View Single Post
Old 01-21-2007, 11:24 AM
  #25  
Skygirl
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,151
Default

Originally Posted by ryane946 View Post
Maybe Karma will strike the 55-60 year old pilots who have been at a major for 30 years. They have benefited from age 60 their entire career, now they want to suddenly change it to benefit themselves!!!

I don't think age 60 should ever be changed. For one, it just adds to the already large supply of pilots competing for jobs. More competition = crappier profession. Period. ICAO changed the retirement age to 65 not because of any safety or discrimination reasons, but simply to benefit the airlines in the Middle East and Asia where the lack of pilots are hurting the growth of airlines and ultimately their entire countries economy. I agree that a 64 year old airline pilot is better than a 70 hour airline pilot (SEE http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=7874). But we don't have 70 hour major airline pilots in the United States, nor do we have a shortage of pilots affecting our countries economic growth. So it is irrelevant to change the retirement age to 65.

Everyone has been crying the word FAIR. It is unfair to make a pilot retire at 60 years old... is a line I hear all the time. But these 60 year old pilots have benefited from age 60 their entire career, allowing them to spend:
less time at a commuter
less time as FO (low pay and QOL)
less time on reserve
less time commuting
less time spent in a crash pad
less time on smaller equipment making less money
less time taking the crappy schedules

I don't want age 60 to change because I have no desire to be anything but a Cessna-172 with my grandson when I am 60. But if you really feel it is discriminatory, necessary, and unfair, then it should be phased-in in a fair way. How about this.
Major airline pilots vary in age from 30-60 years old. Most of the older guys have been flying for a long time, while the younger guys have been flying for a shorter time. While there are some old pilots who are newer to the industry, this is a pretty good assumption.

Pilots who are 54-60 (and thus have benefited the most in their career from age 60) can fly until they are 61.
Pilots who are 48-54 (benefited quite a bit from age 60) can fly until they are 62.
Pilots who are 42-48 (benefited from age 60) can fly until they are 63.
Pilots who are 36-42 (benefited a little from age 60) can fly until they are 64.
Pilots 36 and under (benefited not much from the age 60 rule) can fly until 65.

How does that sound for FAIR. That way the senior guys who have been there for 30 years, and benefited from age 60 their entire careers, cannot screw the younger junior guys who have not benefited from age 60 as much!

Ryan, my fellow Bay Area friend, I like you and enjoy your contributions, but have to respectfully agree to disagree with you here. Although, I think your argument about phasing in a new age 65 has validity.

There will NEVER be a time to change the rule that will be fair to all . Leaving the rule unchanged because it's unfair to someone would be akin to saying that we should have not let women or minorities vote because not letting them vote benefited white males of all ages and enabled them to control the power structure. It could have been argued that it was unfair to change the rules of the game and the way of life that they had come to know. Discrimination is discrimination, whether it's age, sex or racial.
Skygirl is offline