Age 60 Public Comment Period
 

The period for public comment regarding the Age 60 rule is open until November 15th. You can make comments or read what others have stated at the following web sites:

1st website:

http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...rchType=docket

Click the "Comments/Submission" button to add your 2 cents to docket # FAA-2006-26139. You can also just scroll down to docket #FAA-2006-26139 to read what others have submitted.

2nd website:

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main

Select the FAA as the agency and type in "Age 60" in the search block.

To All,

It’s a waste of time trying to convince these greedy pilots of what they are really doing – stealing money and seniority numbers from the junior pilots. Their reasoning is irrational. They are not changing a contract. They are trying to alter a Federal law. One that has been in place for over 40 years and which we were all hired under. We all based our career decisions on retiring at age 60 – all of us.

Write your reps in Congress and let the FAA know your desires. I’m down in Texas and Kay Bailey Hutchison is moving her position from a definite yes to one of a definite maybe. The tide is switching due to your involvement and letters. The older greedy pilots have been very vocal on this – let’s beat them at their own game.

Let the FAA know that if this POS does pass, then all pilots over the age of 60 must go to the end of the seniority list. It’s the fairest and safest way.

Ask yourself how safe a 64 ½ year old pilot would be flying 6 legs in one day with the last one down to mins, on a short wet runway, with 30 knots of crosswind. Would you trust your family on this flight? Where is the data suggesting this is safe? I give you a hint – there is none. They also don’t own their seats or seniority numbers. If the age changes, our contracts will have to be renegotiated. Don’t let their greed overcome safety and hurt your career.

It’s your seniority number and your careers they are trying to alter. Don’t let them do it!

AA767AV8TOR

one arbitrary age for another... where will it end? Let me out at 60, the rest of y'all do what ever you want.

Greedy pilots. Yep, except that it certainly describes you!

Yes, the age was 60 when I hired, but then so was a viable pension.

Consider that even the US Constitution has gone through a few changes since its inception.

For the record I left at age 58-1/2 with a valid first class medical and no reason to leave except I was tired after so many years. So spare me of your sanctimonious B.S. Guys like you sure make me glad I went early.

I remember walking a picket line over a B-scale with senior guys who stood to gain nothing and indeed a few who actually retired on strike carrying a "No B-Scale" sign. But they wanted to do the right thing for the profession and for those not yet even on the property.

I hold THOSE men in the highest regard for they were true professionals.

Oh, and by the way I will write congress about the age 60 rule - to up it to 65. I haven't yet, as I was uncertain whether I should or not, but you helped to convince me. 'Appreciate that!

AA767 boy,

At 47 with no desire to work past 60, I am willing to give up working. I currently am in a position that probably will allow me to do so. Based on where you are would you be willing to do the same? Will this industry be good to you? It has been good to me (you know anything about baseball?) but I don't know about 13 yrs from now.

Just so you know, I felt the same way when I flew with my father on his "last flight" in 1993. It was all about age discrimination then and nothing has changed. The selfishness still exists. Can you recognize who is the selfish one?

Common Dude,
It's selfishness all around. There are VERY few people here who can give an opinion-one way or the other-where that opinion doesn't affect them. We were all hired under this rule. Lets live with it. If those that are for changing the rule SOLEY because of age discrimination, then they should be proposing that everyone who is age 23 and gets a ATP can retire at 65 FROM THIS DATE FORWARD. NOT RETROACTIVELY. Now everyone is happy. Rule has changed and the junior guys don't get screwed.

It is high time for the United States to follow the lead of forward thinking nations around the world who have broken through the age 60 barrier. The “Age 60 Rule” should be repealed. A repeal is long overdue, and this time - more than ever before - the FAA knows it, most pilots know it, passengers know it, and our senators and congressmen - whose offices acknowledge that the majority of the calls and letters and faxes they receive favor repeal (despite ALPA's best and costliest efforts) - know it.

If the junior pilots of today want to have the choice of working past age 60 someday, then those junior pilots must understand that this change must happen NOW. The appropriateness and the circumstances that could effect a change to happen have never been better than they are today and those circumstances may never again become any better. If it should fail, we may never again see an opportunity to abolish the “Age 60 Rule”.

OVID,

The time has never been better – with over 2800 hundred pilots still on active furlough at AA – who are you kidding?

AA767AV8TOR

We could only hope.

I plan to write my congressman and let him know since the age 60 thing is only age discrimination that they should not stop at age 65. Any 18 yr old should be able to get his/her ATP, if they are qualified to pass the test they should be able to hold the rating. Likewise, for the poor age 66 guys/gals, the new age 65 rule would not be fair either. If they can hold a medical and pass a PC, they should be in the skies. Let's be a real "foward thinking" nation.

foreward thinking????????????? the gravy days are over kids. the days of flying a 747 for 8 days a month from age 55 on are gone. we are going to be flyin into LGA and MDW a few times a month for the rest of our days. I for one don't even want to be doing it at 55. and i will not even bring the redeyes into this.

my father just turned 65. retired eastern/usair. asked him if he missed it the other day. he said he could still do it but that no freaking way would he want to mess with LGA on a bad night at min's in the rain/cross wind. said his eyes are fine for most stuff but the at night glare when driving drives him nuts. there is just no way to test for this.
its called retirement gang. we are only here once and i don't care what your job is, work is still a four letter word! get out and enjoy life while you can.

told the wife the other day i was planin of being done with this by 55. saving 20% a year and all that. she comes back with what the hell u gonna do to pay the health bennies!!!!!!!! lol women shheshhhh. i told her that what she was here for..she did not take that to be funny at all :( lol

What makes you think that 2800 junior pilots on furlough justifies the forced retirement 2800 senior pilots? Are you are saying that it is OK to force a senior experienced pilot into poverty just so a junior pilot can move up the seniority list a bit faster. Can you really be so brazen? Where do you draw your values from?

Do you not understand that our Constitution protects those in the minority from the mal intensions of the majority? When the State deprives a person of their liberty to work in a profession that they are qualified, this violates that person’s equal protection guarantied by our Constitution under the Fourteenth Amendment. This is why the “Age 60 Rule” must not stand.

I just wish the abolish it side would get the story straight. And before you bash me, I don't really care if they abolish it or not. I just don't want to be made to work past 60 when that time comes. But in one post you say it is age discrimination, plain and simple. Then in the next post you say it's financial, and for a number of reasons you have to work past 60. Which way is it. You would garner a lot more support and respect if you came out and just said what it is you're trying to change. The law or your financial position. It's selfish, no matter what way you look at it. To say that a physically qualified pilot can't continue to do the thing he loves is selfish. To say you have made some bad financial decisions, like remaining in the right seat for your entire career, then say you need more money sounds disingenuous, and selfish.

Yeah Baby! AMEN!

No one has ever implied or even said that everyone or anyone must work past age 60.

Every one must have a choice as to when then they retire, be it for financial need or the pure love of their profession.

Do not deny that choice for anyone now or for your own future plans.

So now you're guaranteeing that any new legislation will have a clause that will not change the mandatory age to 65. So I can still retire at 60 without any penalties and I will still have a B fund that is tax deferred? That's what you're telling the rest of us.

[QUOTE=OV1D;74972]What makes you think that 2800 junior pilots on furlough justifies the forced retirement 2800 senior pilots? Are you are saying that it is OK to force a senior experienced pilot into poverty just so a junior pilot can move up the seniority list a bit faster. Can you really be so brazen? Where do you draw your values from?

2800 Senior Pilots into poverty. I dont know what you make but looking at the payscales here poverty is far from it. Sorry man, might have to sell the lake house. Seriously give me a break, but i am sure there are some crack heads on the street that would make more sense than your comments, senior pilots in poverty, s#ck it easy my friend/

I love to be able to do everything I did when I was younger. Cant do it anymore, who do I write a letter to? I want my youth back..guess I need to talk to a congressman.

OVID,

I for one am not trying to change the status quo after forty years. This is a federal law that all Part 121 pilots since 1958 have had to plan for. Should I have to pay economically for your poor planning or bad luck?

If a senior pilot is in poverty after being on the historically high wages the last 30 years, that is only due to his/her poor planning, lack of judgment, and financial discipline.

