FoxHunter

No, you have that wrong. She said that pilots that have passed retirement age would not be covered. At most airlines today when one reaches age 60 he/she must retire, and when you retire you are removed from the seniority list . FedEx/UPS pilots that go to S/O at age 60 do not retire, are not removed from the seniority list. They retain all the rights of their seniority number. The FAA can set a max age but they cannot set conditions of employment.

TonyC

And because the FAA cannot set conditions of employment, I believe her use of the term "Retirement Age" is a misnomer, driven by the public's likely confusion were she to use the proper term, the "Regulatory Age." The FAA can change the Regulatory Age, but it would take too many paragraphs to explain what that means to the Press, so they use "Retirement Age" in its place.

Since we understand what Regulatory Age means, I believe you can go back and insert that term wherever she used "Retirement Age" and get a more accurate picture of the intents and purposes of the NPRM.







.

FoxHunter

You are correct and the "regulated age" is in our contract, along with provisions for any change.

A300_Driver

It is in the Pilot Benefit Book (which the Contract states remains in effect) on page I-23...normal retirement age (Age 60)
But now it seems it should have been in the Contract!!!

Velocipede

This is excellent advice. An NPRM takes 18 to 24 months to become reality. So for the younger guys, that's two years of Age 60's who'll get command ejected. That's two years worth of upgrades to grab RIGHT NOW. Its also two years more on the panel for the retreads and two years less they'll have before they reach the new magic age 65.

There's been lots of instant whining on these Age 60 threads about getting stalled in place for 5 years. While there are some guys who will stay on, most of us are looking to "escape" at 60 and have a plan in place to do so. Especially if you're at an airline with a sound A plan, your upgrade delay should be insignificant.

But, I'd take it now (or in the next two years) as soon as you can hold it even if it means Reserve. The vagaries of this industry are too numerous and the Age 65 carnival is just one more monkey wrench in the machinery.

A300_Driver

Well said, and now even more so with the looming change to the regulatory age...
The companies are going to have a lot more uncertainty as well since there are going to be a lot more disability claims for the 60+ guys trying to claw their way back into the left seat. I'm not sure they really thought this out.
Some smart guy once said, "Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it!"

TonyC

The term Regulated Age is used in our CBA when referencing crewmember qualifications.


Retirement is described in the Retirement section of the Pilot Benefit Book, and it says:

Retirement: Pension Plan and Non-Qualified Plans: Retirement Dates



Negotiations would be required to change the definition of Normal Retirement Date. A cursory review of this language would seem to indicate 3 things.

First, if the Regulated Age changes to 65, a pilot who then reaches that age would be allowed to continue in that Captain's seat (with whatever other restrictions the FAA imposes to go along with the rule change).

Second, the Normal Retirement Age remains at 60, so those of us who have no desire to fly 'til we drop will have full retirement benefits as planned.

Third, there's no guidance for the people who have already passed the Regulated Age of 60 and have moved to the Flight Engineer seat. They were previously dealt with in the "Reaching the Regulated Age" texts and changed seats. There is no language that provides a mechanism for "undoing" that move. The question of what to do with that group would have to be negotiated.

Taking a broad look at the CBA language it could be argued that those crewmembers should be allowed to bid the Captain's seat according to the existing procedures for filling vacancies, i.e., the vacancy posting. They would bid a seat their seniority could hold, and would train in seniority order. Unless there are Primary or Secondary vacancies in those seats, they would be stuck in their present seat positions.







.

Ranger

I'm on a trip. A long one. So I don't have access to my reference material. What Tony wrote is both what I thought to be true and what was sent to me by the R&I folks through my LEC. Another variable is what was implied and discussed during the actual negotiation process. But that's way the hell above my pay grade and my level of understanding.

Velocipede

This is exactly why no one with A plan language should allow their CONTRACTUAL retirement age to be linked to the regulatory retirement age. And the young guys should especially be lobbying their reps because keeping this language intact allows (even encourages) guys to retire at 60.

Why?

The extra A plan 10% you'd get by flying to 65 isn't worth the effort if there is no penalty for going at 60. On the other hand, if the contractual age links to the regulatory age, the early retirement penalty is too great to leave at 60.

A300_Driver

For some of us, there isn't necessarily any extra A plan after age 60--our A plan has a cap at 25 years of service X 2% = max of 50%...
I hit 25 yos prior to age 60--just working for B plan and salary at that point.