. From that and from talking to all 4 of the people in that cockpit it sure seemed to be a team effort that probably couldn't have been done (or not as well) without all of them working together.

I guess you were trying to make a point that the younger guy saved the day because he was younger (otherwise why bring up his age). Well, if so, you DID NOT make your point!

I've worked with, trained, and checked a lot of pilots over the years and I've never seen one single instance of competence determined by age.

 

[CRJ200FO]

And we call those who scab opportunists.

Too many people through the word scab around nowdays for just about anything. It's beginning to lose its true meaning. You would compare what I said to scabbing? I think you need to read Flying The Line a few more times so that you can see what scabbing is really about. I would sooner die than cross a picket line. This has nothing to do with that. We need to do what is best for the pilot community in general. We need to see the big picture.

You would increase the retirement age while thousands of highly qualified pilots struggle to get by while they're on furlough. That shows a complete lacking of common sense. As a pilot group we need to do what is best for the majority. Even for the pilots reaching 60 that are not the highest paid in the industry, they will still get their 401k and pension. I'm sure the furloughed pilots out there would love to have some sort of income right now.

For all the pilots reaching retirement age out there, I'm not saying that you make too much money or that you didn't work hard to get where you are as someone else accused me of saying. All I'm saying is that there will be a time in a few years when this will not have such a negative effect on the industy. Let's wait until then to increase the retirement age.

Flame away!!

 

[FD109]

The Majority Rules? Screw the Minority?

As a pilot group we need to do what is best for the majority. Even for the pilots reaching 60 that are not the highest paid in the industry, they will still get their 401k and pension. I'm sure the furloughed pilots out there would love to have some sort of income right now.

For all the pilots reaching retirement age out there, I'm not saying that you make too much money or that you didn't work hard to get where you are as someone else accused me of saying. All I'm saying is that there will be a time in a few years when this will not have such a negative effect on the industy. Let's wait until then to increase the retirement age.

Flame away!!

Better be careful what you wish for!! If the majority is truly entitled to screw the minority, you better get ready to kiss your RJ goodbye, because the majority pilots will probably take it away from you.

 

[FD109]

What'd you say?

I said earlier, the majority should be heard and we all know who they are. Nowwhere did I say that the majority will be listened to. At least half of all seniority lists are made up of FOs and FEs but who really runs the show?

Michael,

I don't mean to be rude, but what the he11 did you just try to say?

I don't know what you tried to say, but what you actually said could be twisted around to mean almost anything. Have you considered going into politics?

 

[skydash]

I will always support the elimination of the age 60 rule. Why?? I will not tolerate a group of cluless politicians who could'nt even figure out how to open the window on my 737 telling me when I have to quit. I fly from BWI to SEA 10 minutes before my 60th birthday and am legal,but 1 minte after 12:00,I'm not?? BULL S*IT!!If I have to retire at 60,then by God so do they!!By what cockpit experience do they base this rule on??How much time behind the controls do they have to formulate their ruling concerning me??If you can pass a full medical&checkride at 59,then what the hell differnce does 60 make?? NONE!! I guess all medical doctors will have to retire at 60 then too,huh?? Give me a break.

 

[DoinTime]

Over the past ten years I have had the privilege of watching my father grow through retirement (age 55-65). The man is as healthy as a horse. He still runs his annual marathon within 20 minutes of what he was running it ten years ago and could probably maintain a first class medical for another 15 years. The thing about him that I have been baffled by over the past ten years is the rate of mental degradation. My father has gone from what I consider mentally quick and open to new ideas to slow and stubborn. He is also the first one to tell me that my observations are unfounded and that he is twice the man he was ten years ago.

Being fit to captain an airliner goes way beyond the ability to fend off a heart attack. Until testing of mental capability is available, and enforced, I am sticking with age 60 as a dividing line.

 

[FD109]

My father has gone from what I consider mentally quick and open to new ideas to slow and stubborn. He is also the first one to tell me that my observations are unfounded and that he is twice the man he was ten years ago.

Being fit to captain an airliner goes way beyond the ability to fend off a heart attack. Until testing of mental capability is available, and enforced, I am sticking with age 60 as a dividing line.

I don't know your father, and I don't know if your opinion of his mental capabilities is accruate or not. Could he pass a PC or a line check?

I do know that I have given PC's to some young pilots who weren't as mentally sharp as some older pilots. Trying to ensure competence by picking a random number like 60 years, or 48 years and 3 months, or whatever meaningless, random number you want to pick, doesn't work.

I have never seen one single instance where a pilot's competence could be determined by his/her age.

 

[tdvalve]

DoinTime :

You need to insist that your father receive a complete medical evaluation. Loss of mental agility does not normally result from aging until reaching the late eighties.