Those junior furloughees that you want to keep out on the street another five years have never had the opportunity to earn a high wages in this profession. Their careers should not be trashed because of the greed of the most senior pilots.

Why should we subject the flying public to the increased risk of an older pilot just to satisfy your own selfish greed? And, don’t give me this BS that an older pilot is not an increased risk. Even ICAO agrees it’s a risk and that’s the reason they are only allowing one pilot over 60 in the cockpit.

You’re living in the “me” generation. It’s easy to see where you get your values from.

AA767AV8TOR

Yikes, Again !!!!!!
 

Jeeze - methinks you need to find a new groove on your LP. Can't you ever think of anything intelligent or original to say??? You're starting to sound like a broken record. Maybe the issue here is that the rules have changed - you ever think of that??? Even the dorky guy in the Dodge Ram advertisement had enough brains to understand that much. What happened to you??? :p :cool:

Let the United States lead the way on this. The first and only fair retirement age in aviation. We'll call it Fly 'till you Die!

What you are describing and what you are concerned about are the terms of a labor contract. Take these questions up with your union.

Federal law, FAR 121.383 (c), does not now and should never mandate terms of retirement. The word retirement is even not found in this regulation, it only establishes an age restriction for pilots operating aircraft in Part 121 operations.

Retirement should be a choice. If you want a mandatory retirement age within your company, be it either age 55 or age 65, write that into your CBA and allow other companies to choose their own retirement plan. Do not force the rest of the industry to conform to your union’s politics.

ATlineholder,

What rule has changed? Last time I checked the age 60 rule is still in effect.

Why do safety and our careers have to be compromised because of your selfish greed?

All you're trying to do is change the rules in the middle of the game (a rule you have already prospered under) just to put more money in your back pocket. That money is a direct transfer of wealth coming from the junior folks on the property.

Some of the senior guys are licking their chops and stand to profit over $1 million if the law is stretched out an additional five years.

AA767AV8TOR

OV1D,

You are a fool if you believe it will work out like that. With all the money the airlines invest in pilots, they want and need pilots to work right up to retirement age. You can count on strict penalties for any early-outs.

Hell, pilots can’t even negotiate a solid retirement anymore. That’s the reason for the push to Age 65 and you think our negotiating teams will be able to draw up a no penalty early-out.

Keep dreaming.

AA767AV8TOR

Or..Fly 'til Pax Die :eek:

I may sound like a broken record, but to hear the pro age 65 crowd chant that the junior guys are selfish has got to be the most idiotic reasoning yet. This after they themselves have enjoyed career advancement and have prospered under the same age 60 rule they now want to deny to the younger guys.

Now because of their own personal hardships, lack of success at the negotiation table, and poor planning; they are attempting to pick the pockets of all the junior folks for their own personal gain.

Nobody since 1958 has been promised a job flying a Part 121 airliner over the age of 60 and should have planned properly for the event. If you are not prepared at age 60, why do we have to suffer? There are numerous other jobs and careers available to someone over age 60. You just want to take the easy way out and make others pay for your own ineptness.

This is called greed and is the ultimate of wanting your cake and eating it too.

This proposal needs to be shot in the head. For you junior guys, let your Congressman and the FAA know your feelings. We can defeat this POS.

AA767AV8TOR

Hey A767
You assume that all Pilots approaching 60 have been at or with same company for the last 20 years and you also sound as if you assume that all of them have been WB CAPTS earning big bucks for the last 10 years or so. It just ain't so!

What about the Pilots at the BIG 4 airlines that have had their pensions wiped out,,,,,,,,,,,,,You guys could be next, lets hope NOT.

What about the former TWA CAPT who is furloughed from AA awaiting recall?

What about the Former 10 year Eastern Pilot who went to work for USAir in 1989 and is furloughed from USAir and awaiting recall?

What about the poor unlucky SOB who just happenesto be at his 3rd or 4th airline and due to no fualt of his own has no more Pension, except for maybe 200 grand in his 401K......We have many Junior FO's at FedEx that are in their 50's from various backgrounds.

