S.65 language
01-21-2007 | 07:13 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 980
Likes: 0
From: Retired
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?
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.
01-21-2007 | 07:18 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 980
Likes: 0
From: Retired
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...
So I plan to stay for a while.
01-21-2007 | 08:17 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
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.
01-21-2007 | 08:53 AM
#25
Trust but Verify!!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: MD11 CRA
"Every time I start to think that I may want to retire I think about you. I would hate the idea of you moving up that one number. So I plan to stay for a while."
Plan all you want MGP..the reality is if you stay it will be as a 727 S/O. If that's how you want to spend your 61st year than I say more power to you!! I think a better plan is to let NMB convert you so you can be "like-minded" and work for him and his company! That way Seattle and Miami will be more than just memory joggers for you...
Plan all you want MGP..the reality is if you stay it will be as a 727 S/O. If that's how you want to spend your 61st year than I say more power to you!! I think a better plan is to let NMB convert you so you can be "like-minded" and work for him and his company! That way Seattle and Miami will be more than just memory joggers for you...
01-21-2007 | 06:19 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
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.
01-21-2007 | 06:36 PM
#27
Che Guevara
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Likes: 0
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!!!
As good of a reason as any
01-22-2007 | 01:17 AM
#28
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 1
From: Retired 121 pilot
01-22-2007 | 06:41 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
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.
01-23-2007 | 03:20 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,813
Likes: 0
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
