ICAO is 67 ???

I thought you were outta there soon?

So what? it's still a mandatory retirement age.

Scope relief is a way of shifting more flying to a lower cost model to help with corporate profits. It's a way to force the expansion of the B-scale composition. It also buys time. But that likely isn't going to work as I don't see the APA or any other mainline going along with it. In this case though, as you pointed out pilots have to come from somewhere, well, instead of having to hire at the majors, they'd place the larger faster, shinier jets at the regionals for lower operating wages. Same number of pilots required at the regional level, fewer required at the main line level. It's no different than going from DSH-8 to an E145 or E175 at PDT. They won't need more pilots as long as the airframe count is the same, just a few more for the training bubble. But again, that's likely not going to happen, the mainline guys aren't going to roll over on scope, especially with no pensions to lose.

Where does that leave us? The wholly owned if merged does one thing and one thing only, it combines the pilot groups into one manageable force at which new hires for AA can be ultimately placed with the promise of flow to AA, ie AA stops hiring off the street and goes to a 100% flow model, and AA does the hiring for all off the street hires at the combined envoy. This isn't going to happen tomorrow, or 3 years from now, but it may happen within about 5 years, and you're going to start seeing a shift in that direction. Possibly sooner than you might think. Just wait and see. My GUESS, is you'll start hearing merger rumors from higher sources around this time next year. An actual merger might happen a year later, and the language will be in place at that point for the eventual increase in flow percentages to AA.

If it doesn't happen, then the wholly owned with the most pilots, and best flow will survive, and the others will be starved out of existance.

Makes no sense to you what-so-ever does it? sleep on it, perhaps you'll have an epiphany.

I am, I have a month left. I still hope that my friends here get a good deal regardless.

Why would anyone want to work past 65? Even 60. Most people retire at 65. It's a good age.

I couldn't find anything about Pilot Retirement Age being 67 under ICAO...I found 65.

I did find some countries don't have an "upper age limit".

Money. When you made none when junior you went into debt. When you started to make some money to pay off your debt. Then you want a couple years of cushion.

You hope everything works out as long as you are able to keep sucking the life out of your friends airlines? Nice!

My ship has sailed as far as things working out my friend. I hoped to go to a major someday but I only have a few years left in this career. Still, it has been a good one and I have built a great nest.

In my time here I have seen plenty of drooling selfish kiddos like yourself. Wishing nothing works out for me will come right back at you. I really hope we can make a better deal than you guys did when you immediately bent over. Once that happens, not only will the bleeding here stop, but we will be able to draw away your good applicants and leave you back to the bottom of the barrel. Don't worry, you'll still have that trickle of likely to fail dummies. We are bit pickier over here and prefer to hire FOs that won't kill someone as Captains someday.

Well, I've slept on it, and it still doesn't make sense.

Shrinking mainline (i.e. 737s or 320s) to operate more regional jets to solve pilot staffing shortages is very poor math. Are you in Congress?

Even if you could move those 320s and 737s to Regionals (aint ever going to happen) just because you happen to pay pilots less doesn't make more appear.

If anything, if there are staffing shortages the way to mitigate it would be to grow mainline and go to decreased frequencies on certain routes with larger equipment, as that would let one pilot move more bodies.