Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Closed
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-21-2007, 10:28 AM   #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ryane946's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: FO, looking left
Posts: 1,055
Default

Maybe Karma will strike the 55-60 year old pilots who have been at a major for 30 years. They have benefited from age 60 their entire career, now they want to suddenly change it to benefit themselves!!!

I don't think age 60 should ever be changed. For one, it just adds to the already large supply of pilots competing for jobs. More competition = crappier profession. Period. ICAO changed the retirement age to 65 not because of any safety or discrimination reasons, but simply to benefit the airlines in the Middle East and Asia where the lack of pilots are hurting the growth of airlines and ultimately their entire countries economy. I agree that a 64 year old airline pilot is better than a 70 hour airline pilot (SEE http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=7874). But we don't have 70 hour major airline pilots in the United States, nor do we have a shortage of pilots affecting our countries economic growth. So it is irrelevant to change the retirement age to 65.

Everyone has been crying the word FAIR. It is unfair to make a pilot retire at 60 years old... is a line I hear all the time. But these 60 year old pilots have benefited from age 60 their entire career, allowing them to spend:
less time at a commuter
less time as FO (low pay and QOL)
less time on reserve
less time commuting
less time spent in a crash pad
less time on smaller equipment making less money
less time taking the crappy schedules

I don't want age 60 to change because I have no desire to be anything but a Cessna-172 with my grandson when I am 60. But if you really feel it is discriminatory, necessary, and unfair, then it should be phased-in in a fair way. How about this.
Major airline pilots vary in age from 30-60 years old. Most of the older guys have been flying for a long time, while the younger guys have been flying for a shorter time. While there are some old pilots who are newer to the industry, this is a pretty good assumption.

Pilots who are 54-60 (and thus have benefited the most in their career from age 60) can fly until they are 61.
Pilots who are 48-54 (benefited quite a bit from age 60) can fly until they are 62.
Pilots who are 42-48 (benefited from age 60) can fly until they are 63.
Pilots who are 36-42 (benefited a little from age 60) can fly until they are 64.
Pilots 36 and under (benefited not much from the age 60 rule) can fly until 65.

How does that sound for FAIR. That way the senior guys who have been there for 30 years, and benefited from age 60 their entire careers, cannot screw the younger junior guys who have not benefited from age 60 as much!
ryane946 is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 10:38 AM   #22  
Trust but Verify!!
 
FreightDawgyDog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD11 CRA
Posts: 684
Default

"Amen there Wild. My condolences to his family - And Amen on your other comments. I once worked on a movie with a guy who was 28 years old, completely healthy, didn't do drugs, etc. and he suddenly passed away from a heart attack. I guess we shouldn't let 28 year olds fly planes either. I've known of more than a few guys (and gals) in their 30's and 40's who have suddenly had heart attacks.

I can't believe the greedy opportunistic folks who will use this man's untimely passing as an example to further their own agenda. Oh well - there is always karma."

Skygirl..

You have an excellent point. I guess it is OK for you to use your 28 year old friends passing to reinforce your point of view though? Seems to me you are being a little bit of a hypocrite here. Anyone's passing is tragic and should be left at just that IMO..
FreightDawgyDog is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 11:01 AM   #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Default

I can't believe the greedy opportunistic folks who will use this man's untimely passing as an example to further their own agenda. Oh well - there is always karma.[/QUOTE]

Just like you using your young friends death to further your agenda. Karma Indeed!!!
jsled is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 11:12 AM   #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Skygirl's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,146
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsled View Post
I can't believe the greedy opportunistic folks who will use this man's untimely passing as an example to further their own agenda. Oh well - there is always karma.
Just like you using your young friends death to further your agenda. Karma Indeed!!![/QUOTE]

I have no agenda other than agreeing that the age 60 rule is unfair. Furthermore, I am not, nor have not, used anyone's passing to do so. I am using that as an example of how wrong it would be to use the Continental pilot's passing. I'm sure his family would agree with me and would be appalled to read about their loved one being used to further someone's agenda. As Velocipede mentioned, he knows of younger pilots having to go out on leave for cancer treatment. Using that sort of logic, perhaps we should ban all pilots of all ages with any sort of family medical history that might cause an unexpected medical emergency.

My karma is just fine, thank you.
Skygirl is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 11:24 AM   #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Skygirl's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,146
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryane946 View Post
Maybe Karma will strike the 55-60 year old pilots who have been at a major for 30 years. They have benefited from age 60 their entire career, now they want to suddenly change it to benefit themselves!!!

I don't think age 60 should ever be changed. For one, it just adds to the already large supply of pilots competing for jobs. More competition = crappier profession. Period. ICAO changed the retirement age to 65 not because of any safety or discrimination reasons, but simply to benefit the airlines in the Middle East and Asia where the lack of pilots are hurting the growth of airlines and ultimately their entire countries economy. I agree that a 64 year old airline pilot is better than a 70 hour airline pilot (SEE http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=7874). But we don't have 70 hour major airline pilots in the United States, nor do we have a shortage of pilots affecting our countries economic growth. So it is irrelevant to change the retirement age to 65.

