Age 67
08-02-2023 | 05:38 PM
#511
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2023
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Looks like your reading comprehension has already degraded. I said age 67 forces us to pick between 2 options. Option 1, achieve the seniority we expected before the rules got changed. That forces us to work longer. Option 2, retire at 65 and give up 2 years of seniority. Those are bad options for the people that don't have our personalities tied to this job.
08-02-2023 | 05:59 PM
#512
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,840
Likes: 93
Are you just trolling? What don't you get? Here is an example. Let's say right now if I make it to 65, I retire at 5%. If the retirement age moves up to 67, to get to that same seniority level of 5% means I need to work longer than I planned (67 instead of 65). If I still retire at 65, that means instead of spending my last few years at 5%, I am at 10%. That means age 67 negatively affects everyone younger than those who are 65 right now. Either they work longer than planned to get to the same seniority, or they give up that seniority. Do you really not understand this? If so, I strongly question your cognitive abilities.
08-02-2023 | 06:05 PM
#513
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2023
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Are you just trolling? What don't you get? Here is an example. Let's say right now if I make it to 65, I retire at 5%. If the retirement age moves up to 67, to get to that same seniority level of 5% means I need to work longer than I planned (67 instead of 65). If I still retire at 65, that means instead of spending my last few years at 5%, I am at 10%. That means age 67 negatively affects everyone younger than those who are 65 right now. Either they work longer than planned to get to the same seniority, or they give up that seniority. Do you really not understand this? If so, I strongly question your cognitive abilities.
When the next black swan event results in 25% furloughs, loss of pension, bankruptcy, and 10-15 years to recover, you will appreciate an age 67 retirement opportunity. New hires now making more than I made in year 4, get no sympathy from me. Those hired before me that started over from nothing after PanAm, Eastern, Braniff, etc., and went through a strike in 1985 had it even worse.
Ask me how I know.
Age 67 is going to happen. Best come to grips with it and enjoy your career of choice.
Last edited by yesto67; 08-02-2023 at 06:15 PM.
08-02-2023 | 06:07 PM
#514
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2023
Posts: 234
Likes: 23
From: Cramped 737 Left Seat
Are you just trolling? What don't you get? Here is an example. Let's say right now if I make it to 65, I retire at 5%. If the retirement age moves up to 67, to get to that same seniority level of 5% means I need to work longer than I planned (67 instead of 65). If I still retire at 65, that means instead of spending my last few years at 5%, I am at 10%. That means age 67 negatively affects everyone younger than those who are 65 right now. Either they work longer than planned to get to the same seniority, or they give up that seniority. Do you really not understand this? If so, I strongly question your cognitive abilities.
08-02-2023 | 06:15 PM
#515
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,840
Likes: 93
I never said you can’t retire early. I said you have to pick. Retire at 65 and give up 2 years of seniority you would have had under the current system, or work longer to get to that same seniority. I never said we would be forced to work longer. Age 67 is just robbing everyone younger than you of 2 years of seniority.
08-02-2023 | 06:47 PM
#518
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 2,657
Likes: 116
I never said you can’t retire early. I said you have to pick. Retire at 65 and give up 2 years of seniority you would have had under the current system, or work longer to get to that same seniority. I never said we would be forced to work longer. Age 67 is just robbing everyone younger than you of 2 years of seniority.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
