surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Post of the year.
Mandatory retirement age now to 65?
- Thread starter Snickersnwa
- Start date
Post of the year.
And remember...chicks dig beta.
skydog
New Member
After reading 5 pages worth of posts on this issue, I can't help but notice that every single post that opposed the rule did so for personal reasons: me, my career, my advancement, my pocketbook. There wasn't a single post regarding the safety or fairness of such a rule. It seems to me that the youngsters are being just as selfish as they are accusing the older guys of being.
My main concern about age 65 is this: Is it SAFE? Is a 64 year old pilot in the cockpit as safe as a 59 year old? If yes than change the rule. If not, then leave it in place.
My main concern about age 65 is this: Is it SAFE? Is a 64 year old pilot in the cockpit as safe as a 59 year old? If yes than change the rule. If not, then leave it in place.
ComplexHiAv8r
Well-Known Member
Could this be a good thing for the industry? Think about it.
1. Some pilots working longer at the Majors
2. More experienced Pilots moving to Majors (due to slowdown)
3. More experience at Regionals
4. Minimums increased at Regionals because of slowdown of retirees.
While this would just about insure I never fly, it might be a good thing for the industry.
1. Some pilots working longer at the Majors
2. More experienced Pilots moving to Majors (due to slowdown)
3. More experience at Regionals
4. Minimums increased at Regionals because of slowdown of retirees.
While this would just about insure I never fly, it might be a good thing for the industry.
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
Doubtful. What you have now - at the regional level - are a very large proportion of disgruntled, bitter, somewhat-hostile humans who have been stuck at that level for close to 7 years longer than they had planned. Now, some will/may never see a major. Ever.
What you'll have at the major level with the passage of this rule are a very large proportion of disgruntled, bitter, somewhat-hostile humans who had PLANNED on retiring at age 60, but now, because of the change - won't get their full retirement.
That, and as Doug alluded to, an even larger number of very sick individuals which the companies will have to keep on their payroll while guys who are elidgible to upgrade won't be able to because, on paper, that seat is taken.
Just my take on the sitch.
LoadMasterC141
Well-Known Member
When I was first researching all this stuff, I found some figures stating what % of a certain major airline’s pilot would be forced to retire by a certain year. I cannot seem to find that info now. I am pretty sure it was in the “Quicktake” section of airline profiles on APC.
Anyway, there were statements like “52% of Delta/United/Usair(can’t remember which) pilots will have to retire by 2008.
This was one of the main reasons I thought of getting into the career now. It seemed like an opportune time. To be honest, the numbers put forth seemed almost unbelievable. It would mean a mass shortage of pilots in the coming years if 50% of the majors pilots were going to have to retire.
Did anyone else see these numbers? Do you think there is truth to it? I wonder why they were removed.
I am bringing this all up in this thread, because it seems as if they might actually have been true. It seems awful convenient to all of a sudden extend the max age. But really, like Doug said, there are issues that are going to come with that, and all they are doing is giving themselves an extra 5 year stay of execution anyway right?
For me personally, this may not be horrible. I would probably consider staying in my current job a bit longer (as much as I loathe it) and save more moolah for the big plunge into the poor life.
Anyway, there were statements like “52% of Delta/United/Usair(can’t remember which) pilots will have to retire by 2008.
This was one of the main reasons I thought of getting into the career now. It seemed like an opportune time. To be honest, the numbers put forth seemed almost unbelievable. It would mean a mass shortage of pilots in the coming years if 50% of the majors pilots were going to have to retire.
Did anyone else see these numbers? Do you think there is truth to it? I wonder why they were removed.
I am bringing this all up in this thread, because it seems as if they might actually have been true. It seems awful convenient to all of a sudden extend the max age. But really, like Doug said, there are issues that are going to come with that, and all they are doing is giving themselves an extra 5 year stay of execution anyway right?
For me personally, this may not be horrible. I would probably consider staying in my current job a bit longer (as much as I loathe it) and save more moolah for the big plunge into the poor life.
Aviator737
New Member
From CBS news: Aviation experts say it could be a year, or even longer, before the new rules take effect. Here's the whole article.
Build your CFI'ing time, and jump onto the regional bandwagon quick-like!
frog_flyer
FredFlyer
it was Continental
ComplexHiAv8r
Well-Known Member
I didn't say I would like it. Also, if they leave it at 60 I think there should be a provision to allow pilots to get Social Security (what there is of it) at 60 since its a government agency telling them they cannot work any longer.
aussieflyer
New Member
It all depends on what group you are in:
- those who will get another 5 years in the left seat;
- Those who will get another 5 years waiting for the left seat (or a front seat, or a recall, or a job....)
Captain_Bob
Well-Known Member
Hmmm... it's all a matter of perspective I guess...
What I'm seeing (at my airline) is folks who are fairly happy... and weighing heavily the option of either staying or moving on to a major.
Bob
Dreampilot
Well-Known Member
It's not even definite yet. It is just a proposal but it will likely get passed which really sucks. DAMN!!!!
Ripper3785
New Member
5 more years of solar radiation at flight levels... suhhweeeeeet!!!!!