Everyone has been crying the word FAIR. It is unfair to make a pilot retire at 60 years old... is a line I hear all the time. But these 60 year old pilots have benefited from age 60 their entire career, allowing them to spend:
less time at a commuter
less time as FO (low pay and QOL)
less time on reserve
less time commuting
less time spent in a crash pad
less time on smaller equipment making less money
less time taking the crappy schedules

I don't want age 60 to change because I have no desire to be anything but a Cessna-172 with my grandson when I am 60. But if you really feel it is discriminatory, necessary, and unfair, then it should be phased-in in a fair way. How about this.
Major airline pilots vary in age from 30-60 years old. Most of the older guys have been flying for a long time, while the younger guys have been flying for a shorter time. While there are some old pilots who are newer to the industry, this is a pretty good assumption.

Pilots who are 54-60 (and thus have benefited the most in their career from age 60) can fly until they are 61.
Pilots who are 48-54 (benefited quite a bit from age 60) can fly until they are 62.
Pilots who are 42-48 (benefited from age 60) can fly until they are 63.
Pilots who are 36-42 (benefited a little from age 60) can fly until they are 64.
Pilots 36 and under (benefited not much from the age 60 rule) can fly until 65.

How does that sound for FAIR. That way the senior guys who have been there for 30 years, and benefited from age 60 their entire careers, cannot screw the younger junior guys who have not benefited from age 60 as much!

Ryan, my fellow Bay Area friend, I like you and enjoy your contributions, but have to respectfully agree to disagree with you here. Although, I think your argument about phasing in a new age 65 has validity.

There will NEVER be a time to change the rule that will be fair to all . Leaving the rule unchanged because it's unfair to someone would be akin to saying that we should have not let women or minorities vote because not letting them vote benefited white males of all ages and enabled them to control the power structure. It could have been argued that it was unfair to change the rules of the game and the way of life that they had come to know. Discrimination is discrimination, whether it's age, sex or racial.
Skygirl is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 11:24 AM   #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 323
Default Ironic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skygirl View Post
Just like you using your young friends death to further your agenda. Karma Indeed!!!
I have no agenda other than agreeing that the age 60 rule is unfair. Furthermore, I am not, nor have not, used anyone's passing to do so. I am using that as an example of how wrong it would be to use the Continental pilot's passing. I'm sure his family would agree with me and would be appalled to read about their loved one being used to further someone's agenda. As Velocipede mentioned, he knows of younger pilots having to go out on leave for cancer treatment. Using that sort of logic, perhaps we should ban all pilots of all ages with any sort of family medical history that might cause an unexpected medical emergency.

My karma is just fine, thank you.[/QUOTE]

Ya know what I find hysterical, Sky? How both you and I have NO agenda (not being pilots) but yet we still get bashed. All we're saying is that young people have to realize that they too will be middle-aged someday and will suddently have an epiphany (hope that's not too big of a word for some of you!) that middle age brings experience and confidence that not too many young people have. Like you said in a different thread, Sky, you feel much more confident with a more mature captain in front than a kid who barely shaves. He's probably seen and done more in his career (emergency wise) than you have ever read about or done in a sim.

P.S. - Let's cut the cr*p and be honest here -- we ALL know it's about the left seat. Always has been, always will be. You're all just foaming at the mouth waiting for your turn. Not saying if that's right or wrong, it's just a fact. You could all give a rat's behind as to what the Captain's age is and what is in his latest medical. You're just counting the days til you get your shot at the big time....Just remember, someday you will be in the left seat and some snot nose will be eyeing your seat up and down just like you did before...LOL

Last edited by wild4theuniform; 01-21-2007 at 11:49 AM.
wild4theuniform is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 11:50 AM   #27  
Trust but Verify!!
 
FreightDawgyDog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD11 CRA
Posts: 684
Default

Skygirl and Wild..

..I like your posts but Skygirl clearly used her friends death to try and prove the point that Age 60 is unfair and then she lashed out at those that used the 58 year old's death the same way.

Anyway, since you and Wild seem to say you have no agenda, other than saying Age 60 retirement is unfair, let me ask you when you both think a pilot should have to retire? At what point do you think the gray hair starts affecting the gray matter and means the 55 year old pilot with graying hair is safer than the ____ (you fill in the blank) - year old pilot with gray hair? I truly am interested in what you think and why, and what kind of background you bring to the discussion. As you both have said, you are dealing with experienced pilots on this board, and you have little or no flying experience. You both do seem to think you know more than the younger (your assumption BTW as I am long past barely shaving) pilots here that are against this change even with much less experience in aviation. I'd like to know why... Thanks in advance for your response..
FreightDawgyDog is offline  
Old 01-21-2007, 12:02 PM   #28  
APC co-founder
 
HSLD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B-777-200
Posts: 5,727
Default

I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that this thread is becoming callous and insensitive. It's easy to start a new thread, try it.

This thread was to inform that we've collectively lost a fellow aviator.

Please join Airline Pilot Central in expressing sympathy and condolences to the immediate family and the Continental Airlines family for their loss.
HSLD is offline  
 
 
 

 
Closed
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pilots response to the NYtimes article??? CargoBob JetBlue 18 12-13-2006 06:01 PM
Updated info on the Brazil Crash. NTSB Factual Report FlyerJosh Part 135 0 11-23-2006 05:06 AM
Martinaire Pilot Hiring Update HSLD Hiring News 2 11-14-2006 04:32 PM
Jet Blue at it again 757Driver Major 72 11-07-2006 06:24 PM
Letter from Alaska Chief pilot mike734 Major 36 09-22-2006 07:33 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:41 PM.