Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
US house panel votes in age [67] >

US house panel votes in age [67]

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

US house panel votes in age [67]

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-26-2023 | 12:25 PM
  #571  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,882
Likes: 681
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by 4dalulz
Let me guess... AOPA member with "passion for flight"... Sad.
I'm not a boomer, and won't need the money. I'm agnostic on this thing but I don't think there's much we can do about it at this point anyway. Pols may not know much about aviation but, like everybody else, they do know people who are 65, and 67, and most of them still work especially in white collar. They just don't see the catastrophic drop in cog performance in the 60s. They see right through the self-serving position of most pilot groups, and so they don't really take us seriously on the topic.

But I am thankful that I mostly enjoy what I do (it's a job after all, I don't expect it to be a complete vacation). I kind of feel bad for someone trapped in the airline industry who actually doesn't like it. Or is that just hip posturing on the part of youth?
Reply
Old 07-26-2023 | 12:46 PM
  #572  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Default You all are missing the biggest points

A vast majority of airline pilots never make it to 65 nonetheless 67. They medical out, die, on LTD or retire early. What makes you think the 20% that decide to work until 67 are going to affect your seniority much? With the mass retirements coming up, it won't affect you as much as you think it will (like age 65 did as it was a different pilot market then with furloughs, hard to make it to a major airline, etc).

Have you seen the latest stats for the amount of pilots needed for the future? It's staggering. Not enough pilots for the increased demand worldwide. As one who hopes to retire at 65, it would be helpful to at least have a choice for another 2 years, depending on the stock market. I never made it to the $300,000 year pilot job throughout my career.

Every pilot ages differently. Some have cognitive issues, some do not. That's what the simulator evaluation is for. Geez. You all will be older someday. And you might change your mind. 65 is the new 45.

We take better care of ourselves (especially pilots with a medical every 6 months when you get older). We are living longer. Don't be so quick to only think of your younger self. It's about thinking of what's best for everyone. Being unionized, it's thinking of everyone to at least have a choice, not just a segment of the pilot ranks. Social security full retirement age isn't even until 67 now. Best to at least have the option. You can fly corporate after 65. So I don't see much of a difference as I've done both.

Last edited by miapilot; 07-26-2023 at 12:57 PM.
Reply
Old 07-26-2023 | 01:07 PM
  #573  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 109
Likes: 2
Default

Originally Posted by miapilot
A vast majority of airline pilots never make it to 65 nonetheless 67. They medical out, die, on LTD or retire early. What makes you think the 20% that decide to work until 67 are going to affect your seniority much? With the mass retirements coming up, it won't affect you as much as you think it will (like age 65 did as it was a different pilot market then with furloughs, hard to make it to a major airline, etc).

Have you seen the latest stats for the amount of pilots needed for the future? It's staggering. Not enough pilots for the increased demand worldwide. As one who hopes to retire at 65, it would be helpful to at least have a choice for another 2 years, depending on the stock market. I never made it to the $300,000 year pilot job throughout my career.

Every pilot ages differently. Some have cognitive issues, some do not. That's what the simulator evaluation is for. Geez. You all will be older someday. And you might change your mind. 65 is the new 45.

We take better care of ourselves (especially pilots with a medical every 6 months when you get older). We are living longer. Don't be so quick to only think of your younger self. It's about thinking of what's best for everyone. Being unionized, it's thinking of everyone to at least have a choice, not just a segment of the pilot ranks. Social security full retirement age isn't even until 67 now. Best to at least have the option. You can fly corporate after 65. So I don't see much of a difference as I've done both.

I agree whole heartedly, great summarization. Lifespans and longer healthy cognitive years are about to increase exponentially mark my words. The current LTD statistics of all airlines represent generational factors that include smoking, poor food options in the airports, no rest rules, more alcoholism and not enough emphasis on exercise. Once this generational demographic moves on I believe we will see less impact disability wise and lower early mortality. In 10 years the statistics will be vastly different.
Reply
Old 07-26-2023 | 01:13 PM
  #574  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,394
Likes: 111
Default

Originally Posted by miapilot
And you might change your mind. 65 is the new 45.
You WILL change your mind. Take a snapshot. Mark the date. Nobody comes out the 65 end looking any younger
Reply
Old 07-27-2023 | 05:59 AM
  #575  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 226
Likes: 50
Default

Originally Posted by Blue Dude
I'll play devil's advocate with you.

Age 60 was arbitrary. Age 65 was arbitrary. Age 67 is also arbitrary. Where's your "data or science" (as though those are highly regarded or at all reliable in a highly politicized post-Covid world...) that supports any given fixed retirement age at all?
Well that's exactly my point. We don't know because no one has studied it. Maybe it is 70? Instead of just making arbitrary rule changes why don't we actually take a look at it scientifically and study it before signing it into law?
Reply
Old 07-27-2023 | 06:55 AM
  #576  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by CRJphlyer
Well that's exactly my point. We don't know because no one has studied it. Maybe it is 70? Instead of just making arbitrary rule changes why don't we actually take a look at it scientifically and study it before signing it into law?
How do propose 'studying it'? And can you cite any studies in the past for any pilot age group?
What was the study done to raise the age from 60 to 65?
Has anyone who has recommended 'studying it' actually proposed how to conduct such a study?

This looks like another post to make the poster feel better by proposing unworkable solutions.
Reply
Old 07-27-2023 | 09:31 AM
  #577  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Jan 2023
Posts: 85
Likes: 1
From: Upside Down
Default

Originally Posted by Andy
How do propose 'studying it'? And can you cite any studies in the past for any pilot age group?
What was the study done to raise the age from 60 to 65?
Has anyone who has recommended 'studying it' actually proposed how to conduct such a study?

This looks like another post to make the poster feel better by proposing unworkable solutions.
And therein lies the issue.
No one (including ALPA) is offering any solutions. They are simply saying “we need to study it.” Unfortunately, they know there are no ways to truly study cognitive decline in individuals because each of us are uniquely different. Furthermore, we will all decline at different rates. That is why we have flight physicals every six months. Our FAA certified doctors are supposed to be the gatekeepers on keeping unhealthy folks from flying. And why we have check rides every nine months.
I’ve said this numerous times in the past, I believe Congress will act on this because it shows they are doing something to address an issue.
Reply
Old 07-27-2023 | 11:08 AM
  #578  
chrisreedrules's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,601
Likes: 0
From: CRJ FO
Default

We’ve been to the moon and to the bottom of the ocean. Figured out how to fly at hypersonic speeds and thermodynamic flow theory… I’m pretty sure we can figure out how to come up with a study and a data set to make an informed decision on a Pilot’s retirement age. Certainly more informed than the completely uninformed and arbitrary method many of you are currently advocating for.
Reply
Old 07-27-2023 | 11:12 AM
  #579  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,480
Likes: 1,051
Default

Originally Posted by chrisreedrules
We’ve been to the moon and to the bottom of the ocean. Figured out how to fly at hypersonic speeds and thermodynamic flow theory… I’m pretty sure we can figure out how to come up with a study and a data set to make an informed decision on a Pilot’s retirement age. Certainly more informed than the completely uninformed and arbitrary method many of you are currently advocating for.
No. It's impossible. No one knows. It's pretty much impossible to study. Science is fake...........
Reply
Old 07-27-2023 | 11:22 AM
  #580  
In a land of unicorns
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 7,045
Likes: 63
From: Whale FO
Default

Originally Posted by CRJphlyer
Well that's exactly my point. We don't know because no one has studied it. Maybe it is 70? Instead of just making arbitrary rule changes why don't we actually take a look at it scientifically and study it before signing it into law?
65 was studied extensively. Do your homework.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
STEAMROLLER
Major
355
04-04-2023 09:15 PM

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