Age 67
#21
“Fairness”….HA! Like ANYTHING in life, let alone this ridiculous career…..is “fair”
When I see a bunch of junior pilots pooling their resources to start a fund for those who were furloughed twice or lost their pensions due to bankruptcy…..I’ll believe that “fairness” is a priority.
*crickets
When I see a bunch of junior pilots pooling their resources to start a fund for those who were furloughed twice or lost their pensions due to bankruptcy…..I’ll believe that “fairness” is a priority.
*crickets
#22
This couldn't be further from the truth. I'm honestly happy to spend the next 30 years in my current seat. It's 100% about safety for me. I have flown with pilots over 65 and it isn't pretty. About half were fine, but the others were extremely weak and had no idea how much the other pilot was helping them. And even in 121, I have flown with a handful of 60-plus who were trending in the wrong direction. Before we even think about increasing the retirement age, we need a complete revamp of the FAA medical process.
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 456
“Fairness”….HA! Like ANYTHING in life, let alone this ridiculous career…..is “fair”
When I see a bunch of junior pilots pooling their resources to start a fund for those who were furloughed twice or lost their pensions due to bankruptcy…..I’ll believe that “fairness” is a priority.
*crickets
When I see a bunch of junior pilots pooling their resources to start a fund for those who were furloughed twice or lost their pensions due to bankruptcy…..I’ll believe that “fairness” is a priority.
*crickets
🤷🏻♂️
#25
#27
No, it’s both safety and fairness. 63 seems to be the magic number where some folks really decline rapidly. A small percentage to be sure, but significant. It’s a problem that would grow exponentially if we change the age to 67.
It’s also not fair for folks who benefited from mandatory retirement age their whole career to get two bonus years at the very top of the heap, while most of us will lose those two years because I won’t be flying that long I promise you.
It’s also not fair for folks who benefited from mandatory retirement age their whole career to get two bonus years at the very top of the heap, while most of us will lose those two years because I won’t be flying that long I promise you.
#29
No, it’s both safety and fairness. 63 seems to be the magic number where some folks really decline rapidly. A small percentage to be sure, but significant. It’s a problem that would grow exponentially if we change the age to 67.
It’s also not fair for folks who benefited from mandatory retirement age their whole career to get two bonus years at the very top of the heap, while most of us will lose those two years because I won’t be flying that long I promise you.
It’s also not fair for folks who benefited from mandatory retirement age their whole career to get two bonus years at the very top of the heap, while most of us will lose those two years because I won’t be flying that long I promise you.
#30
This is jacassery at best… there was no maximum age at one point, then some arbitrary age 60 was applied…for reasons. Then a new arbitrary 65 was instituted.
We could use an update to the FAA medical process, but the majority of 65 year olds are still sharp and are able to continue. I say let move the age to 68 and update the medical certification standards.
We could use an update to the FAA medical process, but the majority of 65 year olds are still sharp and are able to continue. I say let move the age to 68 and update the medical certification standards.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post