 

[asacap]

The age 60 rule has been around for a long time. Don't tell me you had no idea about it when you started flying. Now that you are close to 60, you wan't to change the rules to benefit yourself and screw others.

To DairyAir,

Your statement about corporate aviation being the safest is false. According to the NTSB, in 2001, the airlines (scheduled 121) averaged an accident 0.20 every 100,000 hours flown. Corporate has 2.118 (scheduled 135). Thats almost eleven times as many accidents. These statistics are on the internet at www.ntsb.gov.

This is a safety issue! This rule must not change.

 

[cdog]

We don't have a thing to say about it, they (121, ALPA, gov.) just let us think we do. It has nothing to do with health, it's all economics. 121 managment will never let it happen.

I work with alot of guys in the ag business that are way past 60, it's way more demanding than any 121/135 operation and they do just fine. I know several firebomber pilots that are way past 60, they do just fine, also way more demanding than airline ops, age has nothing to do with it.

I'm not far off myself, but I'll quit when I feel like it.

 

[FD109]

I try not to let people piss me off!!!

The age 60 rule has been around for a long time. Don't tell me you had no idea about it when you started flying. Now that you are close to 60, you wan't to change the rules to benefit yourself and screw others.

To DairyAir,

Your statement about corporate aviation being the safest is false. According to the NTSB, in 2001, the airlines (scheduled 121) averaged an accident 0.20 every 100,000 hours flown. Corporate has 2.118 (scheduled 135). Thats almost eleven times as many accidents. These statistics are on the internet at www.ntsb.gov.

This is a safety issue! This rule must not change.

I hate to tell you this, I guess you haven't been around very long, but people have been fighting the age 60 rule since the first week in went into effect. I guess YOU didn't know that.

Age 60 is not a safety issue and you know it. You present one, just one, valid reason to conclude that people suddenly become unable to fly an airliner safely because they have just passed their 60th birthday and I'll shut up about it.

If you want to protect your seniority by continuing the discrimination against others, fine. Be honest though, just say it like it is.

 

[RJFlyer]

I just find it interesting that virtually EVERY Part 121 pilot flying today was hired under the "Age 60 Rule," knew it was there, and reaped its benefits. Yet now the old farts want to change the rule to benefit them some more. The rule was there, they knew it, and should have planned for it.

Age discrimination? If you put ANY age as a dividing line, it technically becomes 'discrimination.' I'm in my 30s, I want all that money I put into Social Security. What? I have to wait til I'm 65? That's discrimination! I go to the movies, and demand my senior discount. What? I have to be over 55? That's discrimination! Get real. There is discrimination everywhere, if you want to get picky.

Everyone who was potentially discriminated against (those who were flying when the age 60 rule went into effect, and were subsequently forced to retire) are long gone. Everyone flying today is playing under the same rules, and has been since they were hired. Therefore, nobody is being discriminated against.

 

[Jeff G]

The age 60 rule has been around for a long time. Don't tell me you had no idea about it when you started flying. Now that you are close to 60, you wan't to change the rules to benefit yourself and screw others.

asacap (and RJ flyer):

I am 34. I think the age 60 rule is a bad idea, even though I knew when joined this industry that the rule was there. None of that precludes me from trying to change what I perceive as an injustice. I'm willing to do this even if it hurts me in the short term. In the long term it will have no effect; things will adjust.

By your logic, we should never try to change the status quo, rather we should just never initiate anything that has any aspect we don't agree with. Tell you what, the next time you're up for a contract, don't argue for higher wages. After all, you knew what the pay was when you signed up. Why do you want it to change now?

To DairyAir,

Your statement about corporate aviation being the safest is false. According to the NTSB, in 2001, the airlines (scheduled 121) averaged an accident 0.20 every 100,000 hours flown. Corporate has 2.118 (scheduled 135). Thats almost eleven times as many accidents. These statistics are on the internet at www.ntsb.gov.

This is a safety issue! This rule must not change.

You strike out here too. Since when is scheduled 135 corporate flying? Part 135 is air taxi.

The NTSB doesn't break out corporate flying here; it's all lumped under part 91, so this stat is meaningless. But you're right, corporate flying as a whole isn't quite as statistically safe as the airlines. However, operations like Netjets and other large corporate entities have an accident rate indistinguishable from airline flying. The difference in accident rates in corporate flying has to do with variations in standardization and risks associated with ad hoc flights to far flung small airports. There is no documentation to suggest that pilot age is related to the corporate accident rate. Your strident calls for status quo ante on the basis of preserving safety are just unsubstantiated blather. It has never been about safety, only politics and career expectations.