Packrat

Unless you're 5 years old, so did you. Why should YOU get an extra 5 years?

BenderRodriguez

He doesn't get an extra 5 years at the top. He still gets 5 years, only later in life. He and Carl are both right on this.

Packrat

5 years at the top? A whole bunch of people didn't get 5 years at the top. Quit whining....how about all those guys who NEVER get to the "top"?

People who say stuff like that sound like greedy little children. "His piece of pie is bigger than mine!" Wah, wah, wha...

encore

I did get an extra 5 years. As a regional FO, earning near poverty wages.

Now I have to work to 65 to get to where I would've gotten to at 60 otherwise.

5 more years of my life working so that some could fix their poor financial planning at the expense of thousands of others.

galaxy flyer

encore,

Life isn't fair, grow up.

GF

Scoop

Guys,

Its not worth getting spooled up over this - we have pretty much close to zero say on what eventually happens.

But that does not mean there are not clear winners and losers every time the age is raised.

The big winners are those at the top of the food chain (WB Captains) who benefited quite nicely throughout their whole career by mandatory retirements.

Anyone in the Captain seat is a net winner, some marginally, some fairly big winners.

FO's are pretty much net losers because of delayed upgrades.


Biggest myth - No one is forced to stay to the new retirement age and there is no penalty for retiring at 60.

Well I guess there is no penalty if you don't count the fact that the bidding power/relative seniority you would have held at 53 now will not be achieved until around 60.

So while you may still retire at 60 you will be doing so at a much reduced seniority and QOL. Think of it as a transfer of your QOL to those at the top whenever the change kicks in.

This is not the fault of senior Captains - they are just in the right place at the right time. Good for them. Who knows who will be in this position when the next change occurs.

Mind you there are plenty of ways to mitigate this but for whatever reason ALPA decided not to pursue any mitigating strategies last go around.

The most obvious mitigating strategy is a "phased" implementation. Raise the retirement age 2 or 3 months every year so that no group receives more than a 2-3 month windfall vice 5 years or 3 years.

Anyway like I said we are all just passengers on this ride - not really much we can do about it in my opinion.

Scoop

BenderRodriguez

Yeah, now you are coming across as a big whiner. Sorry.

AllenAllert

Greed is a wonderful crutch. Whether a pilot elects to retire at 50 or 100 it should be the individuals choice and not be an arbitrary expiration date. We have medical and performance standards that cover ALL pilots and that should be the only limiting factor or restriction regardless of age.

Even if the guy in your example doesn't get 5 more years at the top he gets the opportunity to be there if he wants.

There is no logical reason to restrict/exclude a pilot because of age.

BenderRodriguez

I agree. There should be no age limit really. I disagrree with your premise that he would get the opportunity to be there. When age determines the retirement date, unless he got hired at 23, he will more than likely never be at the top. I got hired at 30 and there is no way I will be even close. I don't care though, I am happy right where I am.

This entire argument/discussion is retarded.

AllenAllert

I agree this is a retarded discussion. Having said that, like you, I will never be at the top and don't begrudge those that get there.