Originally Posted by
gollum
I guess we will find out when they raise the age. Should be some interesting statistics. Wonder how many that support increasing the age, are for/against stricter medical standards
I support stricter medical standards. But I don't think many advocates have thought this suggestion through - it's a half baked idea. Why?
It is very unlikely to improve safety. Please name a commercial flight in the last decade that has had a mishap due to a pilot's medical condition. Let's examine any data before jumping to conclusions.
In addition, this will reduce the total number of pilots - which is the goal of those pushing for stricter medical standards. This (stage 3 bargaining) is all about exacerbating a pilot shortage.
Now, here's where this half baked idea hurts those that can pass their physicals ... all of a sudden their LTD rates spike because a ton of pilots are out on LTD due to losing their medical.
Bottom line; If I lose my medical, I'll be happy to collect LTD until mandatory retirement.
And frankly, all this talk about stricter medicals is just stage 3, bargaining. It's not going to happen even if the age changes.
Originally Posted by
guppie
31 Democrats in the House A&I Commitee voted against age 67. They are friends of ALPA. Too bad 32 Republicans voted for it. Friends of RAA. Any questions?
Oh my. You should get schooled on how things work in the beltway sausage factory. Those Ds are NOT your friend. The outcome of the vote was already known, but they voted against in order to appear opposed to 67 - to keep those ALPA PAC contributions flowing into their coffers and securing loyal voters. Mission accomplished and those contributors/voters are none the wiser.