IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67
12-29-2025 | 03:04 PM
#1851
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,490
Likes: 138
says who?
Bru’s, your bidness, transport. Here to there on payment of fare/freight. Arrival in one piece. That’s the game. Coherence, please explain what that means to you? What we got here friends, is a national banner of grand excuses flying atop the planet’s crookedest rod.
Bru’s, your bidness, transport. Here to there on payment of fare/freight. Arrival in one piece. That’s the game. Coherence, please explain what that means to you? What we got here friends, is a national banner of grand excuses flying atop the planet’s crookedest rod.
12-29-2025 | 03:10 PM
#1852
Banned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
says who?
Bru’s, your bidness, transport. Here to there on payment of fare/freight. Arrival in one piece. That’s the game. Coherence, please explain what that means to you? What we got here friends, is a national banner of grand excuses flying atop the planet’s crookedest rod.
Bru’s, your bidness, transport. Here to there on payment of fare/freight. Arrival in one piece. That’s the game. Coherence, please explain what that means to you? What we got here friends, is a national banner of grand excuses flying atop the planet’s crookedest rod.
12-29-2025 | 04:31 PM
#1856
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 615
Likes: 148
When it isn’t about opportunity, it’s greed.
You weren’t fighting the good fight 20 years ago. How noble to start now…
Also, having defined parameters that EVERYONE must comply with is the definition of equal opportunity.
Yes, continue to fight the “status quo” (as you surely have been doing for decades) against the big bad wolf aka a federal law that takes into account the age discrimination law by way of BFOQ, that you’ve known about since before your first solo.
At the end of the day, you know that it’s about greed. You can justify it by saying it’s about any of the BS your generation spouts, but we all know it’s about money.
12-29-2025 | 04:49 PM
#1857
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 776
Likes: 308
It blows my mind that you keep using the angle of “fighting the good fight/challenging the status quo/equal opportunity”
When it isn’t about opportunity, it’s greed.
You weren’t fighting the good fight 20 years ago. How noble to start now…
Also, having defined parameters that EVERYONE must comply with is the definition of equal opportunity.
Yes, continue to fight the “status quo” (as you surely have been doing for decades) against the big bad wolf aka a federal law that takes into account the age discrimination law by way of BFOQ, that you’ve known about since before your first solo.
At the end of the day, you know that it’s about greed. You can justify it by saying it’s about any of the BS your generation spouts, but we all know it’s about money.
When it isn’t about opportunity, it’s greed.
You weren’t fighting the good fight 20 years ago. How noble to start now…
Also, having defined parameters that EVERYONE must comply with is the definition of equal opportunity.
Yes, continue to fight the “status quo” (as you surely have been doing for decades) against the big bad wolf aka a federal law that takes into account the age discrimination law by way of BFOQ, that you’ve known about since before your first solo.
At the end of the day, you know that it’s about greed. You can justify it by saying it’s about any of the BS your generation spouts, but we all know it’s about money.
I don’t think they’ve figured that one out yet.
12-29-2025 | 04:55 PM
#1858
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 309
Likes: 1
[QUOTE=180ToAJ;3986472]Again, the courts have already considered your argument. The way the law is written it’s considered a "bona fide occupational qualification" and does not violate the ADEA.[/QUOTE.
When the age rule was introduced in 1959, the age limit may have been a “reasonable necessity” to the essence of safety in the absence of the ability to detect disqualifying traits (the requirement to establish the age limit as a BFOQ under the ADEA). This surely is not the case in 2025 with the advances in medicine and science since the rule was established; from this perspective only, age 65 is unfair to all current and yet-to-be 121 pilots. Any other argument for or against changing the age 65 rule really are self-serving and not relevant to the core principle required to continue using age as a BFOQ.
When the age rule was introduced in 1959, the age limit may have been a “reasonable necessity” to the essence of safety in the absence of the ability to detect disqualifying traits (the requirement to establish the age limit as a BFOQ under the ADEA). This surely is not the case in 2025 with the advances in medicine and science since the rule was established; from this perspective only, age 65 is unfair to all current and yet-to-be 121 pilots. Any other argument for or against changing the age 65 rule really are self-serving and not relevant to the core principle required to continue using age as a BFOQ.
12-29-2025 | 05:09 PM
#1859
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 776
Likes: 308
[QUOTE=SEDPA;3986557]
People also retired in 1959. Normal people. At age 55 or 60 from all types of jobs. Why is retirement culture not celebrated anymore?
Again, the courts have already considered your argument. The way the law is written it’s considered a "bona fide occupational qualification" and does not violate the ADEA.[/QUOTE.
When the age rule was introduced in 1959, the age limit may have been a “reasonable necessity” to the essence of safety in the absence of the ability to detect disqualifying traits (the requirement to establish the age limit as a BFOQ under the ADEA). This surely is not the case in 2025 with the advances in medicine and science since the rule was established; from this perspective only, age 65 is unfair to all current and yet-to-be 121 pilots. Any other argument for or against changing the age 65 rule really are self-serving and not relevant to the core principle required to continue using age as a BFOQ.
When the age rule was introduced in 1959, the age limit may have been a “reasonable necessity” to the essence of safety in the absence of the ability to detect disqualifying traits (the requirement to establish the age limit as a BFOQ under the ADEA). This surely is not the case in 2025 with the advances in medicine and science since the rule was established; from this perspective only, age 65 is unfair to all current and yet-to-be 121 pilots. Any other argument for or against changing the age 65 rule really are self-serving and not relevant to the core principle required to continue using age as a BFOQ.
12-29-2025 | 05:16 PM
#1860
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 309
Likes: 1
[QUOTE=checkgear;3986559]
Not hurt at all; tone down the rhetoric; do you really think that the ability to detect disqualifying traits has remained stagnant since 1959? Or since 2007? Really?
I get it that many (all sides) want to make this about them and their predicament; valid. But strictly speaking, the age limit is a BFOQ only as it relates to the ability to detect disqualifying traits; that ability has changed dramatically since 1959 and 2007.
If you want 65 as a retirement age, then perhaps you should try to do that via your CBA.
I get it that many (all sides) want to make this about them and their predicament; valid. But strictly speaking, the age limit is a BFOQ only as it relates to the ability to detect disqualifying traits; that ability has changed dramatically since 1959 and 2007.
If you want 65 as a retirement age, then perhaps you should try to do that via your CBA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
