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!
So the FAA decides that the pilot age 60 rule is a form of age discrimination, and announces their intent to raise the mandatory retirement age to 65.
FAA controllers are forced to retire at age 56. No change announced. We talk about how changing age 60 is necessary for pilots who have lost their pensions, but how about the controllers who were FIRED from their job for 16 years for going on strike! 16 years of lost income is a reason that is 100 TIMES better of a reason to change a retirement age than pilots got their pensions cut.
Oh, and someone mentioned that FAA controllers can get waivers to work past age 56. True. But "only in targeted locations where there may be a CRITICAL staffing shortage." As of January, there were 16 waivers had been submitted, and only 6 were approved.
See source on page 38. http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...lan_060006.pdf
Six waivers... That's it. And the FAA is actually facing somewhat of a labor shortage. Major airlines are not (shown by the fact that every legacy carrier had pilots on furlough for 5+ years).
There is a good reason for the FAA to retire controllers at age 56. Senior controllers make more money than junior controllers. They actually mention their cost savings from filling open positions with junior controllers as opposed to senior ones. I was shocked that the FAA mentioned that in their published document.
And trust me, if a pilot can fly the airplane at age 60 (or possibly age 65 if this new legislation passes), an air traffic controller can work until at least 60!
If I were an air traffic controller, I would be sueing the FAA.
Any controllers out there, what is your union doing with regards to this issue? Do you need any support? Let us know how we as a pilot group can help you out. I feel it is total BS that the FAA can let pilots fly until 65, but make controllers retire at 56.
Let me know how I/we can help!!!
I think that age discrimination is one of the last things that is a concern right now for controllers. Most of them are counting days until they CAN retire and many are taking early outs. Remember- they get government pensions... the earlier they can collect the happier they are.
With everything else doing on for the controllers, I'm sure that they aren't fighting to work any longer until retirement...
So the FAA decides that the pilot age 60 rule is a form of age discrimination, and announces their intent to raise the mandatory retirement age to 65.
FAA controllers are forced to retire at age 56. No change announced. We talk about how changing age 60 is necessary for pilots who have lost their pensions, but how about the controllers who were FIRED from their job for 16 years for going on strike! 16 years of lost income is a reason that is 100 TIMES better of a reason to change a retirement age than pilots got their pensions cut.
Oh, and someone mentioned that FAA controllers can get waivers to work past age 56. True. But "only in targeted locations where there may be a CRITICAL staffing shortage." As of January, there were 16 waivers had been submitted, and only 6 were approved.
See source on page 38. http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...lan_060006.pdf
Six waivers... That's it. And the FAA is actually facing somewhat of a labor shortage. Major airlines are not (shown by the fact that every legacy carrier had pilots on furlough for 5+ years).
There is a good reason for the FAA to retire controllers at age 56. Senior controllers make more money than junior controllers. They actually mention their cost savings from filling open positions with junior controllers as opposed to senior ones. I was shocked that the FAA mentioned that in their published document.
And trust me, if a pilot can fly the airplane at age 60 (or possibly age 65 if this new legislation passes), an air traffic controller can work until at least 60!
If I were an air traffic controller, I would be sueing the FAA.
Any controllers out there, what is your union doing with regards to this issue? Do you need any support? Let us know how we as a pilot group can help you out. I feel it is total BS that the FAA can let pilots fly until 65, but make controllers retire at 56.
Let me know how I/we can help!!!
If you had listened to the Q&A, after Blakey's speech on January 30 you would have heard her address that subject. Pilot retirement age is set by the FARs, the Controllers is set by Federal Law. The FAA, Congress, or the Courts can change the pilot retirement age, only Congress can change the Controller age. She indicated that the FAA would be more than happy to talk about increasing the Controller age.
Controllers usually don't have any problems retiring at 56. They more often than not retire earlier because most of them are eligible before 56. Retirement for them is different than retirement for an airline pilot. They HAVE something to retire on, airline pilots don't. I don't understand why this is an issue for you.
The real issue is the pay rules are changing for controllers. They will be getting less pay which NATCA is already getting ready to fight in court. Bush wants to privatize ATC, which would be a deadly scenario. A bunch of private contract controllers fighting for work playing the "who can do it cheaper game" might make for some scary situations.
When you hire on you are made very aware that 56 is the limit. Over a 24.5 year career I have seen very few that want to do this sh!t any longer than is required. I for one will punch out ASAP (6mos).
The battles at hand are privatization and pay reduction - Not staying around longer!
The battles at hand are privatization and pay reduction - Not staying around longer!
EXACTLY!!!!!!!! That is the way airline pilots should be thinking. Fighting pay cuts and losing scope to the regionals. But instead they would rather stick around longer...
I'm not a pilot, so take my .02 cents for what it is - one opinion. (I am a controller, though).
I can see where the love of flying, along with a pension that maybe isn't quite ripe enough, would make it so you guys would want to fly past 60. I personally don't have ANY reservations about a pilot over 60 piloting the plane I'm riding on. If that's what you want to do, then great.
Me on the other hand, I am counting the years, months and days until I'm eligible. Up until recently, I loved this job. I loved almost everything about it. That has since changed and you know why.
Regardless of that, I personally wouldn't want to work more than 25 years at my particular job. It is a younger-person's game, imo. The equipment changes, the eyes don't work as good as when they were 23, along with the ears. The shift work is getting old, especially the mid-shifts and the quick turns from an eve to a day. The traffic is building (34% more than when I started), and with the VLJ's coming up, ughh....
Perhaps if some worked in a lower-level facility, they could work past 56 in larger numbers. I really don't think that would work at the factories (centers) and larger tracons. And the FAA certainly isn't going to let someone transfer (much less pay for their move) to a smaller faciltiy, while keeping their pay; they would have to move themselves and take a drastic cut in pay. Might as well retire!
Me on the other hand, I am counting the years, months and days until I'm eligible. Up until recently, I loved this job. I loved almost everything about it. That has since changed and you know why.
Regardless of that, I personally wouldn't want to work more than 25 years at my particular job.
Perhaps ... some ... could work past 56 in larger numbers. ... Might as well retire!
- Seeburg220
Yea, but there's a BIG difference, and thanks for the interesting insight, by the way. Just so no one misuses what you wrote think about it for a minute. What you're ailing from has nothing to do with age. What you've got is "controller burnout," not Alzheimer's or dementia. I'll bet there are plenty of non-aviation professionals out there (i.e. - doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc) who because of a mid-life crisis might decide to become controllers at 56 and then 25 years later when they're burning out say, "gee, I don't think I can do this anymore after age 81. ...'Might as well retire!' "
Personally, I wouldn't have your job for a million bucks. Everyone out there knows about the psychological demand and stress that goes with pushing tin. I wouldn't have lasted 25 days, let alone 25 years. A pilot can hit the CMD A button and sit back with a newspaper and a cup of coffee for the next two hours. Controllers can't.
Last edited by ATlineholder : 02-20-2007 at 12:51 PM.
Similar Threads
Controllers Should Sue FAA
Just so no one misuses what you wrote think about it for a minute. What you're ailing from has nothing to do with age. What you've got is "controller burnout," not Alzheimer's or dementia. I'll bet there are plenty of non-aviation professionals out there (i.e. - doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc) who because of a mid-life crisis might decide to become controllers at 56 and then 25 years later when they're burning out say, "gee, I don't think I can do this anymore after age 81. ...'Might as well retire!' " 
Linear Mode
