Do you believe that stat means that 36% of pilots, age 64, have underlying medical conditions that make them unable to meet the requirements of Part 67? Or, do you think it's a reflection of the CBA that gives NO credit for sick leave balances at retirement?

Let's flip it however, say 36% of age 64 pilots are unavailable, that means 64% of that group IS available. A CEO favoring replacing a pilot at the top of the list (who is a top pay scale, with maximum vacation, and all the other "maximum" labor costs for that job classification) with new guy who is at the bottom scale, and with benefits near or at the bottom of the scale can't be surprising to anyone. However, at United's own admission, they don't know where they'll get the manpower needed to execute on the marketing plan.

The get out of my seat crowd has little merit to the argument when there are unfilled Captain vacancy bids. The seats are open, but where are all the eager new guys to jump in?

Thats an anomaly. It isn’t the case at every airline.

The vast majority of the current wave is being driven by airlines hiring aggressively to replace early and age 65 retirements during the covid lull. Raising the age does very little as long as that continues to be the case as projected retirements are a relatively minor influence in the current hiring and movement. Why take on the added long-term costs for what doesn't even amount to a bandaid fix? I find it hard to believe that any CEO of an airline whose attrition is primarily retirement-driven supports this.

One of the things I love about our contract. Can cash out at 100% up to 700 hours of sick time at your current pay rate. I will never save up that much but having a few hundred would be nice.

I would be curious if we have the same issue if people calling out to burn sick time those last two years.

That's exactly who I was thinking of when I wrote that.

If you go by that, then pilots could go on disability at 62.

I expect this to pass in early 2023. It will likely be an R House and Senate.

Correct; our PAC money is not enough to interest pols. There's a lot more money out there.

I saw that on CNBC this AM. I think he knows exactly where pilots stand on an age change and just said that to please the bulk of United pilots.
How much would he reap in training savings if he squeezed another two years out of each pilot?

You know what's so funny about that stat? There was a similar stat of 58 and 59 year olds before they increased retirement age. I thought it might make a difference in passing 65. It didn't. And now 'the big sick' usage years have moved to right before retirement. Again.

All those 64 year old sick pilots will magically get sick at 66. Kirby knows it and was just throwing that out to appear that he's against the change.
I don't believe him. He want through SERE and learned about 'apparent sincerity'.

No, there are a lot of retirements happening at the big 3. Plus they're trying to grow. I don't have the number of retirements for 2022 at United, but it's likely in excess of 400.

I'd like to see that at United, but since we have a lot of pilots who retire with 500+ hours in their sick banks, why would the company allow pilots to cash that out?

I’m not saying they would, it was clearly something we negotiated for. I was just bringing it up in regards to that comment about 37% of age 62+ pilots being out sick. I wonder if they are just trying to burn sick hours before retirement.

"A Lot"? what percentage of pilots retiring at age 65 have a SL balance in excess of 500 hours. That number would be telling. The current United contract is a "use it or lose it" for sick leave and many pilots as they near retirement are having the elective surgeries they've been putting off for a career, and of course not wanting to leave anything on the table. To use "pilots on sick leave" as a metric of reliability for UAL pilots under the current CBA is disingenuous at best. Reporting pilots that start a long term disability claim at age 63 or older would be a far more accurate measure of pilot heath for that age group, and ALPA R&I could easily provide those numbers. Since LTD requires verification of illness by the policy underwriter, there'd be a much lower risk of the numbers being skewed by "creative scheduling".

There was an AA captain in my pad a few years back doing just that his last couple of years. Had it all mapped out to retire with zero hours in his bank. He said he had a vision problem; he just couldn’t see himself going to work…. :D

Come on Thor, you know I don't have a number. Are you saying that you haven't heard of guys who have proudly said that they have a ton of SL when they're about to retire? I assume you're a fairly senior WB CA; ask some of your FOs if they hear that much.

I've had cancer so I understand how LTD works. And I've also listened to senior WB CAs telling me which surgeries they're getting at 64+. Usually hip, shoulder, knee. And many of them have mapped out multiple surgeries in that last year. I completely understand all of that; I could use a couple of elective surgeries that I'll save for when I'm close to retirement. And since we're discussing burning high sick banks, a lot of guys plan on burning 90 hrs/mo until depleted so that delays collecting (the lower dollar) LTD.

I hope we can agree that the high percentage of pilots out on SL will simply shift to the last 1-2 years before any new retirement age.