Over 60 can't land?
#41
I know everyone is going to flame this, and that's fine... I'm as guilty as others, mainly towards particular examples of "Captains", but if you really think about it, it's a bad road that the union leadership has put us on.
#42
I think it stems from the phrase "required crew member" in the bill. If you are not a S/O and are over 60 you aren't really a "required" crew member. I think that was the interpretation the Company and the Union came up with.
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 426
I believe this is where the confusion arises: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...a/age65_qa.pdf
This was posted on January 17, 200[8] by the FAA and it is on their website. (It actually states January 17, 2007, but alas, we know what they meant...)
This was posted on January 17, 200[8] by the FAA and it is on their website. (It actually states January 17, 2007, but alas, we know what they meant...)
#44
So as I understand what's being said here.. In order for a ND to be returned to the front seat he must first check out as an S/O? Doesn't make sense to me, but I guess it keeps the guys who are "injured", say a shoulder or something.. from playing the system and jumping back into a front seat over those who have played the game as intended...
Benefits of sending guys thru SO school with the anticipation of getting CA in bid 08-01
-- What if the class one medical doesn't work out?
-- What if the bid is canceled or awards delayed? FDX always like to have guys in que to go to training so they can change the class date to suit company actual staffing needs. As opposed to the long range projections (WAGs) provided by long bid cycles.
-- Cheaper to adequately staff CA seat and overstaff SO seat, even if only temporarily
-- Some may choose to retire
#45
Congrats FoxHunter!
Congrats to FoxHunter ... the below passage sounds like he just became our newest "new hire." Since he was over 60 when the law changed and NOT an actively employed flight crew member, I think he might be in big trouble Lucy. Oooops ... FH says I'm an "age bigot"
Question: May a person who was in the employment of an air carrier when he/she attained 60 years of age before December 13, 2007, but who was not conducting part 121 operations for the
carrier as a required flight deck crew member, continue employment with the air carrier?
Answer: Yes. However, under 49 U.S.C., § 44729(e)(1)(B), that person must be treated by the carrier as a “newly hired pilot...without credit for prior seniority or longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or
employment policies of the air carrier.”
Question: In the scenario described above, must the pilot be separated from the air carrier with a formal break in service in order to qualify for coverage of § 44729(e)(1)(B)?
Answer: No. The decision to “rehire” the pilot or keep the pilot in the airline’s employment is a matter to be decided through the company’s contractual process with its employees. In any case,
a person who attained age 60 before December 13, 2007, was not a required flight deck crewmember at the time, and who resumes pilot duties must be treated as a newly hired pilot.
Question: May a person who was in the employment of an air carrier when he/she attained 60 years of age before December 13, 2007, but who was not conducting part 121 operations for the
carrier as a required flight deck crew member, continue employment with the air carrier?
Answer: Yes. However, under 49 U.S.C., § 44729(e)(1)(B), that person must be treated by the carrier as a “newly hired pilot...without credit for prior seniority or longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or
employment policies of the air carrier.”
Question: In the scenario described above, must the pilot be separated from the air carrier with a formal break in service in order to qualify for coverage of § 44729(e)(1)(B)?
Answer: No. The decision to “rehire” the pilot or keep the pilot in the airline’s employment is a matter to be decided through the company’s contractual process with its employees. In any case,
a person who attained age 60 before December 13, 2007, was not a required flight deck crewmember at the time, and who resumes pilot duties must be treated as a newly hired pilot.
#47
Congrats to FoxHunter ... the below passage sounds like he just became our newest "new hire." Since he was over 60 when the law changed and NOT an actively employed flight crew member, I think he might be in big trouble Lucy. Oooops ... FH says I'm an "age bigot"
Question: May a person who was in the employment of an air carrier when he/she attained 60 years of age before December 13, 2007, but who was not conducting part 121 operations for the
carrier as a required flight deck crew member, continue employment with the air carrier?
Answer: Yes. However, under 49 U.S.C., § 44729(e)(1)(B), that person must be treated by the carrier as a “newly hired pilot...without credit for prior seniority or longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or
employment policies of the air carrier.”
Question: In the scenario described above, must the pilot be separated from the air carrier with a formal break in service in order to qualify for coverage of § 44729(e)(1)(B)?
Answer: No. The decision to “rehire” the pilot or keep the pilot in the airline’s employment is a matter to be decided through the company’s contractual process with its employees. In any case,
a person who attained age 60 before December 13, 2007, was not a required flight deck crewmember at the time, and who resumes pilot duties must be treated as a newly hired pilot.
Question: May a person who was in the employment of an air carrier when he/she attained 60 years of age before December 13, 2007, but who was not conducting part 121 operations for the
carrier as a required flight deck crew member, continue employment with the air carrier?
Answer: Yes. However, under 49 U.S.C., § 44729(e)(1)(B), that person must be treated by the carrier as a “newly hired pilot...without credit for prior seniority or longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or
employment policies of the air carrier.”
Question: In the scenario described above, must the pilot be separated from the air carrier with a formal break in service in order to qualify for coverage of § 44729(e)(1)(B)?
Answer: No. The decision to “rehire” the pilot or keep the pilot in the airline’s employment is a matter to be decided through the company’s contractual process with its employees. In any case,
a person who attained age 60 before December 13, 2007, was not a required flight deck crewmember at the time, and who resumes pilot duties must be treated as a newly hired pilot.
Oh, now THAT is priceless!
#49
I think that the definition of the phrase "Required Crewmember" is going to be key. There are several over 60 guys who have been sick/NOQ for many months now. Obviously, the ones who have turned 60 in the past 6 months are the majority of these. Anyway, all you have to do is look at the practice bid to see who these guys are. OBTW, 2nd practice bid closes today. Interesting to see how the company and association determine the definition of the all important Required Crewmember.
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 426
I think the FAA has given their opinion (to date)....
Question: May a person who was in the employment of an air carrier when he/she attained 60 years of age before December 13, 2007, but who was not conducting part 121 operations for the carrier as a required flight deck crew member, continue employment with the air carrier?
Answer: Yes. However, under 49 U.S.C., § 44729(e)(1)(B), that person must be treated by the carrier as a “newly hired pilot...without credit for prior seniority or longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or employment policies of the air carrier.”
This is a quote from the www.faa.gov website. I believe flying Part 61 flights does NOT meet the standard ennunciated by the FAA.
As for being sick/out on medical, I think someone should send this question to the FAA. Apparently they haven't put this specific question in their Q & A, maybe if enough ask they just might??
Specifically, the question to be asked: If a pilot turned age 60 prior to December 13, 2007, and at that time were listed as sick and/or out on medical, are they considered "new hires" or can said pilot return into their previous position?
Answer: Yes. However, under 49 U.S.C., § 44729(e)(1)(B), that person must be treated by the carrier as a “newly hired pilot...without credit for prior seniority or longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or employment policies of the air carrier.”
This is a quote from the www.faa.gov website. I believe flying Part 61 flights does NOT meet the standard ennunciated by the FAA.
As for being sick/out on medical, I think someone should send this question to the FAA. Apparently they haven't put this specific question in their Q & A, maybe if enough ask they just might??
Specifically, the question to be asked: If a pilot turned age 60 prior to December 13, 2007, and at that time were listed as sick and/or out on medical, are they considered "new hires" or can said pilot return into their previous position?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LAfrequentflyer
Hangar Talk
0
09-29-2005 11:47 AM