Originally Posted by
Hoosier Daddy
I was hired when the retirement age was 60. I didn't see the 65 change as some apocalyptical, garment rending plague. Sure I stagnated (and for 2.5 times longer than this change would be), but I didn't insist the pilots who benefitted from it retire at 60. I was making enough to raise my family, even if I was just slinging gear.
I know of only one pilot who retired before age 65 once it changed. I have no doubt that the vast majority of the pilots complaining about 67 will stay until 67. It makes no sense to me that all the pilots who might "benefit" from this should leave because there are a few younger pilots who have promised themselves that they'll retire at 65.
And again, where is the cutoff for good stagnation vs bad stagnation?
The central argument is not that the pilots should all retire at 65 instead of 67 should the law change. Most are advocating for the law not to change at all. I have no beef with a pilot making a personal choice to work beyond 65 if it's legal, but would prefer (for a myriad of established reasons) that the limit not be changed.