So What's up with the age 60 rule?
09-10-2006, 06:54 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Airbus F/O
Posts: 297
So What's up with the age 60 rule?
Just wondering where the FAA and congress are on this one? I haven't heard anything in awhile.
Just something to think about. I know a couple senior capts (ages 55-59) that are going to retire if we get the TA passed. I've also talked to a couple re-treads that are punching out if the TA passes. They all were waiting on the better retirement health care.
If no age 60 rule increases and TA passes, I think we'll (FDX) have a pretty big exodus as well as a big bump in hiring. I saw on a web site (age60rule.com) that ICAO was changing but I didn't read into it enough to see if that would affect the FAA rule.
Just something to think about. I know a couple senior capts (ages 55-59) that are going to retire if we get the TA passed. I've also talked to a couple re-treads that are punching out if the TA passes. They all were waiting on the better retirement health care.
If no age 60 rule increases and TA passes, I think we'll (FDX) have a pretty big exodus as well as a big bump in hiring. I saw on a web site (age60rule.com) that ICAO was changing but I didn't read into it enough to see if that would affect the FAA rule.
09-10-2006, 09:22 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,535
I heard it was passed by the House as part of a larger FAA bill. The Senate is working on their version, again the age 60 part is supposedly buried in a larger bill.
This is all second hand as told to me by a over 60 non-retired pilot. I haven't had time to research it, but I figured he is following it closely since it affects him and his plans.
This is all second hand as told to me by a over 60 non-retired pilot. I haven't had time to research it, but I figured he is following it closely since it affects him and his plans.
09-10-2006, 09:41 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 767 captain
Posts: 2,702
I heard it was passed by the House as part of a larger FAA bill. The Senate is working on their version, again the age 60 part is supposedly buried in a larger bill.
This is all second hand as told to me by a over 60 non-retired pilot. I haven't had time to research it, but I figured he is following it closely since it affects him and his plans.
This is all second hand as told to me by a over 60 non-retired pilot. I haven't had time to research it, but I figured he is following it closely since it affects him and his plans.
Nothing will happen in congress this year on age 60. It is not impossible that the FAA goes along with the ICAO mandate, but it sort of seems odd that they would open themselves up to that sort of liability without first doing some pretty major studies and going through the rule making process.
09-11-2006, 07:37 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: MD-11
Posts: 284
Has anyone ever heard someone other than a "close to" or over age 60 pilot say that this is a sure deal? Seems to me that when the Company wants it they will make it happen. 
The fact is these are the highest paid least productive pilots on the property. Vacation, sick leave
ect. Oh but you say that you lost your pension! If they really cared they would'nt have taken it in the first place. There's also no shortage of pilots out there either. The fact is if they change it won't change seat progression, just delay it unless your given the option to early retire. As for me if it does change I'll be making more money and working less than ever LTSB 680 down to ZERO in 5
The fact is these are the highest paid least productive pilots on the property. Vacation, sick leave ect. Oh but you say that you lost your pension! If they really cared they would'nt have taken it in the first place. There's also no shortage of pilots out there either. The fact is if they change it won't change seat progression, just delay it unless your given the option to early retire. As for me if it does change I'll be making more money and working less than ever LTSB 680 down to ZERO in 5
09-11-2006, 07:39 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Retired FDX MD11 Capt
Posts: 888
Nine days and counting
There are about nine days left in this legislative session. If it doesn't get passed then it will have to wait until after the November elections...
Follow this link for thew latest on HR.65: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-65
Follow this link for thew latest on HR.65: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-65
Last edited by ClutchCargo; 09-11-2006 at 07:41 AM. Reason: added text
09-11-2006, 07:47 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Airbus F/O
Posts: 297
But what does the company have anything to do with changing the FAA rule? Yeah I know we've got political connections but it would take more than one company to try to influence congress/FAA.
The fact is it will change seat progression (at least at FDX) if the rule is changed. We're looking at a lot of retirements in the next ten years.
09-11-2006, 08:00 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,535
09-11-2006, 08:07 AM
#8
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
More info on the Bill here
**************************************
To amend the age restrictions for pilots.
**************************************
To amend the age restrictions for pilots.
09-11-2006, 10:12 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: CA 767
Posts: 402
My local Congressman has just E-mailed last week. He said it is Dead for the 109th congress. Which is the current one. It never got out of Committee. And with more Dems winning this Fall, most likely, the Bill will be dead for a long time.
About two years ago, the Dems were like 5-1 against it, and the Rep. were 5-1 for the change.
I say in about 5 years in may change.
About two years ago, the Dems were like 5-1 against it, and the Rep. were 5-1 for the change.
I say in about 5 years in may change.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
