birdstrike

…How has this rule change affected the lives of the pilots at your airline?...

It’s too early to say in detail, but some effects are already becoming obvious:

• All existing pilots will have the ability to fly for ten years longer than they expected when they joined, should they wish to do so.

• The airline’s cost base will go up, as many more pilots will now reach the top incremental pay point than would otherwise have been the case, and will stay on it for ten years longer than the airline expected.

• Progression up the seniority list will slow up considerably for the next few years, as will command upgrades for F/O’s, unless the airline expands.

• The number of new hires will decrease considerably.

It will benefit me personally enormously, but I would never have campaigned for these changes, for the reasons others have already posted. I signed a contract to go at age 55, and got my command because those who were ahead of me left when they reached age 55. For every pilot who wanted the age increased, there was another who didn’t, it was a very divisive issue, and our union stayed out of it!

However, because of European legislation, we didn’t have any say in the matter. It just happened, and we have to live with it. I happened to be in the right place, at the right time, at the right age, and will now (probably) have a single digit seniority number for the next ten years. Senior F/O’s on the other hand, have seen their command upgrades recede into the distance. Not fair, but it happened.

Incidentally, in Europe, the age discrimination legislation will almost certainly be used to challenge many facets of our working lives as pilots that we have grown used to, principally seniority, bidline, incremental pay scales and promotion on seniority.

What will the final outcome be….I don’t know, ask me again in five years!



…Will pilots still be able to retire with full benifits at age 55?...or are you penalized if you elect to leave the company at 55?...

The age rule change will not, of itself, affect a pilot’s ability to retire at 55 on full benefits, but, in my airline we currently have an ongoing major pension problem.

The latest actuarial valuation revealed that our pension fund is currently under-funded by around £2.1 billion ($4 billion). If the company will not modify their current proposals about how this deficit should be tackled, our union, BALPA, may well issue a strike ballot before Xmas.

No matter how this problem is eventually resolved, I don’t think any pilot seriously believes that our benefits will remain unchanged. So, whilst we may retain the ability to retire at 55, I very much doubt it will be on the current level of benefits.


…what is the aircraft in you avitar?...

Concorde.


Best regards

Bellerophon

 

So, you are saying that some age discrimination is OK, as long as it doesn't effect you. Yep, us young guys are being greedy and should listen to you older, wiser guys.

 

"Why, Because the “left seat”, that I now occupy, the one that I earned, belongs to me and no one else. The government has no right to take away from me what is rightfully mine."

And there you have it ladies and gentleman. OV "earned" his way into the left seat and now he wants to keep it. Screw those pilots who left at Age 60 before him to open that "earned" seat up. Screw those pilots that were expecting to "earn" the left seat when he retired at 60 like those ahead of him did. You have my thanks OV for saying what NMB and FoxHunter really mean. It's all about them and no one else. Everyone ahead of them had to leave so they could move up and now when it is their turn to go they kick and scream like a toddler whose turn on the merry-go-round is over and have to be taken off the horse in a screaming hissy fit. Can't you just picture all these grown up pilots, in their uniforms, crying and yelling "But I don't want to go Mommy(FAA)! I want to stay longer!" Mommy says soothingly "It's time to go child. You had your turn. Now it is time to let the others who have waited have theirs. How would you feel if you were the one that had to wait longer so another child could ride twice instead of once?" "But Mommy I don't care about them. It's not fair! I'm the only one that matters!" At which point Mommy rips the child throwing the tantrum off the horse and says "Life's not fair kid. You had your shot now let's go find something else to do." What a very undignified way to end a professional career in aviation.

 

My up-grade to Captain, 16 years ago, was a result of my company’s expansion and not as a result of even one pilot being forced to retire. When I hired on with my current company, 90% of the pilots senior to me were also younger than me. We made the company the sucess that all of our junior pilots enjoy today.

There are just too many pilots like me who do not fly for APA/ALPA carriers and do not wish to be subject to the dirty big union politics of institutionalized age discrimination as an accelerated job advancement scheme for its junior pilots.

APA/ALPA must not force their dirty age discrimination politics upon the rest of the airline industry

 

Then you must not site the Pay rates of UNION carriers when you want a raise or better working conditions at the outfit you work for.......

 

Those of you who continue thinking that the forced retirement of senior pilots is your God given path to seniority progression, I say that you had better re-evaluate your own selfish attitude. The age 60 rule has always been wrong, you know it, I know it and it is high time that we all put an end to it.

Many of us fly for some of the best airlines in the world. What made today’s profitable air carriers successful, is the work ethic of their employees. Then there are the junior pilots at ALPA and APA who only want to continue screwing their senior members. They should keep that isolated in their own dysfunctional house. ALPA/APA’s current system is not about seniority, it is all about "juniority". Do not impose your institutionalized age discrimination on the rest of us.

I chose to work at my present airline job in 1989 over flying for a legacy airline for two reasons. First, is my desire to live in my hometown and not have to commute. Second, I chose my airline company because at that time, it was a very a stable Part 135 carrier and I was counting on flying until retiring at age 65. Then in 1995 the FAA forced us to convert to Part 121, thus destroying my plans of flying to 65. My airline has never provided its pilots a pension. We only have a 401K. I have planed my career as best as I can. I served in the military, 11 years over seas including Vietnam. Now that I am finally earning a decent living, I would now like to help my parents who recently moved into an assisted living care home and my daughter with college. The financial obligations only increase for most people around the age of 60.

There are too many such situations where pilots have been trapped by rule changes, failed companys, one way or another, that screwed up their careers. I don't even want to read any more C%#&P that "senior guys have benefited from the Age 60 rule as they moved up the list". For too many pilots now days, being forced to retire early means poverty. This is while junior pilots are able to continue flying and enjoy a decent income, medical coverage and the satisfaction of flying for a living.


Most important, I truly love my job and I am damn good at it.


The curse that began in 1959 will soon end.

 

[QUOTE=fly2ski;77712]
Do we have a modirator for this thread?

Please, do not post such counter productive language on this forum!

 

Wow, crying to mommy just as mentioned in the above post.

You really are a piece of work OV1D. I mean, you picked a carrier just so you could work until 65. Did that all on your own 19 years ago.

Right.

Come on, you can do better than that.

 

First I commend you on wanting to help your parents, daughter and your service in Vietnam. I also have a daughter (I'm building her college fund even though it's another 13 years until she goes), I had to help support a parent in an assisted living community, and I served in the latest two rounds of war.

Second, I understand that you're career plans were shifted due to the change in 135 to 121. But how many other pilots have plans changed during their careers. Trust me no one at EAL really wanted Lorenzo to screw up the company, force a strike, and loose their jobs. What about the guy who has to stop flying early due to some medical condition that the FAA says is unsafe (diabetic), yet the pilot could easily continue to fly safely. Was that fair?? NO but that's life.

Third, You STILL have not answered my question on age discrimination. IF you truly believe the age 60 is discrimination would you protest at age 65 AND would you support the 18yr old that wants his ATP TODAY. Let's call it what it is. Whether you believe it or not, you did benefit from age 60. A friend of mine who flew DC-3's had to retire, others took his job. If he was still flying 121 (and he is flying for fun part 91), the guy who took his job would have applied at your employeer and gotten your job before you got there.

 

Koz,

He'll never reply because your questions don't benefit HIM.

This guy is so transparent its scary.