Originally Posted by
throttleweenie
Well, how about this then? I hear a lot of crap from my F/Os about how us older guys are wrecking their career advancement by staying past 60. I'm at a loss to understand why they tell me this since I was 52 when that was enacted, and thus, got just as screwed as anyone, but I'm assuming that they mean anyone older than them who stays past 60 is screwing everyone junior/younger than them.
So, here's my open offer: To all those guys whom feel screwed by age 65, if you'll all go down to the Notary Public with me and sign the same affidavit as me, we can all be happy. That affidavit says that we will ALL quit at 60. But I don't have any takers so far because they all say that they'll now have to go past 60 to recoup their losses (I guess they're entitled to do that, whereas the older guys whom have precious little time to recover are not entitled to go past 60).
Pretty simple: if someone is so sure that quitting at 60 is the right thing, they should have NO PROBLEM making a legal promise to do so. And good luck dealing with the curve balls thrown your way in the meantime.
By the way, I'm 56 and can't wait to be done with this ʙʉʟʟʂʜit. I've been a captain (the word is not capitalized, according to Webster's Dictionary, so I use lower case, even though some use upper case for captains of my integrity. That's for all the tools out there whom believe that using upper v. lower means something) for 16 years, but never owned the "Captain's House" or Lamborghini, Corvette, or Yak 52, etc. I just downsized my home, matter o' fact.
And I lived on United's B-scale for 5 years, qualifying for food stamps the first two years as a pilot for the biggest airline in the free world.
TW
TW,
Not active in the fight, but I personally had no problem with anyone that elected to stay after the change. In fact, I flew with a 320 Capt about a month prior to the rule going into effect. He was in good financial shape according to him but the pension hit obviously hurt.
He said nonetheless, he'd be okay and was looking forward to it. Anyway, the rule was announced to be effective on his birthday. Flew with him in late December on a trip after the change. Asked him why he didn't retire as he had it all planned out with the pension hit and all? He said something along the lines of he was going to but then realized he needed to teach me way more!
I laughed and told him I hoped he had bought a lottery ticket before his good luck ran out!
Again, no problem with the change itself. More the way it came about. That said, everyone has to realize it changed the progression landscape that of course was already destroyed by prior events. This of course added to it.
I can understand both sides of the argument. And will say that an extra 5 years of stagnation was one consideration in taking a voluntary furlough. I don't blame those that elected to stay or praise those that I saw elect to retire on time. They all made the best decision for them given the change in the playing field.
Frats,
Lee