Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Age 67 bill

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-03-2023 | 07:01 AM
  #41  
Margaritaville's Avatar
It's 5 o'clock somewhere
 
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 2,671
Likes: 17
Default

Oh this again? Sure we haven't had a good troll come out in 2023 yet.

Nice post count, OP. I really can't believe the mods are going to let this one ride. Obvious trolling.
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 07:38 AM
  #42  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 155
Likes: 7
Default

Age 65 is there for 1 reason. Safety. Your may not agree with that, but that's the stated reason for it.

The only reason it should be changed is if it's deemed to be safe to do so.

Congress, pilots, airlines, the flying public, boomers retirement account managers, et. al, can't determine if raising the retirement age is the SAFE thing to do.

Conflating this issue with money or seniority is the absolutely worst take someone can have, and easily shows their bias.
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 08:34 AM
  #43  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,886
Likes: 684
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by Margaritaville
Oh this again? Sure we haven't had a good troll come out in 2023 yet.

Nice post count, OP. I really can't believe the mods are going to let this one ride. Obvious trolling.

No TOS violation, and it doesn't hurt to expose this topic to the light of day. I don't think he got the response he was hoping for...
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 09:11 AM
  #44  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 2,235
Likes: 81
Default

Originally Posted by Agent62
Age 65 is there for 1 reason. Safety. Your may not agree with that, but that's the stated reason for it.

The only reason it should be changed is if it's deemed to be safe to do so.

Congress, pilots, airlines, the flying public, boomers retirement account managers, et. al, can't determine if raising the retirement age is the SAFE thing to do.

Conflating this issue with money or seniority is the absolutely worst take someone can have, and easily shows their bias.
“Safety” is a continuum! People in their 40s and 50s have more cardiac events than 20 and 30 yr olds so it would be “safer” to only have pilots under 40 flying.

How safe is safe enough is the question.

Many factors into safety of course but to make blanket statements about a population as a whole based only on age is a diminishing notion as age increases as people’s health varies quite a bit with age but everyone ends up at the same destination.
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 09:43 AM
  #45  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Default

What is unsafe about a pilot in good health (at least according to their medical) to fly pax an extra two years? Corporate has no retirement age. Some of them are flying until they’re 75. If at 65 you feel incapable or your AME feels you are incapable of flying pax anymore then that’s an obvious time to stop. Again though I feel most pilots, even in great health, are taking early outs anyway.
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 03:54 PM
  #46  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Default

Age 65 is there for safety reasons? They said the same thing about age 60. If there is a pilot shortage, then why not increase the age to 67?
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 04:25 PM
  #47  
TANSTAAFL's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
From: Still in one
Default

Lots of 91 and 135 jobs available if you want to fly for a few more years
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 06:43 PM
  #48  
dmeg13021's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 927
Likes: 110
Default

Originally Posted by Boeingdude
Age 65 is there for safety reasons? They said the same thing about age 60. If there is a pilot shortage, then why not increase the age to 67?
If there is a pilot shortage, then WHY increase the age to 67? We have met the enemy….
Reply
Old 01-03-2023 | 07:14 PM
  #49  
On Reserve
 
Joined: May 2022
Posts: 126
Likes: 10
From: B737 CA
Default

Originally Posted by STEAMROLLER
This bill is good for all pilots to have the option to fly until age 67. Please contact your representatives below;
Senate Bill S-4607 and House Bill HR-8513 "Let Experienced Pilots Fly Act" allow pilots to fly until age 67.
Senator Lindsay Graham (Senator-S.C.) and Representative Chip Roy (R-TX-21) introduced the bills on July 25-26 2022.
There are also numerous co-sponsors in congress that support these bills. Senator Graham and Representative Roy merely introduced the bills last July and no further action has yet been taken.


//////////CONGRESS MEETS ON JAN 3, 2023. YOUR ACTIONS TO MOVE THESE BILLS FORWARD ARE IMPERATIVE/////////


*Due to the effects of Sept. 11th, Bird Flu, bankruptcies resulting in the loss of our pensions, poorly managed airline mergers and the recent Covid 19 pandemic many of us have had limited airline careers due to furlough, pay cuts, delayed upgrades to captain and loss of wages.

If you are interested in having the "option" to continue to fly to age 67 which closely matches the Social Security retirement age; .please contact your elected representative(s) using the link below.


https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member


We the experienced pilots of the U.S. airline industry are strongly in favor of passing Senate bill 4607 & House bill 8513. Thousands of pilots like us are nearing the mandatory retirement age of 65. Some of us would like to continue our careers and help our companies get through this current extreme pilot shortage. Last summer, hundreds of flights were canceled due to a lack of staffing. Regional airlines are in dire straits trying to fly their schedules with minimum staffing. Major airlines are hiring as fast as they can and due to training pipelines are limited to how fast they can ramp up to match the pilot shortage. Analyst show a current shortage of 8,000 pilots and forecast the shortage to exceed 30,000 pilots by 2025. Another study by Kiplinger shows the North America will be short 12,000 pilots by next year. No matter how you look at it, the airline industry is facing an ever increasing shortage. Allowing pilots to stay until age 67 will help to alleviate this problem. Every airline pilot requires a Class 1 FAA Medical to fly with an Airline Transport Rating and pilots allowed to fly past age 65 would still need to meet these stringent requirements. This requires meeting with a certified FAA Medical Examiner every 6 months and requires an EKG every year. Almost all the pilots that are close to this age limit have decades of experience with the airlines. This experience and wisdom can be passed to the younger pilots joining the airlines today. Age limits for pilots were passed over a 100 years ago by ICAO and times have changed. Canada, New Zealand and Australia have NO age limits for pilots. Japan has increased the age to 68. Europe and the US are the lone holdouts on the current age 65 limit. Some EU members have filed for exemptions. The time has come to increase this arbitrary age 65 limit and increase this to age 67. Please join us in supporting the passage of S.4607 & HR.8513. The airline industry needs this now and we would like to continue our careers in America’s growing aviation industry.
Lol absolutely not. Bring back the age 60 in fact.
Reply
Old 01-04-2023 | 07:49 AM
  #50  
Douglas9's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
From: A320 CA
Default

Originally Posted by Thatsapproved
Lol absolutely not. Bring back the age 60 in fact.

You’re an “Ageist”. Anyone that is against this is an “Ageist”.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bla bla bla
Regional
49
09-30-2007 07:56 AM
Airsupport
Regional
105
09-27-2007 05:04 AM
fireman0174
Major
79
01-07-2007 08:46 AM
fireman0174
Major
46
11-19-2006 05:49 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices