There does? And where is that point?

 

I guess we will find out when they raise the age. Should be some interesting statistics. Wonder how many that support increasing the age, are for/against stricter medical standards

 

Anyone flying with a permanently disqualifying medical condition is truly foolish. There just aren't that many things that can permanently ground you....and I'd bet you couldn't hide most of them. The real issue with stricter medicals would be the catastrophic failure of the Special Issuance process. It's already bad enough.

 

[laughs in the over diagnosis ADHD crazy of the past few decades]


You know how doctors get paid by insurance or the gov? By diagnostic codes, combine that with the FAA thinking leaches are still cutting age medicine, yeah

Plus let’s add on the weaponization of the medical system

Hoover
https://www.leftseat.com/bob-hoover/

Petitt
https://christinenegroni.com/doc-who...dical-license/

I could go on

 

You win the Hyperbole Trophy of the day.

 

And you win the trophy of ignorance. Shows how dim you truly are if you attribute those specific cases of abuse as hyperbole.

 

Ok there Bob Hoover 🙄🙄.

WTF does this have to do with increasing the retirement age anyway?? Are you guys even paying attention? I'll give you a clue 》》》 NOBODY IN CONGRESS GIVES A KCUF WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT AGE 67, MEDICAL REQUIREMENTS, MEDICAL CERTIFICATION ABUSE, ETC.... Hell, I don't even care what you think. This will be decided for reasons having nothing to do with your concerns.

 

31 Democrats in the House A&I Commitee voted against age 67. They are friends of ALPA. Too bad 32 Republicans voted for it. Friends of RAA. Any questions?

 

I support stricter medical standards. But I don't think many advocates have thought this suggestion through - it's a half baked idea. Why?
It is very unlikely to improve safety. Please name a commercial flight in the last decade that has had a mishap due to a pilot's medical condition. Let's examine any data before jumping to conclusions.
In addition, this will reduce the total number of pilots - which is the goal of those pushing for stricter medical standards. This (stage 3 bargaining) is all about exacerbating a pilot shortage.
Now, here's where this half baked idea hurts those that can pass their physicals ... all of a sudden their LTD rates spike because a ton of pilots are out on LTD due to losing their medical.

Bottom line; If I lose my medical, I'll be happy to collect LTD until mandatory retirement.
And frankly, all this talk about stricter medicals is just stage 3, bargaining. It's not going to happen even if the age changes.

Oh my. You should get schooled on how things work in the beltway sausage factory. Those Ds are NOT your friend. The outcome of the vote was already known, but they voted against in order to appear opposed to 67 - to keep those ALPA PAC contributions flowing into their coffers and securing loyal voters. Mission accomplished and those contributors/voters are none the wiser.

 

Riiiight. I'm glad you're in the know, Andy. Let's see if it makes it though the majority Democrat Senate Commerce Committee. At least you admit the Democrats vote our (ALPA's) way. Big step for you.

I take it that means you don't contribute to the PAC? I figured as much. You'd probably forgo the the membership dues as well, if you could do it without getting fired. I do love a good union agency shop.