Age 67? - Page 10 - Airline Pilot Central Forums

#91

pipe , 02-26-2015 02:04 PM

Banned

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdx727pilot

I have every intention of retiring the year I turn 60, but reading threads like this make me want to stay until 65, just to fulfill all those expectations of pipe, manny, and company.

Knock yourself out. It's your life you're shortening. Probably for the best.

Pipe

#92

MD11Fr8Dog , 02-26-2015 02:28 PM

...Whatever It Is!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

Mark,

I'm hardly bitter. I just don't think any pilot has the right to tell another pilot when or how he should retire. All the whiners here seem to think they were owed a Major airline job or an upgrade on a specified time line.

Considering the fluidity of the aviation business, it say those kind of expectations rival the Theater of the Absurd.

Everyone is dealt a hand based on when they got into the business. Some guys were A scalers who upgraded in 2 years. Some guys were B-scalers who upgraded in 6. Some were 9-11 victims who upgraded in 15.

The good news is with the current hiring wave those times are coming down quickly. The guys on the cutting edge of this wave will upgrade quickly and move on to wide body seats. Those who come in 5 years later may be doomed to narrow bodies for their career.

But throwing a screaming, name calling fit because life has been "UNFAIR" to you is peeing in the wind. Those who do that look like spoiled brats and idiots combined.

Personally, I think your expectations are invalid!

#93

Mark2792 , 02-26-2015 02:56 PM

Gets Weekends Off

-Nothing brings disunity during CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS like a good 'ol fashioned OLD GUY versus YOUNG GUY thread.

Think about it....

#94

J Dawg , 02-26-2015 03:22 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

My age group moved the goal line? You need a lesson in history, Son.

You totally contradict yourself in the rest of your paragragh!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

ICAO changed the age limit several years before we did. Granted, there were guys (notably SWA pilots) who were lobbying Congress to change. They were mostly guys who lost their A plan retirement due to spurious bankruptcy filings. People who were counting on $100K a year pensions that saw them reduced to PBGC minimums.

What would you do in their shoes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

When it became apparent that the ICAO change was going to be universal (only the U.S., France and a couple banana republics were the only holdouts) Congress was forced to change the American law. Google the Supremacy Clause for the legal reason why.

So I did. Nowhere did it say that ICAO regs are the supreme law of the land over the constitution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

Can you not understand there was a basic unfairness in the fact that foreign pilots could exercise their pilot license in U.S. airspace over the age of 60 while U.S. pilots could not.

A foreign air carrier is operated under the regulations of that nation, not by ICAO. Bilateral agreements allow those carriers to operate in US airspace under an operations certificate issued by that nation, and vice versa. ICAO is a branch of the UN and as such has no means of enforcement, much less dictate at what age our pilots must retire.

Now, a foreign country may use ICAO regs as a baseline, and many do, but there is nothing prohibiting a nation from imposing stricter regs, such as mandatory retirement at 60 vs 65 for ICAO.

Is it unfair that an FO from Europe can have 1000 hours flying in US airspace, but new regs in the US require American pilots to now have 1500 before being hired? Is it unfair that we can carry guns but they can't? Probably, but that's the world we live in.

I find it quite ironic that you would play the "unfair" card in this discussion after you won the lottery at the direct expense of the "joker" in your right seat. Maybe you should keep that in mind during your next CRM brief. Perspective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

Nothing like a hypocrite.

Indeed.

#95

flyphisher , 02-26-2015 03:32 PM

Line Holder

Packrat is 108% spot on. And all his facts from what I see are spot on.

There are no guarantees.....in anything. And none of us will know if we made the right decision(s) until retirement. Be it FedEx, UPS, Delta. There is zero guarantee that any of these companies will exist in 30 years. Zero. Do you think in the 40-50-60-and 70's that PanAm, TWA, Eastern, Braniff....would have ever thought their companies would be completely obliterated? Think about that. Think about it long and hard.

You fight for what you can hope to change. You fight tooth and nail. And then you fight more.

But to EXPECT.....anything....is a Fools payday. Companies DO NOT exist for the benefit of the pilot group.