As far as this affecting regionals.. There are alot of other reasons the hiring rates fluctuate from carrier to carrier in the regional world. How much is this gonna contribute to that in the midst of all the competition? Faster upgrades(relative to other regionals) are still going to be had at the carriers that win more flying from the majors. Agreed that the move to the majors may be slower, but how long can the majors absorb the loss of crew via increased persons on long term disability and other attrition and say they are still adequately staffed? I don't think this will affect hiring at majors as much as some think.
As far as this affecting regionals.. There are alot of other reasons the hiring rates fluctuate from carrier to carrier in the regional world. How much is this gonna contribute to that in the midst of all the competition? Faster upgrades(relative to other regionals) are still going to be had at the carriers that win more flying from the majors. Agreed that the move to the majors may be slower, but how long can the majors absorb the loss of crew via increased persons on long term disability and other attrition and say they are still adequately staffed? I don't think this will affect hiring at majors as much as some think.
aussieflyer
New Member
5 more years of solar radiation at flight levels... suhhweeeeeet!!!!!
As far as this affecting regionals.. There are alot of other reasons the hiring rates fluctuate from carrier to carrier in the regional world. How much is this gonna contribute to that in the midst of all the competition? Faster upgrades(relative to other regionals) are still going to be had at the carriers that win more flying from the majors. Agreed that the move to the majors may be slower, but how long can the majors absorb the loss of crew via increased persons on long term disability and other attrition and say they are still adequately staffed? I don't think this will affect hiring at majors as much as some think.
I think you would be very surprised considering that there are already recent retires frothing at the mouth to sue to get back on the property. There is a large push to make it somewhat retrospective as well. So how would you be, 5 years of less left seat time PLUS the risk of people being displaced.
Plus what about all the furloughes that are on the street. Alot lose their recall rights within 7 years. This extra 5 might tip em over the edge. Seems a pretty good deal for the senior list and a crappy one for the rest of us.
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
True statement (perspective).
I'd say, here at Eagle, in DFW and ORD, it's low on the "happiness" scale and high on the "let's get the hell out of here ASAP" scale.
There are multiple reasons for this:
1. Upgrade time (or lack thereof) = we have 7-8 year FO's who are JUST being told they MIGHT upgrade this year;
2. Total lack of professionalism from our scheduling personnel towards pilots/flight attendants = they truly believe they own us and have us by the short and curlies;
3. Total lack of respect from our mother company towards its employees = AMR recorded a $238M profit last year. Upper management promptly awarded itself (itselves?) $218M in "bonuses" (stock so as not to let us to believe it's "cash"). Meanwhile, in 2003, American (not Eagle) pilots voted THEMSELVES a 23% paycut to help AMR out. What did AMR give the pilots in return? Nadda.
4. Reserve on the CRJ = we were informed that there will be NO hiring into the CRJ for the next 6 months to a year. Meaning those of us at the bottom of the list - on reserve, will spend approximately another year on reserve.
5. Reserve on the ERJ = those guys & gals get used like toilet paper. If they are on duty for 6 days, they fly 6 days. Generally no exeption.
And that's just my airline.
I hear your mother company is about to hand all 44,000 of it's employees a share of it's $111M profit on Valentines Day.
Definitely apples & oranges there.
Perspective.
Champcar
Well-Known Member
Here is a sound bite for ya.
Most of you do nothing but cry about the industry and this just proves that you are your own worse enemy.
Captain_Bob
Well-Known Member
All of your points are valid... I can definately see that.
Yep... we already got it. Not a bad valentines gift... beats a box of chocolates any day of the week.
Bob
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
Spoken like someone who has no clue what he's talking about having never experienced what WE'RE talking about himself.
It's the whole "walk a mile in my shoes" thing.
I also worked in the legal profession for 13 years. You want to talk about a bunch of whining cry-babies. That's from the partners on down.
My mother was an RN for 40 years. The whining and crying in that industry surpassses even the airline industry.
My brother-in-law works in retail. That industry is a joke if you listen to retail employees.
My father was an electrical engineer. All whiners and criers.
In short - there are people who will bitch about just about anything in any profession. Period.
Here's a suggestion though Champ. If we bug you so much.... leave. Don't read what we have to say. You'll feel better. I promise.
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
But I'm not bitter.All of your points are valid... I can definately see that.
Yep... we already got it. Not a bad valentines gift... beats a box of chocolates any day of the week.
Bob
Seriously, just frustrated.
Despite all the gripes I posted above, I truly love 90% of my job! I love....LOOOOVE the airplane! I love....LOOOOOVE the view from my "office". I dig getting to go to different cities - especially when I have time to explore!
The company is not all crap either. Mainly the schedulers with a smidgen of upper management thrown in.
My frustrations stem mainly from the prospect of sitting reserve for yet another year and flying very little.
For example: From April to December 31st, I flew a whopping 300 hours. Not exactly what I had envisioned my life as an airline pilot being = sitting at the airport with my phone on waiting to be called or sitting at home doiong the same thing (which is infinitely better than sitting at the airport I might add).