Originally Posted by
GeeWizDriver
Another area where Part 121 is light years ahead of us. In what parallel universe is it a good idea to have 75 year old chowderheads flying customers for hire?
60 was certainly too young. 65 might even be too young given the advances in fitness, nutrition, and medical technology. 67 seems about right.
But the people that apologize for NetJets missing the mark on contract improvements are frequently the same people who claim mandatory retirement is “arbitrary.” What is no longer “arbitrary?” 78? 91? 103?
Well I’ll tell you from experience, having to tell the guy with 4 bars not to takeoff on a taxiway 4 times before he even understood what was going on, sucks. Being paid less than half of what those dinosaurs make, and having to be responsible over them without them even knowing, was not sustainable for the 15 years it would take to upgrade. Certainly flew with amazing people but the concentration of oddballs and pilots who should have their wings clipped was higher at NJA than I’ve ever seen. Although I suppose that’s 135...
I have yet, in 2 years at my airline, to fly with somebody that shouldn’t be in that seat. Where at NJA probably 2 out of 10 captains shouldn’t have been captains.
Few things in the airline world are arbitrary. 117 is a great example of that. 65 didn’t come out of thin air, and 67 is certainly something I expect to see in my future.
NJA is a large holdout of guys who were in financial ruin and some wont ever recover. It’s not surprising that they are fighting the hardest for no retirement, their only option is to work until they die because they didn’t plan.