Well, that certainly got people stirred up. DALPA put out a similarly vague message. Impossible to gauge what the likelihood of this actually happening is without more details. ALPA opposes the change at the national level, and numerous resolutions that have been introduced at DALPA LEC meetings have been overwhelmingly voted down by membership. I also find it very hard to believe that management at the major airlines support this change either. If those groups don't coalesce around the change, it's DOA. They both have extensive lobbying apparatuses that they'll deploy to oppose the change, which is a key difference from what happened last time the age changed. I think one of two things is happening. Either some of the independent regionals and/or perhaps some of the ULCCs are working with their representatives to enact the change to stem attrition, or the unions are attempting to galvanize support against a hypothetical change to head it off before it becomes a more legitimate possibility.

I just can't see any of the big 6 management teams supporting this. At Delta, we had by far the highest early out participation amongst the majors and we still only need to hire at this pace for another year or so before mellowing out to a more normal pre-covid pace. I just can't see them chasing such a high cost change to head off an issue that will likely have come close to working itself out by the time a change like this would have even been implemented. It seems like it would be MUCH cheaper for them to go after some of the barriers affecting the regional carriers, like the 1500 hour rule and the 1000 hours required for upgrade.