The "right thing" in this case is a subjective standard. 65 may be the "right thing" for the pilots who need a few more years to make up for the defined-benefit plans they lost. It may be the "right thing" to those few who could fly well past 60 or even past 65 owing to genetics, or to those who have one of many other reasons.

Is it the "right thing" to a late-50-something captain who should've given up buttered rolls years ago and probably wouldn't pass the additional scrutiny that will be legislated? Grandfather their retirements in order to allow them to retire "early" at age 60? How much negotiating capital must we burn through to make that happen?

No one has said raising the retirement age is the "right thing" for the profession. I don't hear so much talk about "defending the profession" anymore. This smacks of "I've got mine...." Which is rational (don't get me wrong), but let's just admit what's at work here.