IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67
09-01-2025 | 04:03 AM
#271
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 934
Likes: 122
I don't want a seniority hit to line your pockets.
That's my greedy self-serving position.
What's SWAPA's stance on this?
That's my greedy self-serving position.
What's SWAPA's stance on this?
09-01-2025 | 04:17 AM
#272
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,270
Likes: 256
From: B737CA
Per most recent polling, we are against raising the retirement age. Kinda refreshing considering that when age 65 was coming out, SWAPA was all for it and had a former astronaut, then-SWAPA pilot be one of the loudest mouthpieces arguing for raising the retirement age to 65.
Ironically, the change came but it was too late for him. I’m not sure if he was one of the space cowboys who came back as FO’s on the bottom of the list or not - they are all gone anyway. Maybe someone can shed more light on how it all played out.
09-01-2025 | 05:21 AM
#273
Can’t find crew pickup
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 200
Sorry kid, I don't have to do jack. Guess what? I was in your shoes 20 years ago fighting to preserve Age 60 when I got educated on life's reality, especially with respect to retirement age. Just curious, what were you doing 20 years ago? Were you in elementary school? Maybe junior high? Did you study any aviation history, at all? Did you study any ALPA history, at all? Did you study any other pilot union history, at all? Naw... didn't think so, and it's painfully obvious you're swinging without a clue. You do have heart though, I give you that.
09-01-2025 | 05:29 AM
#274
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 25
Likes: 3
Sorry kid, I don't have to do jack. Guess what? I was in your shoes 20 years ago fighting to preserve Age 60 when I got educated on life's reality, especially with respect to retirement age. Just curious, what were you doing 20 years ago? Were you in elementary school? Maybe junior high? Did you study any aviation history, at all? Did you study any ALPA history, at all? Did you study any other pilot union history, at all? Naw... didn't think so, and it's painfully obvious you're swinging without a clue. You do have heart though, I give you that.
You want some hard-hitting data? Here you go: no one has to prove squat to you or anyone, especially today when everything is political. All they have to do is point to other developed countries not having ANY mandatory retirement age for pilots and not seeing airplanes crashing left and right because gummers can't function. Others have 68, some have 67. They'll also point to how they address concerns of two over-Age 65 pilots in the cockpit at the same time. Then they point to shortages on their continents or in their countries for whatever reasons.... and guess what? ICAO eventually ends up changing their retirement age. 2007 repeats itself.
But as you know, we are extra special in the US, so we should be asking for exceptions to ICAO rules i.e. banning foreign airlines for letting their gummers fly in our airspace or to destinations in the US, right? After all.... tHaFeTy aNd tHtaTuTh QuO, right? Guess what? Your precious ALPA will get the memo: flip or flop. Hint: they'll flip, just like they did in 2007 "to stay relevant."
🤣🤣🤣
Nice try kid! I love the buzzwords you're using "gaslighting and projecting." Reminds me of the political hacks calling everyone a racist or bigot... sorry, the sensitivity gauge on that got MEL'd a long time ago. What I am really doing is laughing my a55 off at you foaming at the mouth trying to sell tHaFeTy when in reality all you care about is your career advancement. You know what else is funny? You intentionally dodged affirming that you'd have no objections to requiring PIC on the flight deck to be under 65 and requiring all the gummers in the right seat.... tHaFeTy, tHaThuTh qUo, yOu kNeW dA rULeZ, right?
One thing though.... as I said, I do admire your heart and tenacity. Reminds me of me 20 years ago. But you know what? Look at the bright side of things.... should this abortion pass and the retirement goes to 67 or gets abolished altogether at some point, unlike in 2007, we don't have thousands of pilots on furlough, regional FO's today make a livable wage and don't qualify for public assistance, most FO's at the top 5 can max out their 415c limits if they choose to - back in the day, I don't even think most captains could max it out. So, yep... the blow to our careers in 2007 was substantially worse than any potential blow we'd see if age 67 happened today. In other words, we'll survive, and most likely still thrive. No one is forcing us to stay until 65, let alone 67.
In summary, just as I love to poke fun at those who can't define what a woman is, I love poking fun at the likes of you.... both of you are foaming at the mouth and it's kinda fun watching you get all riled up. Thank you for the entertainment. 🍻
You want some hard-hitting data? Here you go: no one has to prove squat to you or anyone, especially today when everything is political. All they have to do is point to other developed countries not having ANY mandatory retirement age for pilots and not seeing airplanes crashing left and right because gummers can't function. Others have 68, some have 67. They'll also point to how they address concerns of two over-Age 65 pilots in the cockpit at the same time. Then they point to shortages on their continents or in their countries for whatever reasons.... and guess what? ICAO eventually ends up changing their retirement age. 2007 repeats itself.
But as you know, we are extra special in the US, so we should be asking for exceptions to ICAO rules i.e. banning foreign airlines for letting their gummers fly in our airspace or to destinations in the US, right? After all.... tHaFeTy aNd tHtaTuTh QuO, right? Guess what? Your precious ALPA will get the memo: flip or flop. Hint: they'll flip, just like they did in 2007 "to stay relevant."
🤣🤣🤣
Nice try kid! I love the buzzwords you're using "gaslighting and projecting." Reminds me of the political hacks calling everyone a racist or bigot... sorry, the sensitivity gauge on that got MEL'd a long time ago. What I am really doing is laughing my a55 off at you foaming at the mouth trying to sell tHaFeTy when in reality all you care about is your career advancement. You know what else is funny? You intentionally dodged affirming that you'd have no objections to requiring PIC on the flight deck to be under 65 and requiring all the gummers in the right seat.... tHaFeTy, tHaThuTh qUo, yOu kNeW dA rULeZ, right?
One thing though.... as I said, I do admire your heart and tenacity. Reminds me of me 20 years ago. But you know what? Look at the bright side of things.... should this abortion pass and the retirement goes to 67 or gets abolished altogether at some point, unlike in 2007, we don't have thousands of pilots on furlough, regional FO's today make a livable wage and don't qualify for public assistance, most FO's at the top 5 can max out their 415c limits if they choose to - back in the day, I don't even think most captains could max it out. So, yep... the blow to our careers in 2007 was substantially worse than any potential blow we'd see if age 67 happened today. In other words, we'll survive, and most likely still thrive. No one is forcing us to stay until 65, let alone 67.
In summary, just as I love to poke fun at those who can't define what a woman is, I love poking fun at the likes of you.... both of you are foaming at the mouth and it's kinda fun watching you get all riled up. Thank you for the entertainment. 🍻
Can’t say I agree with your position, but I really enjoyed your retort. Well done Sir! Cheers!
09-01-2025 | 06:03 AM
#275
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,270
Likes: 256
From: B737CA
Think about it: thousands of furloughed mainline pilots, RJ’s everywhere and regional FO’s could qualify for public assistance, the pay rates decimated along with A plans and all without a realistic way to make up the difference. Now add the 5 year increase in retirement age to all of that.
Compare that with this…We are looking at potentially 2 years (hopefully not) while most airlines are still hiring and mostly for expansion and some retirements. Most off-probation FO’s can max out their 415c limits. Much of the flying that was previously outsourced is rightfully back to mainline and flown by mainline pilots.
Now, in the grand scheme of things, this is all done at ICAO level, not ALPA, not FAA, not even Congress. If ICAO adopts it, none of our bellyaching will matter. The history will repeat itself.
My point to you is that if this should happen, all of us are far better off today than we were in 2006-2007 in many ways, and should this happen, the impact on your career will be way milder in many ways than it was on us back when 65 came to be. I’m not trying to tell you to like it, but it’s not worth the angst or creating animosity if you run across someone who may be in favor of changing the age. That’s why I’m saying - own your side of the argument whichever one it may be and stop pretending.
Lastly, on a personal note, watching all these same tired arguments is like watching an old re-run. The difference is some folks seem to think the ending will be different this time.
09-01-2025 | 06:18 AM
#276
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2023
Posts: 536
Likes: 140
Sorry kid, I don't have to do jack. Guess what? I was in your shoes 20 years ago fighting to preserve Age 60 when I got educated on life's reality, especially with respect to retirement age. Just curious, what were you doing 20 years ago? Were you in elementary school? Maybe junior high? Did you study any aviation history, at all? Did you study any ALPA history, at all? Did you study any other pilot union history, at all? Naw... didn't think so, and it's painfully obvious you're swinging without a clue. You do have heart though, I give you that.
You want some hard-hitting data? Here you go: no one has to prove squat to you or anyone, especially today when everything is political. All they have to do is point to other developed countries not having ANY mandatory retirement age for pilots and not seeing airplanes crashing left and right because gummers can't function. Others have 68, some have 67. They'll also point to how they address concerns of two over-Age 65 pilots in the cockpit at the same time. Then they point to shortages on their continents or in their countries for whatever reasons.... and guess what? ICAO eventually ends up changing their retirement age. 2007 repeats itself.
