Originally Posted by Venkman

I don't think your points are necessarily wrong, but I look at it this way - you're arguing "why shouldn't we?"when the real argument is "why should we?" Who benefits? Senior pilots (financially) and the company's who would go to the ends of the earth to avoid sweetening labor contracts. If there was currently a debate about establishing a mandatory retirement age, your points would resonate better. But the argument is about why we should keep moving the established age up, and the crux of that argument is to help alleviate the pilot shortage driven by retirements. It's this looming phenomena that has granted a great deal of leverage to pilots all over, not just 121. The salary and QOL improvements that have grown out of this situation over the last 10 years is remarkable. I view pilots at the top of the payscale, arguing in favor of Age 67, as willingly and selfishly sacrificing that leverage at the expense of those below them. You're talking about throwing water on coals that haven't been this hot in 60 years. I think if the industry was stagnant right now, there wouldn't be as much passion. But it's the opposite, it's roaring. Companies are hoping for a recession or anything to cool it off and take the wind out of labor's sails. Age 67 helps them and hurts everyone else. Stop giving them ways around improving this job. They're using the greed of the individual to stave it off as long as possible. Stop helping.