A Few Questions about United
01-22-2020, 05:53 PM
#61
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by APC225
2. I'm not entirely sure, but I think it goes strictly by age 65 retirement losses. I don’t think it looks at growth or shrinking either. New hires are added regularly though.
Growth will obviously help.. the furlough/stagnation that might happen in the next 15 years will obviously hurt.. Age 67 or 70 will be semi indifferent.
That being written, anyone hired here or at Delta should have an amazing 20+ years ahead of them~
FS, FP & FtC
Motch
01-22-2020, 07:42 PM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,159
Originally Posted by horrido27
I would tend to agree.
Growth will obviously help.. the furlough/stagnation that might happen in the next 15 years will obviously hurt.. Age 67 or 70 will be semi indifferent.
That being written, anyone hired here or at Delta should have an amazing 20+ years ahead of them~
FS, FP & FtC
Motch
Growth will obviously help.. the furlough/stagnation that might happen in the next 15 years will obviously hurt.. Age 67 or 70 will be semi indifferent.
That being written, anyone hired here or at Delta should have an amazing 20+ years ahead of them~
FS, FP & FtC
Motch
According to some AME friends of mine, cognitive testing would be too difficult and too subjective and require allot of additional wickets to jump through. Your average AME doesn't want any part of that geriatric examination certification.
01-23-2020, 05:28 AM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 459
Originally Posted by baseball
Does ALPA have a PUBLIC opinion on age 67 or 70. It would be nice to see what our dues money is paying for.
According to some AME friends of mine, cognitive testing would be too difficult and too subjective and require allot of additional wickets to jump through. Your average AME doesn't want any part of that geriatric examination certification.
According to some AME friends of mine, cognitive testing would be too difficult and too subjective and require allot of additional wickets to jump through. Your average AME doesn't want any part of that geriatric examination certification.
ALPA’s official stance? Don’t know.
Unofficial? Well how old are the people running ALPA? That is a good bet on what the unofficial stance is.
01-23-2020, 09:52 AM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,602
Originally Posted by baseball
Does ALPA have a PUBLIC opinion on age 67 or 70. It would be nice to see what our dues money is paying for.
According to some AME friends of mine, cognitive testing would be too difficult and too subjective and require allot of additional wickets to jump through. Your average AME doesn't want any part of that geriatric examination certification.
According to some AME friends of mine, cognitive testing would be too difficult and too subjective and require allot of additional wickets to jump through. Your average AME doesn't want any part of that geriatric examination certification.
01-23-2020, 10:51 AM
#65
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
Not to Thread Drift..
But I'd be surprised if we ever get an official 'opinion' from ALPA National.
BIG can of worms!
That being written, increasing the age above 65 creates as many new problems versus the amount of old problems it solves.
My opinion-
1) An age increase would allow some pilots to stay past 65 while on LTD. Hmm.. who is going to pay for that?
2) How do you certify someone to fly above 65 with regards to their cognitive skills? If they don't hack it in a sim or some sort of computer based test... then what?! LTD or forced retirement? Who designs the cog test?
*I had expected an uptick of deaths while on trips when the age went from 60 to 65 since they didn't change the medicals. As my therapist (Joking.. it's my girlfriend > fiance > soon to be wife!) would say- good to admit when you're wrong. I was wrong (happily so) about that one.
3) Who's going to be the one to sign off (bet) on raising the age?
We lost a great AME here in the EWR area (Doc D). Seems it's harder to find an AME now than before. So are we going to have enough AME's willing to sign off that someone that is 65+ is medically healthy to continue flying?
See 1 and 2!
End of the day, raising it to 65+ may help the RJ world (keeping some of their senior pilots who may also be LCA's) more than helping the Legacy world. Might help the industry as a whole by extending any possible pilot shortage a few years at most.
Don't think it's happening tomorrow but I would have lost the other bet as I expected that it would happen before 2020. (lol.. Gina is loving this)
But I also won't be surprised if it does happen at some point in this decade.
As far as the great seniority tool is concerned-
United Seniority
Great place to see (potential) info with regards to where you might be!
Mind you, I have progressively moved up since I started following it as we have lost pilots who were senior to me AND younger. Not the way I want to move up.
And you can't bet on anything that is there.. at least not 100%. But it does back up stuff that I figure out myself.
ie, if/when I can hold a certain seat.. where I should be and when..
Anyways-
FS, FP and FtC
Motch
But I'd be surprised if we ever get an official 'opinion' from ALPA National.
BIG can of worms!
That being written, increasing the age above 65 creates as many new problems versus the amount of old problems it solves.
My opinion-
1) An age increase would allow some pilots to stay past 65 while on LTD. Hmm.. who is going to pay for that?
2) How do you certify someone to fly above 65 with regards to their cognitive skills? If they don't hack it in a sim or some sort of computer based test... then what?! LTD or forced retirement? Who designs the cog test?
*I had expected an uptick of deaths while on trips when the age went from 60 to 65 since they didn't change the medicals. As my therapist (Joking.. it's my girlfriend > fiance > soon to be wife!) would say- good to admit when you're wrong. I was wrong (happily so) about that one.
3) Who's going to be the one to sign off (bet) on raising the age?
We lost a great AME here in the EWR area (Doc D). Seems it's harder to find an AME now than before. So are we going to have enough AME's willing to sign off that someone that is 65+ is medically healthy to continue flying?
See 1 and 2!
End of the day, raising it to 65+ may help the RJ world (keeping some of their senior pilots who may also be LCA's) more than helping the Legacy world. Might help the industry as a whole by extending any possible pilot shortage a few years at most.
Don't think it's happening tomorrow but I would have lost the other bet as I expected that it would happen before 2020. (lol.. Gina is loving this)
But I also won't be surprised if it does happen at some point in this decade.
As far as the great seniority tool is concerned-
United Seniority
Great place to see (potential) info with regards to where you might be!
Mind you, I have progressively moved up since I started following it as we have lost pilots who were senior to me AND younger. Not the way I want to move up.
And you can't bet on anything that is there.. at least not 100%. But it does back up stuff that I figure out myself.
ie, if/when I can hold a certain seat.. where I should be and when..
Anyways-
FS, FP and FtC
Motch
03-01-2020, 12:21 PM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by JoePatroni
Going between EWR-LGA isn’t all that bad except late at night or early in the am.
https://youtu.be/6d7Vk_qaiB8
03-02-2020, 09:24 AM
#67
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: 756 Left Side
Posts: 1,629
Originally Posted by APC225
If not an SNL fan pass this one by. Lengthy spoof last night on LGA. Some of the licks were spot on.
https://youtu.be/6d7Vk_qaiB8
https://youtu.be/6d7Vk_qaiB8
But that skit was pretty ****ing good~
LOL
FS, FP & FtC
Motch
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