But as you know, we are extra special in the US, so we should be asking for exceptions to ICAO rules i.e. banning foreign airlines for letting their gummers fly in our airspace or to destinations in the US, right? After all.... tHaFeTy aNd tHtaTuTh QuO, right? Guess what? Your precious ALPA will get the memo: flip or flop. Hint: they'll flip, just like they did in 2007 "to stay relevant."
🤣🤣🤣
Nice try kid! I love the buzzwords you're using "gaslighting and projecting." Reminds me of the political hacks calling everyone a racist or bigot... sorry, the sensitivity gauge on that got MEL'd a long time ago. What I am really doing is laughing my a55 off at you foaming at the mouth trying to sell tHaFeTy when in reality all you care about is your career advancement. You know what else is funny? You intentionally dodged affirming that you'd have no objections to requiring PIC on the flight deck to be under 65 and requiring all the gummers in the right seat.... tHaFeTy, tHaThuTh qUo, yOu kNeW dA rULeZ, right?
One thing though.... as I said, I do admire your heart and tenacity. Reminds me of me 20 years ago. But you know what? Look at the bright side of things.... should this abortion pass and the retirement goes to 67 or gets abolished altogether at some point, unlike in 2007, we don't have thousands of pilots on furlough, regional FO's today make a livable wage and don't qualify for public assistance, most FO's at the top 5 can max out their 415c limits if they choose to - back in the day, I don't even think most captains could max it out. So, yep... the blow to our careers in 2007 was substantially worse than any potential blow we'd see if age 67 happened today. In other words, we'll survive, and most likely still thrive. No one is forcing us to stay until 65, let alone 67.
In summary, just as I love to poke fun at those who can't define what a woman is, I love poking fun at the likes of you.... both of you are foaming at the mouth and it's kinda fun watching you get all riled up. Thank you for the entertainment. 🍻
You want some hard-hitting data? Here you go: no one has to prove squat to you or anyone, especially today when everything is political. All they have to do is point to other developed countries not having ANY mandatory retirement age for pilots and not seeing airplanes crashing left and right because gummers can't function. Others have 68, some have 67. They'll also point to how they address concerns of two over-Age 65 pilots in the cockpit at the same time. Then they point to shortages on their continents or in their countries for whatever reasons.... and guess what? ICAO eventually ends up changing their retirement age. 2007 repeats itself.
But as you know, we are extra special in the US, so we should be asking for exceptions to ICAO rules i.e. banning foreign airlines for letting their gummers fly in our airspace or to destinations in the US, right? After all.... tHaFeTy aNd tHtaTuTh QuO, right? Guess what? Your precious ALPA will get the memo: flip or flop. Hint: they'll flip, just like they did in 2007 "to stay relevant."
🤣🤣🤣
Nice try kid! I love the buzzwords you're using "gaslighting and projecting." Reminds me of the political hacks calling everyone a racist or bigot... sorry, the sensitivity gauge on that got MEL'd a long time ago. What I am really doing is laughing my a55 off at you foaming at the mouth trying to sell tHaFeTy when in reality all you care about is your career advancement. You know what else is funny? You intentionally dodged affirming that you'd have no objections to requiring PIC on the flight deck to be under 65 and requiring all the gummers in the right seat.... tHaFeTy, tHaThuTh qUo, yOu kNeW dA rULeZ, right?
One thing though.... as I said, I do admire your heart and tenacity. Reminds me of me 20 years ago. But you know what? Look at the bright side of things.... should this abortion pass and the retirement goes to 67 or gets abolished altogether at some point, unlike in 2007, we don't have thousands of pilots on furlough, regional FO's today make a livable wage and don't qualify for public assistance, most FO's at the top 5 can max out their 415c limits if they choose to - back in the day, I don't even think most captains could max it out. So, yep... the blow to our careers in 2007 was substantially worse than any potential blow we'd see if age 67 happened today. In other words, we'll survive, and most likely still thrive. No one is forcing us to stay until 65, let alone 67.
In summary, just as I love to poke fun at those who can't define what a woman is, I love poking fun at the likes of you.... both of you are foaming at the mouth and it's kinda fun watching you get all riled up. Thank you for the entertainment. 🍻
09-01-2025 | 06:21 AM
#277
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 589
Likes: 169
Both sides have BS arguments.
The for crowd saying, " you can retire whenever you want" annoys me because it is still a financial loss for the people who plan to go out early because retiring at 62 in an Age 65 world vs retiring at 62 in an Age 67 world could very well mean having less money at 62 in the 67 world.
