GEOFFREY

Most management pilots just want a decent pay raise and some moderate changes to schedules. If they get these two things, they will not vote to join the IPA.

The NMB probably would not allow IPA to accrete management without a vote because of the precedent of 20 years of "doing it this way".

1800 RVR

Roberto,

I mean this with all sincerity, and I am not trying to pick a fight, but what do you expect the union to do about Age 65? They have not come out against it. They are staying neutral. This is such a hot-button topic, what did you think they would do? I could say that they should follow the will of the majority, and if put out for a vote, I truly believe that you would be on the losing side. You want the ability to keep working, making money, holding good skeds, etc. I want the ability to upgrade and enjoy the fruits of my advancement, just like you did. You were helped by the Age 60 rule, so you can see how us younger guys feel.

Age 65 will happen. I'm not fooling myself with that. It will hurt me. I will now take AT LEAST 5 more years to upgrade (unless you go to the frozen tundra), but you don't hear me on this board *****in' and moaning. But, to come out and say that your union is not supporting you is BS. I coulod say the exact same thing about me. But that is the point, IT IS NOT ABOUT JUST ME! The EB took the correct stance on this issue, IMHO.

1800 RVR

And this is why many feel skeptical about management pilots' motives. You are using the IPA and the threat of coming over for your own personal gain. If that is the way, so be it. But, in response to yesterday's posts from UPSierra, this is why I said jobs, and not necessarily the people.

I am just a small fish in a big pond, and I in no way know what is the grand scheme of all of this integration talk. What happens will happen.

Roberto

Thanks for your civil question. I am also not interested in rehashing this issue. But I will answer your question, and make a statement.

I expected the union to support our individual requests for waivers of the age rule, while it is being "processed," as it does when a member requests a waiver to regain flying after a heart attack, for example. If you're 40 and have a heart attack, the union supports you. If you're healthy and 60, you got no help. And the reason we got no help, as long-time, dues-paying members, is because other union members want our positions. There will always be fewer people nearing retirement age than those who are not. That is why there is a law to deter this majority, the Age Discrimination Employment Act of 1967. I wish the IPA had taken a vote, as I believe it then would have been in clear violation of the ADEA, which states:

(c) It shall be unlawful for a labor organization-

(1) to exclude or to expel from its membership, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his age;

(2) to limit, segregate, or classify its membership, or to classify or fail or refuse to refer for employment any individual, in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities, or would limit such employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee or as an applicant for employment, because of such individual's age. ADEA of 1967, section 623.

The unions support would have made no difference to the FAA. It's the principle.

IPAMD11FO

Bob Miller may have made some mistakes in the past (i.e. the building, etc), but he is a man of integrity. He has never lied. If Bob says he wants to go forward using date of hire, I believe him. UPS lies on a daily basis.

I believe the IPA made the right decision to remain "neutral". If the EB would have taken your position, it would have torn us completely apart. Look what happened at FedEx. But that's for another thread.

Sounds like you need to be working under a contract. UPS may promise that they will give you regular raises and changes to scheduling practices. Good luck with that. It will be business as usual as soon as they get in a bind, if not sooner.

1800 RVR

Point taken. However, the majority of folks that fall into the Age 65 category are only NOW starting to squawk about age discrimination. I only know of a few folks (can count them on one hand) that have been saying for years that Age 60 was wrong. Most have just started playing this card now, after they have enjoyed the fruits of benefiting from Age 60. Now we have a contract that pays well, and they wish to continue. Where were they years ago? From what I've heard, there may have been 1 or 2 pilots that have been fighting this. Now, all of a sudden it is discriminatory?

Roberto, I thank you for all that you have done in making UPS a better place to work, and all of the fights that you have fought against UPS to make it a better place. I know that all of those that came before me have fought this battle. But, before I get to the point of saying something that I may not mean, I will say that we are going to agree to disagree. We can spend hours and countless posts arguing whose point of view is correct, however, I don't think that we will reach that plateau. This is a very passionate issue, and I wish you all the luck in achieving your goals. Just remember, WE are the IPA, and we are in this together, no matter how it goes down.

JustUnderPar

Just curious what everyone approaching 60 thinks the age limit should be? 70....80....since they are claiming age discrimination as a basis for being forced to the panel or retirement. Wouldnt making the age limit 65 be discriminatory as well??

No spears. Just a question

Dog Breath

Can we try to keep this thread on topic? Debating the Age 60 rule is fine, but please start another thread if you wish to do so. Thanks!

Freightpuppy

"Help" with age 60? Well if that's the case, I want the IPA to "help age 50". ****????

Freightpuppy

LOL! Good luck with this one without a union. You guys are probably the only reason we don't have flight cancellations every day since we are so short on pilots.