Look as I have said before, I too have reservations about raising the Age.
Mostly with the concerns companys' intent on making it mandatory not voluntary.......ie, retiring at 61 would be 4 years early.

Concerns about the IRS rules on B funds if age 60 is changed.
I've already lost 1 pension from a failed carrier and I am one of the lucky ones! (........currently, knock on wood)

Whether you are for it or against it, make it a valid argument not a cheap shot at someones misfortune. Bottom line we can all complain about tit one way or another. Ultimately we have NO say in it anyway. The sad truth.

I have two thoughts on this topic. First, if it truly is a safety issue to have pilots retire at age 60, then they need research to back it up. I plan on being healthy and sharp at age 60, as do most of y'all. In today's jargon, 60 is the new 50, 50 the new 40 and all that. People, including pilots, ARE healthier at age 60 than in past generations. Further, I've seen some 55 yr olds on the line that look, walk, talk, and fly like death on a cracker. They could pass for 70. I've also seen a couple 55 year olds that look like they're ready for the UFC.

My old man retired at age 60, and he did NOT want to retire. The financial benefits would've been nice, but that was not his primary motivation. He's been flying since he was 20, and he was in good shape. He actually LIKED hub-turning 4 nights a week. He's adjusted to retirment now, but he about drove himself bat-sh** crazy out of boredom the first year.

Personally, I don't want the rule changed. It'll hose me and my seniority for years to come and significantly delay my opportunity to upgrade to Captain. However, this IS America, and if a dude can work and wants to work, he shouldn't be denied.

The NBA set a minimum age and it was held up in court. Anyone know the legal justification they used?

Pure APA/ALPA Propaganda!

and by the way,

The only FOOL here is the one who calls someone else a FOOL.

As I said in my previous post I am willing to bet I won't want to work past age 60, are you? I will start with all pilots that are one year younger than me and allow them to continue flying until they can no longer pass a real physical. Lots of us might not be able to pass a "real" one.

Maybe we should start with everyone who is 18 and say from this time forward your age group will be allowed to work in the airline industry past age 60 as a pilot. Are you OK with that? I would bet that most 18 year olds would look at you as if you are on drugs. You think they would even care? Plain and simple folks either side will have to sacrifice something. I am willing to defer to an entity who does'nt have a vested interest and let the chips fall where they may. Again I ask, are you?

Why don't all you ALPA folks that support keeping the age 60 rule wait until the courts decide or until you lose a lawsuit and let your dues be the reward?

Oh! and UPSav8tr, Don't call me dude because it gives away your age bias.

How 'bout we up the age to 65 and significantly raise the bar when it comes to Class I physicals?

How about a physical that is actually harder than a class 1 (maybe we could call it a class 1a) for those over 60? And then only let them fly as SIC.

Do something before its too late
 

I read the comments and there aren't any from young guys so get in there and make your opinion known, the only ones listed are supporting a change. If you don't want it to change step in now.

nightrider

There is no credible information available that supports the notion that all FAR Part 121 pilots over age 60 pose more of a safety risk than younger pilots.

Most of the world is moving to a retirement age of 65 for airline pilots. Japan and the Netherlands, to name but two, have done extensive studies which showed raising an airline pilot’s age is not a risk. Countries such as Japan, Australia, those of the Joint Aviation Authority in Europe...all have raised their pilots’ retirement age. Some 45 nations now allow their airline pilots to fly past the age of 60. Some of these pilots do so in United States airspace. The International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO, Secretariat has now recommended a new upper age limit, with restriction to multi-crew, of 65 years. This recommendation is based on extensive studies, global experience (data compiled from 63 States) with older pilots, totaling 25,500 pilot-years, and the expressed wish of 93 States. The International Civil Aviation Organization—ICAO, now recognizes the harm done by the age 60 rule standard and will amend the international standard to age 65, which should become applicable on 23 November 2006.

A person’s age has never been proven to be the sole determination of one’s ability to safely perform the duties of a FAR Part 121 pilot. There is no evidence that proves that physical and mental decline can be measured by age alone. We have all observed that some people decline in their physical and mental abilities faster than others. There is the experience factor to be considered also. Since the Wright Brothers, the aviation industry has observed that the more experienced pilot is likely to be the safer pilot. Pilots may suffer some varying amounts of decline in physical and cognitive abilities as they age, however, their level of experience could compensate for any physical decline in performance.