I too was impacted at UPS by the age 65 rule. 80% of the pilot list across all airlines were affected. At UPS we had the added bonus of guys that roles back to the backseat at age 60, and waited and hoped they'd get a window seat again. Which they did. I and many others lost the captain seat.

Was I bitter? Nope. Didn't like it but I understood. It's hard for ICAO to allow what we wouldn't allow. Yet international pilots could fly in our airspace. The USA didn't have a leg to stand on. Was the intent to make us work until we drop dead therefore not having to pay retirement? Yep. Probably did at some point.

You fight and hopefully prevail. Same with 117 cargo cutout. We all know why we were carved out. Money. Corruption. By two major companies mostly. It's blatant. But what are you going to do? If it eats you up so bad, then You gotta get out of the industry. Or go to a pax carrier. It's that simple. Accept it an live longer.

Turning this into an old vs young with phrases of get out of my seat, three ex wives, etc....is beyond the pale of ridiculous.

Some/many pilots need a reality check.

#96

NoHaz , 02-26-2015 04:07 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

My age group moved the goal line? You need a lesson in history, Son. ICAO changed the age limit several years before we did. Granted, there were guys (notably SWA pilots) who were lobbying Congress to change. They were mostly guys who lost their A plan retirement due to spurious bankruptcy filings. People who were counting on $100K a year pensions that saw them reduced to PBGC minimums.

What would you do in their shoes?

When it became apparent that the ICAO change was going to be universal (only the U.S., France and a couple banana republics were the only holdouts) Congress was forced to change the American law. Google the Supremacy Clause for the legal reason why.

Can you not understand there was a basic unfairness in the fact that foreign pilots could exercise their pilot license in U.S. airspace over the age of 60 while U.S. pilots could not.

Perhaps you jokers should look past your own self interest and walk a mile in their shoes. You're going to be faced with age mandated retirement eventually. Every one of you studs who claims they're going to retire at Age 60 are blowing smoke. You're the guys who will work until 65. Nothing like a hypocrite.

Lets add a few items to your version of the history lesson.

1. Plenty of FDX guys were involved in the lobbying. There was an ANC Capt. quoted in articles who made numerous trips to DC to augment the SWA effort.

2. What would I have done in their shoes? Here's what I would have done in our management shoes. Not let over 60's go to the 10 and 727 backseat without a bid to wait for the rule change. The seats were overmanned already. Once the rule did change not cancel the entire system bid, instead tell over 60's congrats as seats become available you can bid them. Your age group manipulated the whole process to keep a group on the property and to allow them to rebid any Capt seat they wanted immediately. Huge disruption cost for many and excess bid costs for the company, but not your problem.

3. Age change wasn't a done deal until ALPA leaders (age group again) decided the 'train was leaving the station' and even though most of ALPA members opposed the change 'you'd want us to be at the table for the changes right, so let's just say we support it.' The misrepresented ALPA support is what made the change happen and happen so quickly, at least that's what Sen McCain has stated.

I may work past 60. That's not my issue, its the way the whole thing happened that I have a problem with.

#97

pipe , 02-26-2015 04:17 PM

Banned

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packrat

Can you not understand there was a basic unfairness in the fact that foreign pilots could exercise their pilot license in U.S. airspace over the age of 60 while U.S. pilots could not.

Bull. If the laws of the country that you're based in didn't apply, your FAA ATP wouldn't be worth anything in many countries. Rules are not necessarily level across borders.

Pipe

#98

HIFLYR , 02-26-2015 04:30 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoHaz

True Dat!!!

#99

NoHaz , 02-26-2015 04:33 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Things have worked out excellent for me. No whining here just think the process was flawed.

"Thanks
For your thoghts, D#ckhead. FYI, I retired from Part 121 passenger flying at age 60. Missed flying after a couple months and got a Part 125 cargo gig.

You and all the other whiners here have no right to tell ANY pilot when he has to quit flying.

Sorry things haven't panned out for you. I guess you could quit."

#100

pipe , 02-26-2015 04:35 PM

Banned

Bitter old ba$tard, isn't he?