Could someone please explain to me how and why it is discriminatory to force a pilot to retire at age 60
but it is not discriminatory to force that same pilot to retire at age 65?
I find it perplexing that a group calling themselves
Airline Pilots Against Age Discrimination would support replacing one number with a different number.
I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but isn't this still age discrimination? Wouldn't retirement based on ones ability to pass a Class I physical be the only true non-discriminatory policy?
Tipsy[/QUOTE]
Of course its discriminatory. But it is legal discrimination. We are not unique in this situation. You have to be 21 to legally drink in the USA - legal discrimination. You often have to be 25 to rent a car in the USA - legal discrimination.
Almost all military members (probably a few Flag Officer exceptions) have to retire at 62.
Air traffic controllers have to mandatorily retire at what, about 36 years old or something like that?
And yes you have to retire at age 65 from part 121 Ops in the USA - legal discrimination.................................... .................................................. .................................................. ...........................................for now.
Scoop