Retirement at age 70
12-13-2018, 08:32 AM
#171
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,407
Creating ab-initio programs and hiring 1500 hour CFI's may not solve all their problems... there would likely be sim bottlenecks for the larger planes, so keeping qualified guys in the seat longer becomes paramount. DAL dodged that bullet when everybody retired early in 2007 by hiring them back as contractors the next day (union agreed to avoid parking all the widebodies)... but that only worked because people retired early to save their lump sum from BK.
12-13-2018, 08:34 AM
#172
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,171
Oh, I agree. I'm just speculating about where the regs might go.
I think it's obvious to almost anyone that lets say 85 is too old, but there's a grey area between 65-85 and if big economics are at stake then regulators and politicians (and unions) might be tempted to play a little in the grey area. As long as some quack can whip up a study showing the risk is not that bad (I'm sure the airlines would pony up for that if needed).
Removing the age limit entirely would necessitate some sort of enhanced medical, which might kick in well before age 65....
I think it's obvious to almost anyone that lets say 85 is too old, but there's a grey area between 65-85 and if big economics are at stake then regulators and politicians (and unions) might be tempted to play a little in the grey area. As long as some quack can whip up a study showing the risk is not that bad (I'm sure the airlines would pony up for that if needed).
Removing the age limit entirely would necessitate some sort of enhanced medical, which might kick in well before age 65....
I wouldn't expect another run at increasing pilot retirement age until Dr Jordaan is replaced, and her replacement will have to be as aggressive on wanting to increase retirement age as Dr Evans was. I don't expect Dr Jordaan to leave her ICAO position for another decade or so.
12-13-2018, 09:46 AM
#173
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,407
Dr Anthony Evans, the now retired ICAO Chief of Medicine Section, was a huge proponent of raising retirement age. He was even working on changing the acceptable incapacitation rate in order to raise the age limit past 65. There are a ton of powerpoint presentations on the web with his name on them. His replacement, Dr Ansa Jordaan, has been silent on this subject. She replaced Dr Evans October 2015.
I wouldn't expect another run at increasing pilot retirement age until Dr Jordaan is replaced, and her replacement will have to be as aggressive on wanting to increase retirement age as Dr Evans was. I don't expect Dr Jordaan to leave her ICAO position for another decade or so.
I wouldn't expect another run at increasing pilot retirement age until Dr Jordaan is replaced, and her replacement will have to be as aggressive on wanting to increase retirement age as Dr Evans was. I don't expect Dr Jordaan to leave her ICAO position for another decade or so.
12-13-2018, 10:26 AM
#174
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Position: A330
Posts: 34
Without any real scientific studies proving flying past 65 is dangerous, it's purely age discrimination to require someone to retire who is still able to pass a 1st class medical. You can't even get your full SS benefits at 65. The rule needs to change so that you can fly as long as you can pass a medical.
I would be in favor of more stringent medical evaluations at a certain age. We all are going to age differently. Some of us are going to be washed up at 55 and other 75. An arbitrary age with no evidence of ineptitude is unjust.
I would be in favor of more stringent medical evaluations at a certain age. We all are going to age differently. Some of us are going to be washed up at 55 and other 75. An arbitrary age with no evidence of ineptitude is unjust.
12-13-2018, 10:46 AM
#175
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Position: 777
Posts: 141
Without any real scientific studies proving flying past 65 is dangerous, it's purely age discrimination to require someone to retire who is still able to pass a 1st class medical. You can't even get your full SS benefits at 65. The rule needs to change so that you can fly as long as you can pass a medical.
I would be in favor of more stringent medical evaluations at a certain age. We all are going to age differently. Some of us are going to be washed up at 55 and other 75. An arbitrary age with no evidence of ineptitude is unjust.
I would be in favor of more stringent medical evaluations at a certain age. We all are going to age differently. Some of us are going to be washed up at 55 and other 75. An arbitrary age with no evidence of ineptitude is unjust.
Play some golf, travel, volunteer, something. I don't care what you can pass. We don't need 70 year olds in airline cockpits.
12-13-2018, 11:12 AM
#176
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,236
I think rickair is right. And I think the FAA is walking a fine line. I don’t see them getting rid of all age limits without a tougher physical. They can’t just make the physical tougher for older pilots as some have suggested. That would be age discrimination and there would be a lawsuit. So any medical standards that get changed will apply to all of us. The fine line comes in because the purpose of raising or getting rid of the age limit may be to increase the supply of pilots, but what happens when the new standards start knocking out a bunch of guys below age 65? You could well add to the pilot supply problem as well as severely straining the LTD programs as pilots lose their medical.
12-13-2018, 12:26 PM
#178
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,704
There are many good reasons the airlines would be opposed to any increase... right up until they have to start parking planes for lack of pilots. If it comes to that, they will push for it.
Creating ab-initio programs and hiring 1500 hour CFI's may not solve all their problems... there would likely be sim bottlenecks for the larger planes, so keeping qualified guys in the seat longer becomes paramount. DAL dodged that bullet when everybody retired early in 2007 by hiring them back as contractors the next day (union agreed to avoid parking all the widebodies)... but that only worked because people retired early to save their lump sum from BK.
Creating ab-initio programs and hiring 1500 hour CFI's may not solve all their problems... there would likely be sim bottlenecks for the larger planes, so keeping qualified guys in the seat longer becomes paramount. DAL dodged that bullet when everybody retired early in 2007 by hiring them back as contractors the next day (union agreed to avoid parking all the widebodies)... but that only worked because people retired early to save their lump sum from BK.
In 2007 we were hiring pilots and long past the retirement surge.
12-13-2018, 01:14 PM
#179
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,171
Without any real scientific studies proving flying past 65 is dangerous, it's purely age discrimination to require someone to retire who is still able to pass a 1st class medical. You can't even get your full SS benefits at 65. The rule needs to change so that you can fly as long as you can pass a medical.
I would be in favor of more stringent medical evaluations at a certain age. We all are going to age differently. Some of us are going to be washed up at 55 and other 75. An arbitrary age with no evidence of ineptitude is unjust.
I would be in favor of more stringent medical evaluations at a certain age. We all are going to age differently. Some of us are going to be washed up at 55 and other 75. An arbitrary age with no evidence of ineptitude is unjust.
As far as tightening up the FAA medical, please. The medical's a joke.
Last edited by Andy; 12-13-2018 at 01:25 PM.
12-13-2018, 01:24 PM
#180
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,171
As far as the big 3 parking planes, that's extremely unlikely. One can speculate on the matter, but it's even less likely that the earth will burn to a crisp due to CAGW.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