If the United States Federal Government is to continue the age restriction in FAR Part 121-383(c), given that a pilot is otherwise qualified to practice in their profession, then that government must prove that there are enough reasons to deny pilots the full enjoyment of their profession. If pilots are denied piloting an aircraft for no reason other than because of age, then it is the Federal Government’s burden to first prove that all pilots suffer an unacceptable decline in their ability to fly beyond age 60 which poses an unacceptable safety risk to the flying public. The proof that age 60 alone determines when a FAR Part 121 pilot must not operate aircraft in FAR Part 121 operations is something that Congress has directed the FAA to come up with but the FAA has failed to produce such proof. That proof simply does not exist.

The age 60 restriction in FAR Part 121.383(c) should be extended or abolished until/unless it is proven that all Far Part 121 pilots suffer an unacceptable decline in ability to fly beyond age 60 which poses an unacceptable safety risk to the flying public.



Figures Lie and Liars figure.

The FAA has been deceptive in promoting its theories about aging and pilot safety. The FAA used flawed Methodology in their attempt to prove that Part 121 pilots over the age of 60 are unsafe. True, if you compare the accident rates of ALL pilots over age 60 with that of ALL pilots under age 60, as the FAA deceptively tried to do in it’s Civil Aeromedical Institute CAMI REPORT 4, the over age 60 group of pilots would appear to have a slightly higher accident rate. That is because the pilots over age 60 group include ONLY the FAR Part 135 which has a much higher accident rate then that of Part 121 scheduled airline pilots which are not now permitted to fly past age 60 and not included in the study. Even the FAA admits that their methodology was flawed. The FAA admits their is no proof that airline pilots flying past age 60 would pose a safety risk to the flying public. Now the FAA says that it is "NEUTRAL" as "safety" can no longer be used as a valid argument against changing the "Age 60 Rule Increasing the “Age 60 Rule” to age 65.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65043&q=age+60

Greed is in the eye of the beholder. Some would say the greediest are those who seem to think their upgrade will be delayed 5 years. Now that's greed making an assumption.

And it sounds like entitlement thinking to me.

Of course, they forget their career will be lengthened by 5 years as well. And they don't factor into the equation the number of us out here who fully intend to go at 60 regardless of what the Age ?? rule is at the time.

They seem to think that everyone is going to hang on until the bitter end.

Excellent idea! I doubt some of these young folk could pass the physical when they reach 40. BTW no disability leave allowed. Oh! they want that too! Figures!:p

I'll be starting a aviation career later than most @ 42. I'd like to work as a pilot in 121 for as long as possible. If I want to work and can hold a class 1 / class 1a (good idea - i'm for it) and pass all appropriate line checks I should be able to.


-LAFF

I make my comments to the people who matter and have the ability to change the law and don't waste time with the ones pushing for the change. In case you have not noticed they do not want to discuss any downside to changing the rule. Bfunds, 25 yr pay scales, people on furlough etc.

I was talking about keeping the medicals the way they currently are for those of us below 60. Only those above 60 would be required to get a class 1a. It should include BMI requirements, cholesterol limits, tighter BP limits, stress test cardio ekg, a full MRI, and some sort of mental reasoning test. All that and keep them in the right seat.

Interesting argument.

Here in Australia thankfully things have changed with regards to this forced retirement of 60. I'm surprised to hear about some selfish younger pilots in the states who are in favor of the premature retirement of senior pilots. When I reach 60 - I personally don’t wish to have any age restriction placed upon me, being forced into retirement whilst the aviation bug is urging you to jump in the cockpit of a large aircraft. You only live once! Seniors, Captains/ First Officers have your fun in the aircraft! J - The time will come for you juniors when these seniors are 100% happy with their efforts throughout their career.

I'm sure, once a junior reaches such an age milestone in some 40 years time, one wouldn’t want the pressure of being forced to retire / find employment.


Just my opinion. :)