You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. If you're a working pilot, please join our free community and you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you don't want to register (or not a working pilot), you can still use the Google search box in the upper left of this screen to search all forum posts!
I know the law can't be changed, but I am still struggling with the line ALPA gave us that nothing was in the way of change for age 65 and it was going to happen regardless. The thing that gets me is that the FAA planned a couple years of testing, then they would make a decision to raise the age or not. Then here comes the US Government and passes it with lightning speed. Nothing happens that quickly in DC. Not even passing out the money for the economy stimulus. So I decided to call my senators and congressman and ask how this was able to pass so quickly. I spoke with aides at each office, but spent the most time on the phone with an aide for Bob Casey D-PA. This is the summary of what I was told based on notes from Sen Casey's office. The aide said that at the time of the vote, the FAA still opposed change. What caused the vote to go through was basically ALPA's endorsement of the rule change. I asked, "what if ALPA still opposed the change?" The aide responded, "the bill probably wouldn't have been approved." Now, I know that I was only talking to an aide who doesn't have all of the info and there are two sides to every story, but this contridicts what we were told by ALPA. I am not crying sour grapes here, but this bothers me. If the majority of ALPA pilots were for the change and ALPA went and endorsed it, I would say "OK, I don't agree, but that is the majority vote". But that wasn't the case. The majority didn't want the change both within FedEx and nationwide, and ALPA went against the mojority and endorsed it. I came from a Teamster airline and I can tell you that ALPA is leaps and bounds better than the Teamsters, but this really hurts the level of trust between the members and the leadership.
Last edited by 1st overnite : 01-25-2008 at 02:42 PM.
Certainly the law can be changed, ever heard of prohibition, ask your FE he probably remembers. Oops that was out of bounds. It would just take a max effort and I am not sure there is enough cohesion out there to do it. But thats just me talking, I will go back to my drink and cigar and wait for the call.
The ALPA leadership finally endorsed changing the airline pilot age 60 rule for one good reason. That reason is that ALPA’s senior leadership rightly recognized that no legitimate labor union should continue to actively support a rule which discriminates against its own members, forcing them to leave their jobs and leave them with reduced benefits. ALPA milked the Age 60 rule for all its worth for much to long a time.
“Scab” is a union word describing people who cross picket lines to steal from their fellow workers. True brotherhood among loyal union membership means leaving no loyal union member behind and respecting seniority. Solidarity is the calling of true union membership; at least it was when there were unions worth a ****. Any airline pilot who would support a position that all pilots over age 60 should be forced out of their jobs and/or reduced to the bottom of a list without seniority or longevity fits that “Scab” definition.
Congress finally saw the true colors of the junior airline pilots and their scheme of greed. Congress could no longer pander to their every whim. That is why at least two thirds of the House of Representatives and more than fifty present of the Senate signed on to co-sponsor a bill that would change the age 60 rule. Bill # H.R. 4343 passed in both the House and Senate virtually unopposed because Congress no longer listens to the winning, greedy please coming from junior ALPA and APA pilots. Congress realized that in deciding the airline pilot age 60 rule issue, they would be listening to the American people and not just the junior pilots at ALPA or APA. When it comes time for re-election Congress knows that seniors go to the poles and VOTE along with military veterans but GREEDY SELF-CENTERED JUNIOR AIRLINE PILOTS DO NOT VOTE.
This issue finally received enough public attention and the the public finally took note of the plight of senior airline pilots being forced out of work, loosing their pensions, being forced to go overseas to work while foreign pilots over age 60 can fly in this country. Congress would not be supporting veterans or seniors if they continued to support a rule that forced senior pilots out of their own country just to work. Nothing gets politicians out of office like bad press, and not standing for seniors and military veterans is very BAD PRESS.
The ALPA leadership finally endorsed changing the airline pilot age 60 rule for one good reason. That reason is that ALPA’s senior leadership rightly recognized that no legitimate labor union should continue to actively support a rule which discriminates against its own members, forcing them to leave their jobs and leave them with reduced benefits. ALPA milked the Age 60 rule for all its worth for much to long a time.
“Scab” is a union word describing people who cross picket lines to steal from their fellow workers. True brotherhood among loyal union membership means leaving no loyal union member behind and respecting seniority. Solidarity is the calling of true union membership; at least it was when there were unions worth a ****. Any airline pilot who would support a position that all pilots over age 60 should be forced out of their jobs and/or reduced to the bottom of a list without seniority or longevity fits that “Scab” definition.
Congress finally saw the true colors of the junior airline pilots and their scheme of greed. Congress could no longer pander to their every whim. That is why at least two thirds of the House of Representatives and more than fifty present of the Senate signed on to co-sponsor a bill that would change the age 60 rule. Bill # H.R. 4343 passed in both the House and Senate virtually unopposed because Congress no longer listens to the winning, greedy please coming from junior ALPA and APA pilots. Congress realized that in deciding the airline pilot age 60 rule issue, they would be listening to the American people and not just the junior pilots at ALPA or APA. When it comes time for re-election Congress knows that seniors go to the poles and VOTE along with military veterans but GREEDY SELF-CENTERED JUNIOR AIRLINE PILOTS DO NOT VOTE.
This issue finally received enough public attention and the the public finally took note of the plight of senior airline pilots being forced out of work, loosing their pensions, being forced to go overseas to work while foreign pilots over age 60 can fly in this country. Congress would not be supporting veterans or seniors if they continued to support a rule that forced senior pilots out of their own country just to work. Nothing gets politicians out of office like bad press, and not standing for seniors and military veterans is very BAD PRESS.
This has to be one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read on this site. Calling pilots who differ from your point of view scabs?! Are you serious?! YOU sound like the self-centered greedy person. You knew what the industry was like before you were hired by an airline. But when it comes to your time to retire, you whine and cry like a baby. Don't even tell me old senior pilots look out for junior pilots. If that was the case we never would have heard of A and B pay scales.
“Scab” is a union word describing people who cross picket lines to steal from their fellow workers.
So were you ever a Scab?
GREEDY SELF-CENTERED JUNIOR AIRLINE PILOTS DO NOT VOTE.
No calling the kettle black here!
not standing for seniors and military veterans is very BAD PRESS.
I can honestly say that I was able to up-grade to captain not at the expense of pilots senior to me. I flew for a regional airline based in my hometown. When I hired on there in 1989 over 90% of the pilots senior to me were also younger than me, so I did not progress up the seniority list by retirement attrition. I progressed thru my company’s expansion. Most of the pilots who were senior to me when I was hired at Horizon Air are still flying there. I played a part in making Horizon Air the best regional airline in the industry. Why should I be forced out of my job only because of my age?
When I first started flying for my company, Horizon Air, was a part 135 carrier and for that reason I chose to stay because I wanted to build my seniority until age 65 when my 401K would allow me to retire. Then in 1995 the FAA changed the rules and forced my company to convert to Part 121. I have been active in trying to change the age 60 rule since I was 18 years old. I remember helping my then next door neighbor who was then a Western Airlines Captain and a Western ALPA EXCO member. I stuffed envelopes for a campaign to repeal the age 60 rule. I recall him often saying, this age 60 rule will be a thing of the past long before you reach age 60. I cannot believe that it still existed until just before I was forced to retire 42 years later.[/color]
[color=black]I was loyal to my country when I was drafted into the Army and served faithfully in Vietnam. I feel that my country has now let me and thousands of other Vietnam era veterans down by robbing us of our profession while foreign pilots are allowed to fly in my country past age 60.
The fact is I am no longer an airline pilot only because of the junior greedy scabs at ALPA and APA. I lobbied Congress for years trying pass anti-age discrimination legislation along with APAAD but every year our efforts were defeated by the dirty political power of ALPA and APA.
Yes, I consider every airline pilot who supported the age 60 rule a SCAB!
Similar Threads
Age 65 was going to happen anyway- Really?
Linear Mode
