Maybe........Maybe not........we will see. Regardless of the talk, most of the pro's, for a plethora of reasons think it's ok to "have theirs' and then want some of mine (ours).

 

A. Ask the non-CBA employees how current practices helped them keep their pensions.

B. the rule says age 60.

 

A. Thats my point we have a CBA if the company wants to change it our moral superiority of having been for or against age 65 is not going to change what we ask for in return.

B. And the rules say new hires, et al, no vote.

 

Its not a vote, its a poll. Hence the "vote" in my posts.

 

German court rules Lufthansa can force pilots into retirement at age 60
FRANKFURT (AFX) - A German court ruled that it is legal for Deutsche Lufthansa AG (Xetra: 823212 - news) to force its pilots to retire at age 60.
Three pilots had filed a complaint with a labour court in Frankfurt, citing a breach of Germany's laws against discrimination and demanding that the maximum retirement age be pushed to the age of 65.
The court said that the age limit is based on the legitimate goal of ensuring 'the bodies and lives of the crew, passengers and people in the areas over which airplanes fly.'
The age limit is appropriate and necessary, the court said.
[email protected]
COPYRIGHT
Copyright AFX News Limited 2007. All rights reserved.
The copying, republication or redistribution of AFX News Content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of AFX News.
AFX News and AFX Financial News Logo are registered trademarks of AFX News Limited

There is the potential for each contract to be more restrictive than the FAA. If the majority of union is in favor for age 60, that could be the new work rule. It would take a lot of pressure from the crew force to make it happen.

 

Age 60 is not in our CBA, it is changable on a whim by the company. If we want to keep it we will have to spend boucoup negotiating capital putting it in the CBA.

 

AGE 60 is not stated in the contract but AGE 60 is stated in the "Plan Document" as the Normal retirement age. so We are covered.

You are correct that the next contract negotiations we will expend large negotiation resources keeping what we have.......(my opinion) should the rule change or be in effect before negotiations cocnclude.

 

Agreed-under this contract we are covered. After that all bets are off.

 

But isn't hat how it always is anyway?

But it will be an addtional hurdle that I would prefer not to have to Leap over.

 

No, this is the first time the regulated age is facing a change. There has never been a reasonable argument that 60 in our documents should change before, now we will be fighting our whole fight just to keep this from changing. The company will save a lot of money by not paying us retirement for 5 more years, and then paying it for fewer years after they do start. We would not win that one without giving up any hopes of any other improvements.