![]() |
Retirement age 67
We have recently learned that legislation could be introduced to increase the mandatory retirement age from 65 to 67, or possibly 68. The SWAPA Government Affairs Committee (GAC) is closely monitoring the issue and working with our industry partners to determine the road ahead. This has occurred rather rapidly, and we expect to see the legislation at any time.
ugh! |
Either raise it or give me full SS benefits at 65…….
|
Just read the email and shaking my head. It’s like the Lost Decade fairy keeps following me around.
|
Originally Posted by at6d
(Post 3421217)
Just read the email and shaking my head. It’s like the Lost Decade fairy keeps following me around.
On the up side, I will probably get some free bbq out of the deal. |
Originally Posted by poopooplatter
(Post 3421214)
We have recently learned that legislation could be introduced to increase the mandatory retirement age from 65 to 67, or possibly 68. The SWAPA Government Affairs Committee (GAC) is closely monitoring the issue and working with our industry partners to determine the road ahead. This has occurred rather rapidly, and we expect to see the legislation at any time.
ugh! |
Unreal. What a joke.
|
You know that SWA will have captains jumping for joy about this one. The recruiters are going to have an even tougher time now.
I hope it doesn’t come to fruition. Extending the age is a bandaid. If they let the shortage play out, the market will eventually correct itself. |
evidence? details? reports? where is this?
|
Great. More babysitting.
|
Originally Posted by APCHCLIMB
(Post 3421236)
evidence? details? reports? where is this?
|
It's time for Gen X to have a turn
|
I wish I could say I'm surprised, but I've been expecting something like this since watching regionals shut down due to staffing issues.
I'll call my reps and see if they know anything. |
Retirement age 67
Originally Posted by BobbyLeeSwagger
(Post 3421246)
It's time for Gen X to have a turn
Generation X keeps getting screwed time and time again.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...81a242f826.jpg |
Have a turn?
|
Originally Posted by BobbyLeeSwagger
(Post 3421246)
It's time for Gen X to have a turn
|
I got no problem with age 67 as long as you’re willing to go back to the bottom of the seniority list. Keep your pay band and vacation, but go back on weekend reserve and stop being a greedy b@stard.
|
Welcome news for all of us. Getting a new contract before retirement might be possible now for someone in their 30s.
|
For many who got screwed by Age 65…..this actually counteracts that and gives them a few more years at the right end of the pay scale. But for others….it just means more time stuck in the mud.
|
I hope the old grandpas aren’t offended when a gen z has to take the controls during a boomer senior moment. After 65 an auto land should be required on their legs, plus they should be banned from landing at certain airports.
|
Originally Posted by BobbyLeeSwagger
(Post 3421246)
It's time for Gen X to have a turn
|
Originally Posted by ReadOnly7
(Post 3421291)
For many who got screwed by Age 65…..this actually counteracts that and gives them a few more years at the right end of the pay scale. But for others….it just means more time stuck in the mud.
That makes some assumptions. The first being that we all went back to the airlines we were furloughed from. But after the 65 increase, the furloughs were extended so long that many of us just moved on and started over. About a 12 year hit for me. It also assumes they're already in the left seat. If not, it's just another hit to career earnings. It also assumes we would medically be able to fly to 67 to recoup those lost earnings. That's a big gamble. |
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
(Post 3421304)
That makes some assumptions. The first being that we all went back to the airlines we were furloughed from. But after the 65 increase, the furloughs were extended so long that many of us just moved on and started over. About a 12 year hit for me.
It also assumes they're already in the left seat. If not, it's just another hit to career earnings. It also assumes we would medically be able to fly to 67 to recoup those lost earnings. That's a big gamble. |
What would happen if you mandatory retired before this went effective (if that were to happen)
|
Originally Posted by ReadOnly7
(Post 3421308)
My comment covered all those assumptions. Good for SOME. Not good for others. You are clearly in the “others” camp. It’s a pretty $hitty system when we all have to hope for the end of somebody else’s livelihood to bolster our own. I just hope we all start to get some better contracts and it won’t be such an issue to have people ahead of us.
|
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
(Post 3421304)
It also assumes we would medically be able to fly to 67 to recoup those lost earnings. That's a big gamble.
That will help supplement my income as a Walmart greeter. |
Originally Posted by mkitrn
(Post 3421310)
What would happen if you mandatory retired before this went effective (if that were to happen)
|
Originally Posted by CBreezy
(Post 3421313)
Once you're off your seniority list, it's permanent
|
Originally Posted by BLMPilot
(Post 3421302)
I hope the old grandpas aren’t offended when a gen z has to take the controls during a boomer senior moment. After 65 an auto land should be required on their legs, plus they should be banned from landing at certain airports.
|
Originally Posted by mkitrn
(Post 3421314)
I wonder if people would go fly 121 somewhere for 2-3 years at bottom of the list?
|
Originally Posted by Moonbeam
(Post 3421316)
I would guess the legacies would stop hiring for a few years if nobody is retiring. But I guess the regionals would be hiring.
|
Originally Posted by Moonbeam
(Post 3421316)
I would guess the legacies would stop hiring for a few years if nobody is retiring. But I guess the regionals would be hiring.
|
Originally Posted by mkitrn
(Post 3421314)
I wonder if people would go fly 121 somewhere for 2-3 years at bottom of the list?
|
Originally Posted by WHACKMASTER
(Post 3421315)
Wow. Dramatic much? I’m totally against raising the age but what a crock of $7it you’re spewing.
|
I’m guessing the majority that will oppose (like me) were absolutely hammered in our careers from 2000 on. Obviously starting with 9/11, the ATP requirements, the Age 65 change, and the 2008 recession led to the “Lost Decade” generation of pilots, especially coming from the regional world. Those coming aboard a major now, especially to carriers like Delta, United, and American, may not be affected as much due to the mass retirements. Sure, I decided to go to SWA when I got the chance in 2015 after having to leave the regionals to build turbine PIC time in the corporate world (which took almost a decade alone). This would without a doubt increase an already high upgrade time for our generation. I’m in my 14th year of 121 and still have years to go before an upgrade.
|
Originally Posted by at6d
(Post 3421324)
When SWA offered the early out packages, we had several that took it and then went to other 121 carriers I.e. FedEx.
|
I could use it!
Airline #2 shut down in 2008, after being downgraded for 4 years, and a very positive, but insincere, suitor leading us to stick around. I was happy at this place all the same. With the recession, and being out of work several times between contract work in 3 other counties, it's taken me a long time to get a respectable flying gig in the USA. I instructed at two majors. The industry doesn't respect instructors. Not a lucrative position. So, I'm flying again. Bottom of the list at 56. Based where I live. Happy about it. I also have to plan to live until 95. Didn't think that was possible, but seeing my 88 y.o. father, former smoker, half a lung, still hanging on, I don't think 65 and out is going to work for me. I could use it. I think I've put up with a enough sh!t from this industry. |
Originally Posted by aeroengineer
(Post 3421328)
Serious question. How many went to the 91/135 world?
|
Originally Posted by mkitrn
(Post 3421318)
do you really think though all the 65 year olds are gonna be like let me stay at this another 2-3 years cdc life expectancy male is 76.3… I feel like some folks would take the opportunity but some would still retire?
|
Originally Posted by Al Czervik
(Post 3421237)
Great. More babysitting.
|
Originally Posted by Andy
(Post 3421336)
739. Seriously, do you think anyone has that data at their fingertips??? :confused:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:09 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands