N6724G

I am not an airline pilot so please justtell me in siple terms why you all are opposed to the government extending the retitrment age to 65? I dont understand. For me its a good thing. I am starting late in life anyway so it would be noce to be able to get on and make so in roads. But I am curious maybe I am missing something.

saab2000

I am 39 years old and am not opposed. I also got started flying later than 20 and also am starting over. I got laid off (probably never to be recalled) at a large European airline 3 years ago. I would like to retire at 60, but the financial reality for most is that working an extra 5 years would help.

I think it is ultimately inevitable that it will become 65. I don't want to stand in the way of those who wish to enjoy their well-earned retirement at 60, with all their benefits. But I also don't want them to stand in the way of those who wish to (and are medically qualified) to work longer.

rickair7777

Very good question. There are several reasons to oppose or support the change, some are good, others not so good:

Pro-Change:
1) The original rule was arbitrary, and is widely known to have been instituted on the whim of politically connected airline owners (to lower costs).
2) Pilot health has improved (along with everyone elses). We no longer subscribe to a daily regimien of 3 packs of cigs, a bottle of gin, bacon & eggs for breakfast, steak and potatoes for dinner, and no exercise.
3) The rest of the world is going to age 65.
4) Many pilots lost their pensions (and have three ex-wives). They need to work. In the old days they might have continued on as flight engineers, but 3-seat airplanes in the US are no more (except a few cargo operators).
5) Some older guys see it as an opportunity to rake in the bucks, essentially leveraging the economics of a system that was set up on the assumption that you had to stop at age 60.

Anti-Change:
1) Some young guys simply don't want their careers to stagnate for 5 years...these are the same opportunists as #5 above, just younger.
2) It is likely that medical screening standards will be raised, and it is virtually assured that the new standards will not just apply to old guys, we will ALL have to meet them...lots of young guys will be on the street.
3) Raising the age will cause management to want to "normalize" our payscales to an assumed age 65 retirement. This will mean less take-home pay, and will really suck for the guys who suffer the medical screening impact and cannot fly up until 65.
4) This is a hard job. I don't know if I would feel physically fit at that age, and I'm sure others won't. Old pilots are one thing, exhausted old pilots are something else... I plan on doing some kind of 91/corporate gig at that point, 6 legs a month is a lot easier than 6 legs a day.


I assume it will happen, since Europe is doing it. Maybe there should be a phase in, ie raise the age by a month or two every year until it gets to age 65. That would avoid upsetting the applecart overnight.

Also, I think the law needs to specify that any pilot can retire voluntarily at age 60...otherwise you'd have guys that are just too tired and don't even want to be there, but are forced to keep at it.

dojetdriver

Edited; Darn, Rickair7777 is 2 minutes ahead of me.

For some it means a longer wait till getting to a major. Age 60 is the reason that there is alot hiring going on right now, especially at CAL. If the age is lifted to 65, it can mean an aditional 5 year wait before moving on.

For someone like you, getting a late start in life, think about this. You get on at a regional at 40, make CA at 43, buy 45 have enough PIC time to be qualified for any LCC/Legacy job. We won't even mention your OBAP connection here and assume you are going the normal route. Don't get your panties in a bind, it's not a slam. In this example, age 60 retirements are freeing up a potential slot for you to get. If it's age 65, you might have to wait an addtional 5 years. Who knows what will happen in that time? Economic collapse, another terror attack, oil goes through the roof again and hiring stagnates at wherever you want to go. You could end up being stuck at the regional for an even longer period of time. Do you want to be a 50 year old RJ pilot? Note, not my personal opinion, just someting to think about.

In this day and age, with the loss of pensions, pay cuts, displacements, ect, many are going to need that additional 5 years.

If it wasnt for age 60, many people careers could have stagnated at various parts.

Packer Backer

Geez, do we really need another one of these threads. If you want to see why everybody is opposed to it, read the other threads! Or did you forget how to read other threads in your old age?

You sound like a bunch of mules!

ps. The only reason that Europe is going to 65 is because they have a shortage of pilots. Even then, one pilot has to be below 60. Can you imagine what that would do to our collective agreements if we open this can of worms? "Sorry Mr./Mrs. FO, you can't have those top 50 lines even though you have the seniority to hold them. All the Captains are over 60." Open your little minds and see the bigger picture.

CaptainMark

cause it will screw up my b-fund!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hatetobreakit2u

6724G? where have i heard your tail number before?
vegas approach?

saab2000

Wrong. They do it because there is no reason not to. 60 was an arbitrary number chosen a long time ago. Times have changed and so should the retirement age.

I worked in Europe for a long time and endured their thorough medical exams. People who are fit will pass with flying colors. People who drink and smoke and are 75 lbs overweight and never exercise will sweat it every six months. They know who they are.

I do agree that until we change the age in the US that no foreign pilots over 60 should be allowed to fly to the US though.

But as long as pilots can pass a medical exam at the age of 60 or 64 years and 364 days he/she should be allowed to fly.

Just my opinion and it is worth what it cost you.....

Sanchez

I posted this on another thread, but it answers you questions non the less.

HotMamaPilot

Wasn't it C.R. Smith who started that whole age 60 crap to lower his payroll? You are right..it is an arbitrary number. Ole C.R. might as well of thrown a dart at a board to get that number.