Fret not... no one yawned towards ALPA to make them fold just yet. They'll fall in line the second they're told to.

 

I would think A4A would not care nearly as much if it changed at the ICAO level as they would with a wildcard change that only applies domestic ops.

And I’m 100% willing to believe given everything going on right now he would be willing to give a Texas congressman a political favor even with A4A lobbying against it.

 

Not just merger, but bankruptcy as well. Eagle was the only wholly-owned AA regional then. Piedmont and PSA were not. These are new contracts since then. I’m assuming (don’t know) that the subsequent Eagle contracts did not include a “no-strike” amenable clause.

 

Right?! I’ve got a few dates in my calendar where I will have a drink in honor of a retirement. Rose was a Duvel.

 

….as much as I doubt it, for your sake, I hope there are other things that ‘really make you happy’. If this (bad idea) passes, are you going to spend the rest of your working life really unhappy?

 

It is true that A4A might be more OK with it if ICAO goes first. They might even have told the powers that be as much.

 

https://aviationweek.com/air-transpo...t-age-standard

Aviation Week Article on IATA.

 

No one cares.

 

my thought too. A change at ICAO would be inconvenient, but the US changing without ICAO would be total chaos. Since we know this administration will push for this as a political favor to Nehls and Cruz, they probably are just trying to control the damage.

 

From the article:

“IATA’s working paper calls for the global standards-setting body to support raising the upper age limit for pilots to age 67, provided a second pilot is younger than 65. IATA does not propose any new data-driven reviews to support the move, but advocates “a system of standardized data collection about the medical status and health-related performance across all pilot age groups,” the recently submitted paper said. The data should “at a minimum” include medical conditions, medical reasons for retirement or loss of certificates, “and inflight safety and performance data [for all events],” it added.”

Questions:
Why would the 2nd pilot need to be younger if there’s no degradation in safety???
Why not study it(and collect data first), then make a proposal?
This is the CRM equivalent of committing to an alternate without asking Dispatch and your First Officer… aka poor planning and decision making. This group appears to lack the safety oriented thinking required to make such decisions.