Originally Posted by
AirBear
I'm on Med LOA from NetJets so have read only in the crew room section of the union message board. This won't affect me personally but I was wondering how it's going to work with the NJA Loss of Medical plan if the age 65 bill is passed this summer.
For non-NJA types our LOM pays 60% for 6 months then 60% capped at $5000/month for 30 months for 3 years total. You maintain full benefits for the 3 years. After 3 years you're terminated with severance pay.
For those affected by age 65, I can see a rush to a Non-Pilot Friendly AME. I mean if you're getting canned why not take the 3 year LOM? I'm sure many pilots that old can find stuff that would ground them.
NetJets could try to claim "Force Majure" and not give the 3 years after age 65 but I doubt that would win in arbitration since NJA spent around $500K lobbying for the rule that will apply only to NJA.
Just curious what others think will happen with this. I read the message boards daily (not much else to do!) and haven't seen this question raised.
Interesting concept. Hadn’t crossed my mind. Nor anybody else’s, apparently.
Given the current political situation as described by the head of the Industry Affairs committee today, I don’t think it’s going to happen. At least not this year.
In my view, Netjets money would be better spent approaching major airlines to combine their lobbying efforts to force an INDUSTRY-WIDE mandatory retirement age of 67. If you hold out to the public under Part 121, Part 135, or Part 91K, the mandatory retirement age would be increased ONE more time, to 67 ACROSS THE BOARD.
The 121 airlines can’t find enough pilots and would like to keep theirs a little longer and Netjets wants to cut loose the public relations and benefit cost liabilities of 70+ year old pilots. There is some common ground there.