Originally Posted by ThumbsUp

You should stop being their advocate. You’re the worst advertisement and probably create a loss on donations.

Originally Posted by 13n144e

No we can’t. Labor contracts don’t supersede federal statutes. But regardless, my point is that mindlessly blaming this age group or that for this bill is ridiculous because no one has anything to do with it right now except Lindsay Graham (and maybe Manchin, Kelly et al.) If it passes someday you can blame/credit congress. But that’s about it. Your fellow pilots on either side of the issue have very little say (or blame) in the matter.

Originally Posted by guppie

awe, buddy. I told you 8 months ago this bill was dead with a Dem controlled senate and WH. That it wouldn't even make it out of Committee. And it hasn’t. That’s the power of politics. I know it triggers you, but it’s fact. Enjoy the benefits of age 65 retirement. At least another 2 years. 😏

BACK THE PAC

Originally Posted by Chowdah

I doubt the poster you were responding to was a neuroscientist, but obviously, yes, there’s been a lot of research done about cognitive decline with age. So the question is, where do we put the mandatory retirement age? I agree with others that some of us are perfectly sharp at 65, but there are plenty who are in obvious decline at 65 as well. As someone who used to do simulator work and more than my share of line checks over the years, I can assure you that pilot “Joe Smith” at 65 is not as sharp as he was at 55. This becomes very evident when stress is introduced. How far do we want to let this trend go, rolling the dice that the medical exam and CQ events catch an issue before a pilot is out in a situation that requires more cognitive power than they have available? I definitely started noticing in my 40s that after a bad night sleep, or especially grueling backside of the clock flight or perhaps just life stress, there were days that I was very glad I did not face a challengeing emergency. I think most of us have enough SA to see that when we were younger, these things just didn’t affect us as much…

As someone who is currently sitting in my desired seat, this would be quite beneficial to me financially. Two more years of making 450 K a year and two less year drawing from retirement account… And yet I’m pretty skeptical. I just can’t see an argument from the pilot side other than the financial one.

Originally Posted by vetter

Retiring at 67 is ridiculous. The average lifespan of a US male is 77 years old.

So you work your entire life, and in the end, just get to enjoy life for 10 measly years when your body aches everyday and you aren't even at your prime anymore, then be buried forever. LOL.

There should in fact be a bill to LOWER the retirement age, not HIGHER it.

Originally Posted by vetter

Retiring at 67 is ridiculous. The average lifespan of a US male is 77 years old.

So you work your entire life, and in the end, just get to enjoy life for 10 measly years when your body aches everyday and you aren't even at your prime anymore, then be buried forever. LOL.

There should in fact be a bill to LOWER the retirement age, not HIGHER it.

Originally Posted by vetter

There should in fact be a bill to LOWER the retirement age, not HIGHER it.