Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
Age 60 legislation is alive and moving forward >

Age 60 legislation is alive and moving forward

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Age 60 legislation is alive and moving forward

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-16-2007 | 03:32 PM
  #11  
fireman0174's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 1
From: Retired 121 pilot
Default

Originally Posted by Falconjet
But yeah, it sure is fair for all of the furloughed guys to have to sit another 5 years so the 37 year Captains at United don't have to go on the welfare rolls.

FJ
Here's another point of view to consider. Attitudes like that make me sorry that I put my career on the line and went on strike to help eliminate the b-scale at UAL in 1985. This for people not even on the property.
Reply
Old 01-16-2007 | 03:51 PM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
From: FedEx
Default

Attitudes like what? Caring for people who are out of a job for 6 years running and simply want their chance based on the same rules as the guys pushing for the change?

Oh my gawd, what an awful attitude, to actually care about those guys.

It wasn't me standing up before the FAA Administrator and the media claiming that I would be relegated to poverty after 37 years at United. That was Mr Undaunted Flyer from that other website. Talk about no shame. How could he stand there and say that with a straight face I can't even imagine.

If I had gone on strike to protect a guy like that, then I would be sorry too.

FJ

Last edited by Falconjet; 01-16-2007 at 04:05 PM.
Reply
Old 01-16-2007 | 04:12 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 973
Likes: 0
From: A320 CA
Default

Originally Posted by Velocipede
Forced through? The difference this time is that foreign pilots are operating in U.S. airspace TODAY over age 60. The driver here is the basic unfairness that U.S. pilots are being denied the privileges of operating in U.S. airspace while foreign pilots are allowed to.

Americans (even politicians) won't stand for that kind of inequity.
Let's see....right now foreign pilots can fly US passengers without being subjected to the same drug tests that US pilots are.....foreign carriers can fly with combis with cargo in the back and pax up front (opposite FARs)...Air France allows their pilots to have a glass of wine with dinner....yeah there is inequity...so what. If a 60 year old US pilot still wants to fly let him/her fly for Air Mozambique or Emerates...just not UAL or NWA etc! Ripper
Reply
Old 01-16-2007 | 08:21 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
From: SAABster
Default

Where have all the pleasent redtail pilots gone? I heard one yelling at ATC for a late turn on to the ILS last night.
I plan on living for a while, maybe 85. I think hanging out on the flightdeck 'till I'm 65 might be good for me. 25 years is a long time to be saying "I used to fly an Airbus 320", "I used to be a CFI".
I've been a Pilot for 25 years! I love it! Why is everyone in this biz so bitter.
I work a hell of alot less then anyone else in my neighborhood. I travel more too! The world is changing around us. Bend like a sapling or break like a tree its up to you.

Make it a great day!!
Reply
Old 01-17-2007 | 01:40 AM
  #15  
ockham's Avatar
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Default 104 Rule

Originally Posted by viperdriver
What is a 104 rule?
The combined age of two required pilots must not exceed 104 years if one crewmember is over 60.
Reply
Old 01-17-2007 | 02:09 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by ockham
The combined age of two required pilots must not exceed 104 years if one crewmember is over 60.
This whole thread smells like dogxxxx. Looks like someone's running a gullibility check.
Reply
Old 01-17-2007 | 02:28 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by fireman0174
Here's another point of view to consider. Attitudes like that make me sorry that I put my career on the line and went on strike to help eliminate the b-scale at UAL in 1985. This for people not even on the property.
Odd statement. I'll assume that you don't want to talk about what the United pilots of your era did to their Frontier and Continental brothers.
Reply
Old 01-17-2007 | 04:33 AM
  #18  
CVG767A's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
From: 767ER capt
Default

Originally Posted by Andy
Odd statement. I'll assume that you don't want to talk about what the United pilots of your era did to their Frontier and Continental brothers.
Okay, I'll bite. What did they do?
Reply
Old 01-17-2007 | 06:47 AM
  #19  
757Driver's Avatar
Need More Callouts
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,143
Likes: 0
From: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Default

Does the Torque campaign ring a bell???
Reply
Old 01-17-2007 | 03:00 PM
  #20  
fireman0174's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 1
From: Retired 121 pilot
Default

Originally Posted by Andy
Odd statement. I'll assume that you don't want to talk about what the United pilots of your era did to their Frontier and Continental brothers.
Actually, it wasn't the the pilots that did Frontier in, it was the company.

The company "offered" to take the Frontier operation over, but their pilots had to come to United on some sort of B-scale, the specifics I don't recall. Our MEC rejected the company's "offer", but stated they were willing to sit down and negotiate. I was not privy to the parameters given to the negotiating committee, as I was no longer on the MEC, having completed my term of office about a month prior.

The company flatly rejected any negotiations - they said it was a take it or leave it deal, after and not before the "offer". This method of negotiations was their tried and true tactic back then. They immediately announced the deal was off, "blaming" the pilots. Frontier shut down shortly thereafter.

United got just what they wanted, the Denver operation basically to themselves, and they got to blame the pilots to boot. Not a bad outcome for them.

So you can blame the United pilot group if you want, but the truth is that it was the company that killed the deal. The United MEC was indeed quite willing to negotiate.

Actually, I think the outcome was exactly what the company wanted from the get-go.

I do think the UAL-MEC was out-maneuvered by the company.
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices