Truth hurts doesn't it?

 

Well, that is news to me. But in reality I could care less. I entered this profession right during the Eastern and Pan Am days and decided then I would not count on a CAL retirement. I planned for that and still do. CAL is just a sideline.

 

Obviously I was being sarcastic. Since you have it all figured out then why would you begrudge those at Pan Am or Eastern, etc. the opportunity to attempt to make up for it when it wasn't their fault? If it isn't all about your retirement or your seniority then what is it about? Oh yeah its all about "safety."

I must say their is enough selfishness on both sides of this issue and when it becomes all about the individual it frankly makes me want to puke.

 

I'm new to this forum but the age 65 rule change is a topic of great interest to me and mine. First, I oppose the change. Even though or because I work for a regional I want to be able to retire at 60 so I can have a few years of good health to do the things I enjoy without having a trip to look forward to. Unfortunately my company got sucked into two rounds of bankruptcy along with our parent company and we have suffered financial setbacks as well. One thing we managed to hold on to was a social security "bridge" which pays the equivalent of our SS benefits until age 65. This legislative action will effectively force me and others to work past 60 because my company has already hinted that the bridge will be gone. The law of unintended consequeces at work? The though of having 5 more years added to my sentence is almost more than I can stomach.

What I believe we are missing is if this passes and is effective within 30 days how are ICAO medical standards going to be effective for all the pilots retiring within the next six months. In other words are the AME's equipped and trained already for the new standard? Has the FAA already gotten ahead of the administrative support requirments? Have they increased the medical certification staffing for the flood of special issuances, appeals, boards, etc? I think not. My guess is it will be 2 years before the FAA is ready to go on this. Anyone have any more info on this?

 

The mandatory 60 retirement age eventually going to be raised. As time goes on and with advancement in medicine we are living longer and healthier lives. It only makes sense for it to be raised.

 

This is true. It obviously should not be open-ended, but lifestyle and medical advances have easily bought us another 5 years on average.

I'm a relatively younger guy who would be hurt more than helped by this in the near term, but it is not right to have a rule on the books that came into existence for the economic convenience of the airlines.