No one is being honest. The for crowd all hiding behind age discrimination while they screamed and moaned against Age 65 in 2007 because it harmed them. Or safety because a new FO at a legacy is less safe than they would be if they were flying at a regional instead. Or think they are entitled to more because they had it rough.
Against crowd is saying planes will fall out of the sky due to 66 year old falling asleep.
What ****es me off even more is the ones that are so self-absorbed into themselves and their own fitness, they want to make medical standards fit their overtly strict viewpoints( see that guy saying have the 40 year old meet his fitness at 66 with a body builder physique in BA's letter). Or the ones bitter over how they were hired during the time of astronaut physicals so everyone should still be hired with astronaut physicals( it's the no one should have it better than I had it view point).
09-01-2025 | 06:27 AM
#278
Leaves Biscoff crumbs
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 3,265
Likes: 941
From: Blue Juice Taste Tester
Remember kid, life's not fair as long as it benefits me, otherwise I'll go lobby and flex in front of Congress to change the rules of the game in my favor 👈😎👈
09-01-2025 | 06:42 AM
#279
Banned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
No, it certainly does not. But has it occurred to you that perhaps we’ve seen this play out before during much worse time in the industry?
Think about it: thousands of furloughed mainline pilots, RJ’s everywhere and regional FO’s could qualify for public assistance, the pay rates decimated along with A plans and all without a realistic way to make up the difference. Now add the 5 year increase in retirement age to all of that.
Compare that with this…We are looking at potentially 2 years (hopefully not) while most airlines are still hiring and mostly for expansion and some retirements. Most off-probation FO’s can max out their 415c limits. Much of the flying that was previously outsourced is rightfully back to mainline and flown by mainline pilots.
Now, in the grand scheme of things, this is all done at ICAO level, not ALPA, not FAA, not even Congress. If ICAO adopts it, none of our bellyaching will matter. The history will repeat itself.
My point to you is that if this should happen, all of us are far better off today than we were in 2006-2007 in many ways, and should this happen, the impact on your career will be way milder in many ways than it was on us back when 65 came to be. I’m not trying to tell you to like it, but it’s not worth the angst or creating animosity if you run across someone who may be in favor of changing the age. That’s why I’m saying - own your side of the argument whichever one it may be and stop pretending.
Lastly, on a personal note, watching all these same tired arguments is like watching an old re-run. The difference is some folks seem to think the ending will be different this time.
Think about it: thousands of furloughed mainline pilots, RJ’s everywhere and regional FO’s could qualify for public assistance, the pay rates decimated along with A plans and all without a realistic way to make up the difference. Now add the 5 year increase in retirement age to all of that.
Compare that with this…We are looking at potentially 2 years (hopefully not) while most airlines are still hiring and mostly for expansion and some retirements. Most off-probation FO’s can max out their 415c limits. Much of the flying that was previously outsourced is rightfully back to mainline and flown by mainline pilots.
Now, in the grand scheme of things, this is all done at ICAO level, not ALPA, not FAA, not even Congress. If ICAO adopts it, none of our bellyaching will matter. The history will repeat itself.
My point to you is that if this should happen, all of us are far better off today than we were in 2006-2007 in many ways, and should this happen, the impact on your career will be way milder in many ways than it was on us back when 65 came to be. I’m not trying to tell you to like it, but it’s not worth the angst or creating animosity if you run across someone who may be in favor of changing the age. That’s why I’m saying - own your side of the argument whichever one it may be and stop pretending.
Lastly, on a personal note, watching all these same tired arguments is like watching an old re-run. The difference is some folks seem to think the ending will be different this time.
nobody owes me anything because of it.
09-01-2025 | 06:44 AM
#280
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,270
Likes: 256
From: B737CA
Ut oh, seems I’m living in your head? Don’t want to be there. When you mention “foaming at the mouth” twice in one post, again it seems like projecting. And no that’s actually not a “buzz word” as you say, but a psychological term/self-defense mechanism. I’ve been a 121 airline pilot pilot since 1992, at United for decades, and will soon wear a 35 year ALPA pin, proudly. One thing you never do is refer to the next generation as “kids”. Such lack a respect shows me where you’re at and why you think the way you do. Good day!
No, not quite.
So if you’ve been an airline pilot since 1992, then you should know better and should recall the effects, the arguments and the sales job of Age 65. Yet here you are selling the same damn thing that was proven to be irrelevant back in 06-07. Shouldn’t an engaged, proud 35+ year ALPA pilot know better?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
