horrido27

well...? anything new?!

sailingfun

There is nothing going on about 67. Perhaps however if pilots keep posting on here about it someone will think its a good idea.
The only way you will see 67 is if the ICAO changes to 67 as they did to in the switch to 65. If the go to 67 the FAA is a ICAO signature and has to let those pilots fly in the US. At that point just like 65 its a done deal since it could never withstand a age discrimination lawsuit. Lots of guys like to blame various people for 65 but the simple fact is that ICAO changed the rules and that was the end of the story. There is no current movement or even discussion of a change to 67 by ICAO.

BenS

Really dude? Who wants to work past 65? Have you seen the retirement age for social security? In 20 years I bet 75 will be standard social security retirement age.

Anyway, think about this logically guys. People don't want "old" pilots flying them around, media wouldn't stand for it. Last thing any politician can afford to do is pass a measure such as that, would certainly get them in political trouble. Airlines see the massive shortage as a chance to replace expensive talent with new, younger, cheaper talent (aka, what Bain wants to do with American to reduce its cost structure). And the FAA wouldn't propose an age change until after lobbied by the airlines for it, or something happens that provokes the FAA to feel older pilots are more necessary. So all around, nobody has a reason to change the law therefore it won't change.

About the pilots who were told they had a pension for life and in turn blew all their money when they had salaries twice as big as the "pre-pay-and-benefits-concession era". I do feel bad for those guys, they were promised to be taken care of for life with benefits that were hedged with money the airline wasn't making. We do need to learn from this. Never expect anyone but yourself to take care of your retirement. I feel that if I get a pension, great. But if not, I plan on having what I need when the day comes that I want to retire.

bleedairpacks

...so I can come back to work for 6 more years? No thanks. I know plenty of guys, like myself, that got out at age 60 and could have flown another 5.

threeighteen

Seriously. This should help any remaining pension funds remain solvent.

syd111

No the public wants young inexperienced pilots like yourself flying them around. Lol,

I am also glad that you know you will have what you need when you retire, geez where do we get these guys.

johnso29

Even if there was, they'll be 65 before it takes effect. Wasted effort on their part.

labbats

If only the age 60+ pilots knew what they need and what they want we'd all be happier. You all don't need much yet you seem to want a lot.

BenS

I'm not saying the public wants a 24 year old captain assisted by a 21 year old FO, but I am saying I don't think the flying public would support raising the retirement age so captains can be 67 (or 70, or 80) and still flying planes.

The I plan on having what I need when I retire quote was in context of I plan on saving to my own needs. It was said in context of the alternative, being dependent on a pension or social security for my retirement. I may not get everything I want, or for all I know I might end my working years without the things I "need" for retirement. But I plan on working toward being sufficient in my retirement. If the last 20 years hasn't shown you anything, I feel it shows me not to depend on a pension for retirement. I fear the next 20 years will teach us all to not depend on the government or social security for retirement. I only hope to have the means to at least be able to depend on my own savings for my retirement. I just feel that is a good goal to work for, even if I fail to achieve it.

FrankCobretti

I fail to see the problem. I have good genes and good habits and can reasonably expect to lead a long life. Since I like to fly, being able to get my airline to pay for my gas money for that many more years is 100% good deal, as far as I'm concerned.