Well, 5 more years in the right seat.

[Quimby]

Maybe you should fly cargo

, so you can get that big ego of yours in the airplane!

umm, I think he does.

 

[avbug]

You one of those guys with 3 houses, a couple boats, and a few ex-wives???

Am I supposed to feel sympathy or anger, or ambivilance there? Quite frankly, I don't own a house, don't own a boat, and do have an ex-wife, whom I don't own either. I'm someone who's been professionally flying since I was in High School, and who will continue flying anything and everything I can as long as he can.

If you don't like it, tough.

I'm just a little tired of sitting in the right seat. Been through one bankrupt/liquidated airline before coming here. Been in the right seat 9 years now with absolutely NO forward progression other than retirements. Now that is going to come to an end for 5 years.

Sounds like you need to find a better job. You were probably all kinds of proud of yourself when you got that job. You weren't one of those got-my-first-jet-job-props-are-for-boats kids, were you? Not that it matters. Now you have the opportunity to work longer, earn longer, and make up for the social security you'll pay for but never get. Be happy.

Once again the cargo carriers get the crap end of the stick.

Join a carrier that upgrades you faster and quit whining. Problem solved.

I'm out at 55 regardless. I want to enjoy retirement.

See? Your problem is solved already.

Have you ever seen any of these cargo geezers that are close to 60? They look and act like 90. They're not all that way, but most of them.

Hmmm. Sounds like you're describing...YOU!

But the whores who fly every single day of the month look like walking death.

You're still young enough to learn to mind your own business. Because a man is willing to work and takes the opportunity as he sees fit, you have to insult him? Is it really any of your business?

Simmer your punk ass down, open your history books and learn that the age 65 limit is the way it always was. The age 60 thing has merely been an unfortunate mistake that's being corrected.

 

[HoursHore]

This just goes down as one more thing the baby boomers screwed up. A mere shadow of their parents.

 

[dutch747]

I have to agree with AVbug, although the age 60 thing adversely effects my opportunity for upgrade, I would rather the "choice" of flying to age 65 or take early retirement.

 

[sat74]

How is AGE 60 considered age discrimination and AGE 65 NOT???

In 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, whats to these guys will push for AGE 70??

Seems like Australia is the only place with no age limit (maybe I am wrong).

 

[FreightBumper]

Maybe you should fly cargo, so you can get that big ego of yours in the airplane!

He does fly cargo if I'm not mistaken. But as my wife points out, I'm mistaken quite often.

 

[Way2Broke]

Belch,

I actually support age 65, and my reasoning is pretty simple. Its just plain wrong to force someone into retirement before social security can be drawn. Heck, you can fly as long as you want as long as you truly can hold the medical required for the job. 50 or 65, who cares! The question is are you medically fit to fly? If you are have fun and make a buck.

Global warming will be over by then and we'll be in the coming Ice Age!

Jurrasic Jet must be on of those guys working for someone that still has defined benifits on retirement...if you want to go at 60 my man, I'm sure you could come up with a medical reason! I personally don't want to go to the bench any sooner than nessesary-I like what I do and it's pretty silly for an arbitrary rule that wasn't around till 1960 to make me do that. Perhaps you might look for another line of work if you're so anxious to get out!

 

[B737 Guy]

Belch,

I actually support age 65, and my reasoning is pretty simple.

Most are, and they're usually greed!

Its just plain wrong to force someone into retirement before social security can be drawn. Heck, you can fly as long as you want as long as you truly can hold the medical required for the job.

Piss poor planning has nothing to do with it either eh?
The biggest supporters of age 65 are the "I've got mine crowd!"

50 or 65, who cares! The question is are you medically fit to fly? If you are have fun and make a buck.

Just curious who you fly for?
Some of the older captains I've flown with in my career, should have retired at age 55! I see the ones getting closer to 60 being worse. That being said, it doesn't apply to ALL pilots, just some!
SO the question begs, where do you draw the line? IF the FAA felt that 65 was ok, then why put the caveat in there that "no 2 pilots in the cockpit can be over 60."
Just some observations/opinions from a "non supporter" of age 65

 

[countbat]

All these guys against 65 rule, when their time will come AND IT WILL COME SOONER THEN THEY THINK, will be the first ones to scream and hold their seats and want to work 'till droping dead. It is just human hypocrisy and individualism.
Majority of americans and pilots are part of it can not afford to retire our days. Life has too many ups and downs, too screwed.
However forced stop flying at 60, medicare at 62, and social security benefits at 65 shouldn't sound right to anybody. Majority of pilots stay and will stay in Social Security as only source of income at that age if they can not find a part 91 job or not flipping burgers at McDonald. Except the ones lucky enough to get a job with majors, but I have seen former majors screwing thei employees. Just to name few: Eastern, PanAm etc. One never knows. Tomorrow can be AA or UAL or any other.

 

[Way2Broke]

First of all I am closer to 30 than 60, so this is hardly greedy.

The most important and hardest to enforce part of my stand point is protecting the integrity of the certification of pilot medicals. Of course there are pilots not medically fit for flight that have a medical examiner that is just kinda passing them along. Making laws is easy, enforcing them is difficult.

I know over 60 pilots that still have all their brain function and some under 60 that never had it the first place.

My company has a 121 and a 135 side of the house. I am on the 135 side of the house and fly with pilots that are in their 60s all the time. Previously pilots have had to retire from the 121 side of the house at age 60, but have been allowed to come back to the 135 side as a captain until 65. At which point they can still stick around as a F.O. I think? I doubt many opt to take the move back to the right seat though. Instead they retire.

I wonder once this passes if the over 60 pilots will be allowed to bid back to the DC-9 (121 side)? I know a handful of them that would love that opportunity.

My long term career goals do not include part 121 airlines so this has little affect on me. As long as I still like flying and I am medically fit to fly I will be flying, but I hope not to have to work until 60 or 65. By then I hope to be taking it easy in a "little banger" flying for fun, when I want to and to where I want to.... not what and where my company tells me to go. Now that is the dream!

Most are, and they're usually greed!


Piss poor planning has nothing to do with it either eh?
The biggest supporters of age 65 are the "I've got mine crowd!"


Just curious who you fly for?
Some of the older captains I've flown with in my career, should have retired at age 55! I see the ones getting closer to 60 being worse. That being said, it doesn't apply to ALL pilots, just some!
SO the question begs, where do you draw the line? IF the FAA felt that 65 was ok, then why put the caveat in there that "no 2 pilots in the cockpit can be over 60."
Just some observations/opinions from a "non supporter" of age 65