![US house panel votes in age [67]](/iconimages/major/us-house-panel-votes-age-67-a_ltr.gif)
US house panel votes in age [67]
06-18-2023 | 06:26 AM
#111
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 203
Likes: 1
Hopefully international lines are fully staffed because the increase is for DOMESTIC ONLY, great for SWA which doesn’t do many international flights but might be problematic for ATLAS FEDEX UPS SPIRIT and the big3 on the international side
06-18-2023 | 07:22 AM
#112
Banned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
this has been discussed ad nauseum. ICAO is more ready than the US to raise the age and/or do away with it entirely
06-18-2023 | 07:50 AM
#113
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 599
Likes: 46
How about the self proclaimed “strong unionist” on that list? He’s pretty much as far away the definition of fit boomer as you can get…
06-18-2023 | 07:51 AM
#114
Missing from the Crashpad
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
From: Recliner
06-18-2023 | 10:51 AM
#115
Orbis Non Sufficit
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 788
Likes: 10
Let the international governing body decide then….and the United States will follow. Novel concept, I know, but that would make it an international scenario rather than a handful of greedy hypocrites in this country trying to change the rules to suit themselves as they approach their personal 11th hour.
06-19-2023 | 05:40 AM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 2,235
Likes: 81
Let the international governing body decide then….and the United States will follow. Novel concept, I know, but that would make it an international scenario rather than a handful of greedy hypocrites in this country trying to change the rules to suit themselves as they approach their personal 11th hour.
06-19-2023 | 12:19 PM
#117
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,882
Likes: 681
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Let the international governing body decide then….and the United States will follow. Novel concept, I know, but that would make it an international scenario rather than a handful of greedy hypocrites in this country trying to change the rules to suit themselves as they approach their personal 11th hour.
The international "governing" body exists to manage reciprocal international policies... not meddle with anyone's internal business. Other countries already have internal age 67+.
At least this international governing body knows it's place, and seems to function with minimal agenda (not all of them can say the same).
06-19-2023 | 02:36 PM
#118
Disinterested Third Party
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,758
Likes: 74
So you call those anti-67 as entitled, but the people for 67 are not acting just as entitled?
Older generation tells the younger generation life is unfair, tough. Yet they don’t abide by their own statement by recognizing that yeah they had rough timing and their career didn’t go as well while the incoming guys/gals are potentially going to have decent careers. Life is unfair. You don’t get to change the rules as they become inconvenient and get to stop the career progression that the retirement age causes that you enjoyed.
So no one is entitled to ANYTHING. I’m not saying, “ Thanks for the service, now get out of my seat”. But same time you don’t get to go, “ I had it rough so I deserve those extra few years”.
I’m against 67 because it doesn’t solve the problem, kicks the can down the road, and further makes this career unattractive. While damaging peoples careers. You were damaged by age 65. You shouldn’t want to do the same thing to others.
Older generation tells the younger generation life is unfair, tough. Yet they don’t abide by their own statement by recognizing that yeah they had rough timing and their career didn’t go as well while the incoming guys/gals are potentially going to have decent careers. Life is unfair. You don’t get to change the rules as they become inconvenient and get to stop the career progression that the retirement age causes that you enjoyed.
So no one is entitled to ANYTHING. I’m not saying, “ Thanks for the service, now get out of my seat”. But same time you don’t get to go, “ I had it rough so I deserve those extra few years”.
I’m against 67 because it doesn’t solve the problem, kicks the can down the road, and further makes this career unattractive. While damaging peoples careers. You were damaged by age 65. You shouldn’t want to do the same thing to others.
The point is, if you fail to grasp it, you may have missed the point.
Whether or not a 65 year old has had a long career, hard career, hard life, difficult time, challenged existence, or quasi-cosmic troubling bout with karma, is irrelevant.
There is no valid reason why a 65 year old pilot who is able and capable should not continue until he is 67.
Of course he should be able, should he choose, if he is able. She, too.
06-20-2023 | 08:27 AM
#119
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 900
Likes: 0
This is all about Congressmen not wanting to lose business in their districts. They see regional jets parked with no pilots to fly them in and out of their small regional airports. Parked airplanes is a ding in their economy. They're all over this age 67 thing as a win for votes.
06-20-2023 | 10:10 AM
#120
SDQ Base Chief
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,056
Likes: 34
From: 320 CA
This is all about Congressmen not wanting to lose business in their districts. They see regional jets parked with no pilots to fly them in and out of their small regional airports. Parked airplanes is a ding in their economy. They're all over this age 67 thing as a win for votes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
