Welcome to the Airline Pilot Central Forums forums.
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!
Selected points in FAA speech and the questions that followed
(14:20) It is our intent that this new rule will apply to pilots who have not yet reached 60 by the time the rule comes into effect.
(27:00) …how long will it take? …18 month to two year, possibly longer, process…
(27:55) …why not issue exemptions? …waivers would be very difficult to do, because not only do we have to grant a specific request to a specific individual based on their request, but the certificate holder, the airline in question, would also have to come forward and make a specific request for a specific individual. That would be hard… and candidly the FAA, and I would say it would be difficult for the carriers as well, to all try to process individual requests, so I do not anticipate that we would be able to do that.
(29:00) …would you consider making age 65 retirement age retroactive? …no, we do not plan to do that… people who are already out of the system, who have already gone on, the questions of trying to bring people back in, and at that point would be for a very brief period of time, the training, the skills, are they up on the specific equipment, et cetera? I think that this would be a very disruptive thing to do, and at the end of the day, I do not expect that this would be a part of the final rule.
(30:20) …any additional medical…? …(probably not) is the expectation.
(31:00) …how long will the transition period be to this new age limit? …likely a proposed transition period.
(32:45) …what would you have to say to younger pilots who fear they might lose career opportunities because of this change? …a great and longer future if they choose to exercise it at its fullest
(34:40) …why not for FAA controllers? …because it's the law of the land that they retire at 56… but I will tell you, if there is a move on Congress's part to raise the age for controllers; I think we would be happy to work with them on it.
(40:00) …why do you require that one of the pilots be under 60? …international harmonization and having the same standards globally…
(32:45) …what would you have to say to younger pilots who fear they might lose career opportunities because of this change? …a great and longer future if they choose to exercise it at its fullest
IOW Tough Sh!t, you old guys advanced at the expense of those above who left at the correct time but I don' want to follow the same rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FAA
(34:40) …why not for FAA controllers? …because it's the law of the land that they retire at 56… but I will tell you, if there is a move on Congress's part to raise the age for controllers; I think we would be happy to work with them on it.
More double-talk BS, if its the law of the land for controllers, it certainly should be more-safety oriented towards the Pilots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FAA
(40:00) …why do you require that one of the pilots be under 60? …international harmonization and having the same standards globally…
More babble. If the FAA thinks its OK for a 60+ year old to be up front as Captain why not the F/O. What's to be afraid of.........perhaps:
a) Congestive Heart Failure Times 2
b) Senility
c) A myriad of other post 60 maladies that are just waiting to strike.
1) The FAA can legally implement a gradual phase-in period (this is good).
2) However...the FAA CANNOT in any way shape or form prevent retired 60+ pilots from petitioning or sueing to get their jobs back. That is labor law stuff, not airplane law. If congress doesn't issue timely, common-sense legislation to prevent this, it will get ugly...
I suspect that its going to get alot more ugly. This is not a cut and dried rule change. Age 65 is still arbitrary dont you agree? What about the over 60 guys that have gone to the back seat and are still employed by their carrier with their original seniority number? Do they get to bid for a capt seat in the next vacancy after the law changes? Will the guys 60 +1 day that were forced to retire the day before age 65 became law sue to get their jobs back? Bet on it.
Now, why does an over 60 capt have to fly with an under 60 FO? Isnt that the FAA implying that a capt flying over age 60 is a safety issue? If not, why does an over 60 capt, or FO for that matter have to be paired up with an under 60 crewmember?
It will be interesting for sure and guaranteed to be a big can of worms that will take quite a bit of time to get ironed out. Bottom line I think is that age 65 will eventually stick. There are too many economic advantages for the airlines for that not to happen.
Now I am in no way implying that an over 60 person is not capable of commanding a part 121 aircraft. Heck I've seen guys in their 40's 100 lbs overweight and in very poor health signing the release everyday. All I am saying is that this will be a very complex NPRM to enact into a FAR.
__________________
You cannot escape the almighty bungholio
I suspect that its going to get alot more ugly. This is not a cut and dried rule change. Age 65 is still arbitrary dont you agree? What about the over 60 guys that have gone to the back seat and are still employed by their carrier with their original seniority number? Do they get to bid for a capt seat in the next vacancy after the law changes? Will the guys 60 +1 day that were forced to retire the day before age 65 became law sue to get their jobs back? Bet on it.
Now, why does an over 60 capt have to fly with an under 60 FO? Isnt that the FAA implying that a capt flying over age 60 is a safety issue? If not, why does an over 60 capt, or FO for that matter have to be paired up with an under 60 crewmember?
It will be interesting for sure and guaranteed to be a big can of worms that will take quite a bit of time to get ironed out. Bottom line I think is that age 65 will eventually stick. There are too many economic advantages for the airlines for that not to happen.
Now I am in no way implying that an over 60 person is not capable of commanding a part 121 aircraft. Heck I've seen guys in their 40's 100 lbs overweight and in very poor health signing the release everyday. All I am saying is that this will be a very complex NPRM to enact into a FAR.
??? I thought it would be more economical for the airlines if these High Seniority guys left due to their salaries?
I thought that I was going to retire soon; but, I guess not The wife and I had it all planned out too. We plan on spending the summers in Alaska(we own a house there) and the winters in Guatemala(we are looking to buy some land and build a place there). I guess we might be waiting a few more years now. The wife is more upset about the 65 rule than I am. If it happens, I guess we'll just have to deal with it.
I thought that I was going to retire soon; but, I guess not The wife and I had it all planned out too. We plan on spending the summers in Alaska(we own a house there) and the winters in Guatemala(we are looking to buy some land and build a place there). I guess we might be waiting a few more years now. The wife is more upset about the 65 rule than I am. If it happens, I guess we'll just have to deal with it.
CO777Driver
That's terrible! Golly, I feel so bad for you! Imagine, not being able to live in one of your THREE homes for a few more years. Such pain.
Perhaps you might tell your wife, that this rule, when implemented, might actually help others, less fortunate than you, to be able to keep their only house. As I'm sure you're aware, some guys have lost the vast majority of their retirement in the past few years, through no fault of their own. Of course, you could always retire anyway, before the rules and laws regarding 401's and retirement plans change. And by the way, have you visited Belize, I hear it's wonderful. You might look there for property.
I thought that I was going to retire soon; but, I guess not The wife and I had it all planned out too. We plan on spending the summers in Alaska(we own a house there) and the winters in Guatemala(we are looking to buy some land and build a place there). I guess we might be waiting a few more years now. The wife is more upset about the 65 rule than I am. If it happens, I guess we'll just have to deal with it.
CO777Driver
Sounds like you were planning to retire, so do it. No reason to work past 60, if you planned right.
That's terrible! Golly, I feel so bad for you! Imagine, not being able to live in one of your THREE homes for a few more years. Such pain.
Perhaps you might tell your wife, that this rule, when implemented, might actually help others, less fortunate than you, to be able to keep their only house. As I'm sure you're aware, some guys have lost the vast majority of their retirement in the past few years, through no fault of their own. Of course, you could always retire anyway, before the rules and laws regarding 401's and retirement plans change. And by the way, have you visited Belize, I hear it's wonderful. You might look there for property.
This coming from a ROPE with a porsche in his avtar!
Similar Threads
Key FAA points on Age 65
The wife and I had it all planned out too. We plan on spending the summers in Alaska(we own a house there) and the winters in Guatemala(we are looking to buy some land and build a place there). I guess we might be waiting a few more years now. The wife is more upset about the 65 rule than I am. If it happens, I guess we'll just have to deal with it.
Linear Mode
