|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 3612042)
If the age changes to 67 forced downgrades would never happen. It would trigger immediate age discrimination lawsuits that would be guaranteed winners. Management would never consider it knowing they would lose big time in court. The only way to beat it is insure that 67 does not pass. Write both your Senators and your Congressman. Letters make a difference.
|
Every pilot that goes out on LTD (with no chance of return) requires a new pilot to take their place. Labor cost is now new guy wages plus LTD. What impact do you think this will have on wages for EVERYONE when 50% of 65-67 are out on LTD? JB will gladly fund his stolen retirement with your career earnings.
|
Originally Posted by Wingtip220
(Post 3612082)
I don’t post here much but this topic seems to pull the aggression and immaturity out of many. With the advancement in preventative medicine and a more robust approach to healthy lifestyles the aging process is changing for the better. Within a decade we are going to see a lot of age related disease either eradicated or slowed considerably so tell me why should there be any mandatory retirement laws. I know surgeons, professors, scientists etc that are as sharp as a tack and are practicing in their fields with admiration. I know pilots who have retired and went right into the training environment to produce new pilots so if they’re in such cognitive decline how are they qualified to train, think about that. Everybody’s different and can be sacked medically at any time, age doesn’t matter. All I see here is selfishness. I’m not close to retirement btw but if the person I’m in the cockpit is safe and standard I don’t care what his/her age is. I wholeheartedly believe in physical standards and yes they should evolve with newer protocols and detection techniques but the era of age discrimination needs to go the way of the dodo. No other pilot has the power to tell another to “get out of my way boomer” or whatever other phrase has been lobbed towards older colleagues. I’m sure the many that oppose didn’t get to experience pay for training, post 9/11 lost decade, TWA/American staple, US Air pension forfeiture etc. so keep the perspective that todays time in the profession is great for the foreseeable future. Those who say the economy is gonna tank and cause layoffs well let me tell ya we’re all numbers and layoffs will happen regardless of the retirement age. So get over yourselves and realize in the end we all benefit when we’re not discriminated against.
In reality, we do need an age limit for practical reasons. I'm a bit agnostic as to what exactly it should be, but it should be determined by some fairly objective evaluators and science... not selfish angry youth who just got their legacy upgrade after 18 months on property and don't want to sit reserve for an extra 12 months, nor those seniors who have an obvious selfish motive to hang on at the expense of everyone else. So most of our opinions are not objective. Same with ALPA, they respond to the winds of membership opinion (as they should). If it increases, they could avoid a huge windfall to a small handful of senior citizens by phasing it in over time, ex increase the age limit by one month every 2-3 months. That would definitely be the way to go IMO, but the problem is that it won't dilute the short-term retirements, which is what this is all about in congress (or at the least giving the appearance of doing something about it). So if it happens near term, they'll throw the switch immediately. Advancing age obviously results in cognitive decline, and also increases the statistical risk of sudden incapacitation.. Practicality comes into play because obvious math says you'd need to screen older pilots more often and probably more thoroughly. At some point that gets expensive and impractical. They could just throw that expense onto the geriatric pilots, but there's real risk that enhanced screening would be extended to younger pilots as well... also at their expense. Can of worms, be careful what you ask for. I play video games, ride motorcycles and generally keep my brain engaged... I'm sure I could do better on a cog test than some folks half my age. IMO cog screening would be disruptive to our profession because it's a very blunt instrument. Just because you're good at whatever video game they dream up as a test doesn't mean you can land a heavy in gusty crosswinds and vice versa. I think experience and checkrides is the best "cog screen" for what we do. Eventually the risk of sudden incap is just gets too high, even if you pass an astronaut physical at the airport immediately prior to departure on every leg. That's obvious science and cannot be refuted. You just have to decide how far to the right you're willing to push it. |
Originally Posted by Tropical
(Post 3612039)
Says a guy who thinks airline pilot votes have enough clout to sway a vote in favor of extending it. Lol. Hypocrisy is your generation's superpower.
