Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67 >

IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-28-2025 | 12:40 PM
  #1471  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 66
Default

The fb group


Originally Posted by 744ButtonPusher
article ?…..
Old 10-28-2025 | 01:46 PM
  #1472  
symbian simian's Avatar
Line holder
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,178
Likes: 255
From: Aircraft & Seat: old & hard
Default

Originally Posted by Meme In Command
I was specifically speaking of YT, not FB.
Same 3 dots on yt.
Old 10-28-2025 | 02:07 PM
  #1473  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 3,681
Likes: 247
Default

Originally Posted by symbian simian
Same 3 dots on yt.
Take that youngster! Now get me my aleve.
Old 10-28-2025 | 02:15 PM
  #1474  
FangsF15's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,303
Likes: 1,315
Default

Originally Posted by ThumbsUp
Take that youngster! Now get me my aleve.
Maybe some Ensure to wash it down?
Old 10-29-2025 | 07:26 AM
  #1475  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,106
Likes: 793
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by StoneQOLdCrazy
DELETED POST, USER REQUEST
I do believe that government should have good, objective, quantifiable reasons to restrict our freedoms in ANY manner. We all should be more aware of that post 2020.
Old 10-29-2025 | 07:58 AM
  #1476  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 589
Likes: 169
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
I do believe that government should have good, objective, quantifiable reasons to restrict our freedoms in ANY manner. We all should be more aware of that post 2020.
But same time, if LEPF is going to scream 67 is safe, then it is on them to show the proof.

Usually the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. It is like someone claiming the sky is green, gets called on it, but just tells us to do our own research and they aren't going to provide the proof of their claim and believes it is actually us needing to provide the proof.
Old 10-29-2025 | 08:25 AM
  #1477  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,106
Likes: 793
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by joepilot50
But same time, if LEPF is going to scream 67 is safe, then it is on them to show the proof.

Usually the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. It is like someone claiming the sky is green, gets called on it, but just tells us to do our own research and they aren't going to provide the proof of their claim and believes it is actually us needing to provide the proof.
Two people in a civil lawsuit, sure. The plaintiff has to prove a claim.

But in the case of government imposing itself on freedoms (especially constitutional freedoms) the burden is on .gov. You can of course debate what constitutes adequate proof in this case, but I know it's not union political influence.
Old 10-29-2025 | 09:19 AM
  #1478  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2021
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 212
Default

Originally Posted by joepilot50
But same time, if LEPF is going to scream 67 is safe, then it is on them to show the proof.

Usually the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. It is like someone claiming the sky is green, gets called on it, but just tells us to do our own research and they aren't going to provide the proof of their claim and believes it is actually us needing to provide the proof.
If your argument is that the burden of proof is on the side that wants to change the status quo then sure. Otherwise neither side has provided any proof, Anecdotal evidence is not proof.
Old 10-29-2025 | 09:35 AM
  #1479  
BoilerUP's Avatar
Doing One Pilot's Job
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,886
Likes: 121
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
But in the case of government imposing itself on freedoms (especially constitutional freedoms) the burden is on .gov.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act specifically has a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification exception, which has repeatedly been upheld in courts.

Claiming a constitutional right to fly for an air carrier indefinitely is a wee bit of a stretch...

Last edited by BoilerUP; 10-29-2025 at 09:52 AM.
Old 10-29-2025 | 09:51 AM
  #1480  
dmeg13021's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 934
Likes: 122
Default

Originally Posted by BoilerUP
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act specifically has a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification exception, which has repeatedly been upheld in courts.

Claiming a consitutional right to fly for an air carrier indefinitely is a wee bit of a stretch...
My widebody, my choice, right Rick?
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
satchip
Corporate
11
09-16-2009 07:22 PM
eFDeeeX
Cargo
59
01-31-2008 01:30 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