Originally Posted by pinseeker (Post 105624)

I agree. If age 65 passes, then the company can put s/o's back in the left seat but will only do so to fill vacancies. As new bids post, those in the back could bid to the front again to fill vacancies. Passover would be paid only to those who could have held the front on the bid but the company chose not to train them because of time until they reach 65 (ie., a 64 year old could have held it but they trained a junior 60 year old to get the most bang for their buck instead). The company will only do what they have to by law or labor agreement and not a penny more. The question is, how many vacancies will there be when the rule changes and those 58 and 59 year olds decide to stay. I think the only way that those in the back that are over 60 will see the front again or get paid for it is through growth. Thoughts?

Originally Posted by FoxHunter (Post 105656)

Around six years from now.;)

Originally Posted by FreightDawgyDog (Post 105632)

C'mon Mister Grumpy Pants..aren't you tired of this yet? You have been acting like the cat that ate the canary for years when it comes to Age 60 changing. You think you have all the info that it is going to change and when it doesn't you start calling those against it names like bigots and scabs. Truth is you have very little idea of what is going to happen, or if it does, when. You just keep acting like you know more than us though and keep heading towards your inevitable retirement. In the meantime, enjoy the seniority that was given to you by those that retired because of Age 60. My guess is you will join them before any rule change takes effect...

Originally Posted by FoxHunter (Post 105662)

That sounds fine with me. With no action by Congress the courts will be able to answer the question or the UAL pilots that have already turned age 60 and want to reclaim their seniority.:)

Originally Posted by jsled (Post 105691)

Let the courts decide. Couple years for the case, and appeals, maybe the supreme court will take the case in 3-5 years. Meanwhile they all turn 65.

Originally Posted by jsled (Post 105453)

Guys, this is the 3rd S.65 in three years. What makes you think this one will pass? Heck, it might not even make it out of committee. Last year it did, with almost all Dems against. Now the Dems are in control!!! Anyway, for every day it stays 60, more people punch out of the big iron!!! :D

Originally Posted by FoxHunter (Post 105662)

With no action by Congress the courts will be able to answer the question or the UAL pilots that have already turned age 60 and want to reclaim their seniority.:)

Originally Posted by Andy (Post 105914)

jsled, the lower courts have already ruled against those that wanted to change the age 60 rule. They appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case. While some may argue that the Supreme Court has a lot of cases, if there was a reasonable chance of the lower court rulings being overturned, they would have heard the case. Let Foxhunter talk about using lawsuits to overturn age 60; it ain't gonna happen in the judicial system.

Originally Posted by FoxHunter (Post 105670)

I'm not sure I agree that a bid is required. In the past if a pilot was forced to the back seat because of a medical condition and that condition was resolved he could move up without a bid. If a pilot returns from a LOA there does not have to be a bid. If a Flex or LCA returns to line he/she can go any place without a bid. It will be interesting to see how it is handled by both the Company and ALPA.