Reading comprehension. |
Originally Posted by Wingtip220
(Post 3612082)
I don’t post here much but this topic seems to pull the aggression and immaturity out of many. With the advancement in preventative medicine and a more robust approach to healthy lifestyles the aging process is changing for the better. Within a decade we are going to see a lot of age related disease either eradicated or slowed considerably so tell me why should there be any mandatory retirement laws. I know surgeons, professors, scientists etc that are as sharp as a tack and are practicing in their fields with admiration. I know pilots who have retired and went right into the training environment to produce new pilots so if they’re in such cognitive decline how are they qualified to train, think about that. Everybody’s different and can be sacked medically at any time, age doesn’t matter. All I see here is selfishness. I’m not close to retirement btw but if the person I’m in the cockpit is safe and standard I don’t care what his/her age is. I wholeheartedly believe in physical standards and yes they should evolve with newer protocols and detection techniques but the era of age discrimination needs to go the way of the dodo. No other pilot has the power to tell another to “get out of my way boomer” or whatever other phrase has been lobbed towards older colleagues. I’m sure the many that oppose didn’t get to experience pay for training, post 9/11 lost decade, TWA/American staple, US Air pension forfeiture etc. so keep the perspective that todays time in the profession is great for the foreseeable future. Those who say the economy is gonna tank and cause layoffs well let me tell ya we’re all numbers and layoffs will happen regardless of the retirement age. So get over yourselves and realize in the end we all benefit when we’re not discriminated against.
|
Originally Posted by joepilot50
(Post 3611997)
Biden will back his transportation secretary who has come out to oppose raising the age. If this remains a separate bill, I would expect it to be vetoed.
If it gets tossed into lets say the debt limit bill, it would probably get signed. |
Originally Posted by Moonbeam
(Post 3612128)
The data is already out there. Just ask NetJets and NetJets pilots why they had to implement an age cutoff. Flying with a Strom Thurmond or Dianne Feinstein is a lot of work.
|
Good grief, we're just along for the ride.
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3612114)
Partly true, in theory.
In reality, we do need an age limit for practical reasons. I'm a bit agnostic as to what exactly it should be, but it should be determined by some fairly objective evaluators and science... not selfish angry youth who just got their legacy upgrade after 18 months on property and don't want to sit reserve for an extra 12 months, nor those seniors who have an obvious selfish motive to hang on at the expense of everyone else. So most of our opinions are not objective. Same with ALPA, they respond to the winds of membership opinion (as they should). If it increases, they could avoid a huge windfall to a small handful of senior citizens by phasing it in over time, ex increase the age limit by one month every 2-3 months. That would definitely be the way to go IMO, but the problem is that it won't dilute the short-term retirements, which is what this is all about in congress (or at the least giving the appearance of doing something about it). So if it happens near term, they'll throw the switch immediately. Advancing age obviously results in cognitive decline, and also increases the statistical risk of sudden incapacitation.. Practicality comes into play because obvious math says you'd need to screen older pilots more often and probably more thoroughly. At some point that gets expensive and impractical. They could just throw that expense onto the geriatric pilots, but there's real risk that enhanced screening would be extended to younger pilots as well... also at their expense. Can of worms, be careful what you ask for. I play video games, ride motorcycles and generally keep my brain engaged... I'm sure I could do better on a cog test than some folks half my age. IMO cog screening would be disruptive to our profession because it's a very blunt instrument. Just because you're good at whatever video game they dream up as a test doesn't mean you can land a heavy in gusty crosswinds and vice versa. I think experience and checkrides is the best "cog screen" for what we do. Eventually the risk of sudden incap is just gets too high, even if you pass an astronaut physical at the airport immediately prior to departure on every leg. That's obvious science and cannot be refuted. You just have to decide how far to the right you're willing to push it. |
https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/...152578.article
Article indicates that the political motive is loss of service to smaller airports. ALPA opposes. RAA (regionals) in favor. NACA (ACMI/third tier) in favor. Doesn't say what A4A thinks, but I think they opposed it last time. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:40 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands