Sign in to follow this  
Great Ozzie

U.S. Pilots Can Fly Until 65

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>Good news for the older pilots, longer waits for the younger>pilots coming up.>>http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi...0,1950072.story>a BLATANT load of crap if you ask me. so the seasoned ones get the benefits of age 60 retirements for their career and an extra 5 yrs at the top of the food chain (while delaying EVERYONE below them).thanks SWAPA and APAAD, greed rears it's head.

Share this post


Link to post

>thanks SWAPA and APAAD, greed rears it's head.Sure, old pilots are as greedy as the current young pilots will be in the future. So what's new? Call me greedy too - I also want to work till I'm 65 (I am not a commercial pilot). Perhaps it was time for US to catch up with the rest of the civilized world in this matter. I detect a lot of juvenile anger in your post .. I suggest you grow up. Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

>>thanks SWAPA and APAAD, greed rears it's head.>>Sure, old pilots are as greedy as the current young pilots>will be in the future. So what's new? Call me greedy too - I>also want to work till I'm 65 (I am not a commercial pilot).>Perhaps it was time for US to catch up with the rest of the>civilized world in this matter. I detect a lot of juvenile>anger in your post .. I suggest you grow up. >>Michael J.Easy for you to say when you are not the one that just had your life plans set back five years again. This whole age 65 thing had absolutely nothing to do with equal rights or joining the rest of the world or anything else that might sound worthwhile. Simply a case of one side's greed winning out over another's. The older pilots benefited from the age 60 rule when they were young, then decided that once they got to the top, the rules could be changed so that they could hang on to the top longer. First 9/11, now Age65, I wonder what's next? You should be glad you're not a "commercial pilot."Besides, why would anyone want to work until 65?

Share this post


Link to post

" The older pilots benefited from the age 60 rule when they were young,"At the time, I'd wager they were the strongest rooters for the 60-and-retire rule. Old saying, "It all depends whose ox is being gored." :-) or :(

Share this post


Link to post

>>thanks SWAPA and APAAD, greed rears it's head.>>Sure, old pilots are as greedy as the current young pilots>will be in the future. So what's new? Call me greedy too - I>also want to work till I'm 65 (I am not a commercial pilot).>Perhaps it was time for US to catch up with the rest of the>civilized world in this matter. I detect a lot of juvenile>anger in your post .. I suggest you grow up. "I am not a commercial pilot", so i do not think you understand what really happened here. a bunch of old, self centered, greedy pilots got one of their own elected to the head of the organization that collects 2% of my paycheck every month. he then proceeded to change ALPA's stance on the issue 180 degrees even though polling showed an OVERWHELMING favor AGAINST this. they then lean on congress to rush this through with SWAPA paid off politicians.let me lower your career earnings $500,000 with the stroke of a pen and see how you will react. it's not juvenile, it's a righteous display of anger against those who couldn't plan ahead and simply want 5 more years at the top of the food chain.ANY argument they use is false. age discrimination was argued at age 60. so they simply move the age up 5 years! that's not still discriminatory? i am sure in 4 years we'll hear from these greedy slimes again pushing for age 70.

Share this post


Link to post

I understand your reasons, but would you hold the same opinion if you were 59 years old? It's not meant to be a pure rethorical question.Marco

Share this post


Link to post

> The older pilots benefited from the age 60 rule when they were young, Sorry but I don't buy this theory. When this old rule was coming into effect the current old pilots were then barely 20-22 years old. I don't buy for a second that somehow the rookies pilots at the time had such a political clout to force the change for their benefit.>Besides, why would anyone want to work until 65?Say what, excuse me ... ??? Some want to work till they are 70, 80 or when they drop dead, some want to retire at 40. Some want to work because they are 'greedy' some simply like to work. This is called choice and individual life style.Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

>> The older pilots benefited from the age 60 rule when they>were young, >>Sorry but I don't buy this theory. When this old rule was>coming into effect the current old pilots were then barely>20-22 years old. I don't buy for a second that somehow the>rookies pilots at the time had such a political clout to force>the change for their benefit.>Nothing to do with clout or that they even knew or cared what the retirement age was. They all made their upgrades, got a job when they did, all five years sooner than if the rule had been 65.>>Besides, why would anyone want to work until 65?>>Say what, excuse me ... ??? Some want to work till they are>70, 80 or when they drop dead, some want to retire at 40. Some>want to work because they are 'greedy' some simply like to>work. This is called choice and individual life style.>>Michael J.Some choices are dumber than others.

Share this post


Link to post

From one pilot to another, it sounds like you might benefit from five more years of maturing. I know I don't want to share my cockpit with an attitude like that. BTW I am only 37 and I think the change is long overdue.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll tell you what's really despicable is that the airlines like USAirways, United, Delta, who declared bankruptcy were allowed to come out of it without honoring their pension commitments and turning it over to the federal government, who in turn were forcing these pilots to retire before 65 (60) and then has the nerve to invoke the rule about denying full pensions for those who leave before age 65, resulting in a 3/4 loss of their pension they worked for. Talk about the a Catch 22!! These airlines should not have been permitted to come out of bankruptcy unless they resumed their pension commitments that they owe these pilots and other employees affected.

Share this post


Link to post

>From one pilot to another, it sounds like you might benefit>from five more years of maturing. I know I don't want to>share my cockpit with an attitude like that. BTW I am only 37>and I think the change is long overdue.>>Why don't you add something to the conversation by bringing up some reasons why you would want this kind of change instead of being the first one to start making personal insults.

Share this post


Link to post

I suggest you re-read your own posts before you point fingers at who is or isn't adding to the conversation. Fantastic claims about greedy 59 year old pilots is neither accurate or constructive. Forcing our most experienced line pilots out at 60 makes zero sense if they are fit and healthy. This rule is about being competent to fly, and not "greed" as you claim. The age 60 rule was created at a time when US health standards and expectations were much different that they are today. If there was a safety reason for restricting older pilots flying Part 121 then I would be all for it, but has our health at older ages improves, the standards and limits for flying in the 121 world also need to adapt.If change to 65 means a slightly slower upgrade time for FO's and a slower track to the majors, then so be it. At the back end these same pilots will also not be forced out at 60. Regardless of all of this, in the volatile world of aviation this should be at the bottom of any pilots worry list.

Share this post


Link to post

>I understand your reasons, but would you hold the same>opinion if you were 59 years old? It's not meant to be a pure>rethorical question.I am not 59 so it's a moot question.

Share this post


Link to post

>I suggest you re-read your own posts before you point fingers>at who is or isn't adding to the conversation. Fantastic>claims about greedy 59 year old pilots is neither accurate or>constructive. the truth hurts. read the APAAD literature.>Forcing our most experienced line pilots out at 60 makes zero>sense if they are fit and healthy. This rule is about being>competent to fly, and not "greed" as you claim. The age 60>rule was created at a time when US health standards and>expectations were much different that they are today. If>there was a safety reason for restricting older pilots flying>Part 121 then I would be all for it, but has our health at>older ages improves, the standards and limits for flying in>the 121 world also need to adapt.for all this time ALPA has defended their age 60 stance based on SAFETY and now since Prater this has changed. wrong.if it is about "experienced" aviators, then let them fly past age 60 but from the right seat.>If change to 65 means a slightly slower upgrade time for FO's>and a slower track to the majors, then so be it. At the back>end these same pilots will also not be forced out at 60. >Regardless of all of this, in the volatile world of aviation>this should be at the bottom of any pilots worry list.the economic hit will never be recovered on the backside. you want to sit at the regionals and be abused for 5 years longer, thank Prater and have at it. FedEx and UPS are NO LONGER HIRING so those codgers sitting sideways can rebid over. thank god i escaped the regionals.

Share this post


Link to post

>I'll tell you what's really despicable is that the airlines>like USAirways, United, Delta, who declared bankruptcy were>allowed to come out of it without honoring their pension>commitments and turning it over to the federal government, who>in turn were forcing these pilots to retire before 65 (60) and>then has the nerve to invoke the rule about denying full>pensions for those who leave before age 65, resulting in a>3/4 loss of their pension they worked for. Talk about the a>Catch 22!! These airlines should not have been permitted to>come out of bankruptcy unless they resumed their pension>commitments that they owe these pilots and other employees>affected.What you just described is why age 65 came into being. Old pilots, who didn't save a dime, have 3 houses, boats, etc. being mad because they didn't get a pension. So guess what, we'll screw the younger guys. And they did.

Share this post


Link to post

>the economic hit will never be recovered on the backside. you>want to sit at the regionals and be abused for 5 years longer,>thank Prater and have at it. FedEx and UPS are NO LONGER>HIRING so those codgers sitting sideways can rebid over. thank>god i escaped the regionals.To be honest the very few regional pilots I hear complaining about this sound like the greedy ones to me. Its all about them and their desires, and they don't actually care what is good for the industry as a whole.With any luck this change will in time help slow new hiring at the regionals a little, and these sketchy under 1000TT minimums will go away. I am ten times more worried about 500hr FO's as opposed to the effect of 60-65 year old captains!

Share this post


Link to post

That's the problem with unionized occupations, or ones that work like a union. Instead of promoting on merit, there is a strict seniority system in place. The younger workers are screwed, under the theory that "you'll get yours later". That of course is a good way to prevent any competition, and promote "solidarity" which is in the union's (not the good/hard worker's) interest.I happen to have a friend who is an MD11 captain and is directly affected by this. He is planning to fly until 62. IIRC he told me once that there was a pilot in his company who had reverted to 727 flight engineer at 60 to continue to fly. Maybe the age 60 rule didn't apply there?scott s..

Share this post


Link to post

>That's the problem with unionized occupations, or ones that>work like a union. Instead of promoting on merit, there is a>strict seniority system in place. The younger workers are>screwed, under the theory that "you'll get yours later". That>of course is a good way to prevent any competition, and>promote "solidarity" which is in the union's (not the>good/hard worker's) interest.>>I happen to have a friend who is an MD11 captain and is>directly affected by this. He is planning to fly until 62. >IIRC he told me once that there was a pilot in his company who>had reverted to 727 flight engineer at 60 to continue to fly. >Maybe the age 60 rule didn't apply there?while i agree in principle with you, "merit" simply cannot be measured in an airline environment. can you measure getting from a to b safely with a merit based system? i can't. you're either getting there safe or your not.

Share this post


Link to post

>To be honest the very few regional pilots I hear complaining>about this sound like the greedy ones to me. Its all about>them and their desires, and they don't actually care what is>good for the industry as a whole.>>With any luck this change will in time help slow new hiring at>the regionals a little, and these sketchy under 1000TT>minimums will go away. I am ten times more worried about>500hr FO's as opposed to the effect of 60-65 year old>captains!that's why there is a CA there. the old stooge is the CA in the other scenario.i do agree though with the wunderkids flying out there. go instruct. learn how to fly for goodness sakes. you need 1200 hours to fly boxes but not people, huh?

Share this post


Link to post

>>while i agree in principle with you, "merit" simply cannot be>measured in an airline environment. can you measure getting>from a to b safely with a merit based system? i can't. you're>either getting there safe or your not.Isn't that why they have line checks? Is airmanship equal among all pilots? Customer service? CRM?scott s..

Share this post


Link to post

You sound like a Virgin America pilot...Airmenship?Hopefully we all get to the same places in the same safe manner I don't know how you could judge that one.Line checks? Everything is pretty much standard. What would set someone apart from the rest?Customer service?You are in the sky cubicle for hours at a time with only a few minutes before each turn to work on the customer service. You can't really get up and ask all the passengers if the ride is smooth. Plus the pilot's service is to get you there intact not baby you.CRM?Again this all should be standard stuff taught in classes and sim sessions this shouldn't differ between crews.I feel that merit systems are unsafe. The only way to stand out is if you rush procedures, cut corners and make risky decisions to get in earlier. All this to make an extra buck or move one number up in front of the guy who was flying the aircraft safely.Those are some of the reasons I feel the merit system are not good for airlines.

Share this post


Link to post

>I am not 59 so it's a moot question.Probably my question is moot. Certainly your answer says a lot.Marco

Share this post


Link to post

If current trends prevail, we should see a large increase in air travel in the coming years. That woluld create a need for more pilots. As a matter of fact, a number of airlines are having a hard time trying to fill their rosters. Here is an interesting article on the topic;http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2007/1...askthepilot256/"Allow me to introduce you to a friend of mine, an aspiring airline pilot whom we'll call Kevin. About two weeks ago Kevin was hired by a US Airways Express affiliate. Later this month he'll begin first-officer training on a highly sophisticated 50-seater. Kevin, who is 29, has a grand total of 300 hours in his logbook. Three hundred. Thinking back to the mid-1980s, to the point when I had 300 hours, the prospect of applying to an airline -- any airline -- was unfathomable."So, I don't think allowing pilots to work an extra 5 years will have a dramatic effect on new pilots trying to find work in the industry.Dave Fisher

Share this post


Link to post

>Isn't that why they have line checks? Is airmanship equal>among all pilots? Customer service? CRM?whose going to measure airmanship, customer service, or CRM? the company? hahaha! they give you perhaps 1/2 hr on customer service in training and a 2 hr video on CRM. maybe a meeting with the flight attendants.line checks? the point is "standardization". everyone is DOING THE SAME THING. same call outs, same procedures, follow the SAME manual. if we're all doing that what's the differentiation?what measures airmanship? safety? the faa? economics like fuel management? guess which one an employer is going to push.merit cannot work in a large airline. there is truly one measure and 99.99999% of the time it's done on a daily basis. the other 0.00001% will lose their jobs or sadly die performing them.if our government cares, why do they force controllers to retire at 57. they have more of a shortage there than they do in the flightdecks.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this