Congress passes age 65 legislation Dec 11th

PCL_128 said:
....but the principal of it is sickening to me.
Click to expand...

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you meant principle. I've been for ending mandatory retirement since entering the industry at age 24. That was based on the principle that retirement should not be forced on someone who was fit and able and wanted to continue working.

What "principal" is it exactly that sickens you?
 
Thank you for the spelling correction. Guess I should proofread myself instead of blindly trusting the spell-checker. :)

What sickens me is that this is about nothing but greed on the part of the geezers, and they are willing to compromise safety and harm the careers of their union brothers just to benefit themselves from the elimination of a rule that they have reaped the rewards of for their entire careers.
 
Dugie8 said:
The thing that is really bugging me, is we all got into this knowing exactly what age we had to retire at (121) and we all signed on knowing full well that was the rule.
Click to expand...

I trust then sir, that you will never be found on an organizing committee or a picket line trying to increase your pay, because you knew full well what the pay was when you signed on.

Age 60 is bad law. Age 65 is bad law. There should not be a mandatory retirement age. No one who is fit and able should be forced from their chosen profession because of a date on a calendar, regardless of what "the rules" said when you started. If you are physically, mentally, and medically qualified, and you can produce the results that your employer is paying you to produce, you should be allowed to work as long as you want.
 
PCL_128 said:
What sickens me is that this is about nothing but greed on the part of the geezers, and they are willing to compromise safety and harm the careers of their union brothers just to benefit themselves from the elimination of a rule that they have reaped the rewards of for their entire careers.
Click to expand...

Wow, that is one jaded perspective. This is one "geezer" who has argued against mandatory retirement from day one and never spent much time begrudging anyone anything. In fact, my hope for you is a great career that compensates you well and that you get to retire when you want to, not when someone says you have to. And you need to know me a lot better before you accuse me of willingly compromising safety.

Those are my principles.
 
skydog said:
I trust then sir, that you will never be found on an organizing committee or a picket line trying to increase your pay, because you knew full well what the pay was when you signed on.

Age 60 is bad law. Age 65 is bad law. There should not be a mandatory retirement age. No one who is fit and able should be forced from their chosen profession because of a date on a calendar, regardless of what "the rules" said when you started. If you are physically, mentally, and medically qualified, and you can produce the results that your employer is paying you to produce, you should be allowed to work as long as you want.
Click to expand...

My pay isn't a matter of federal regulation, retiremetn age is. My pay is up for review at every contract negotiation, retirement age isn't. No one is forced from their chosen proffession at any age, no retirement age in part 135 or part 91 operations.

There are age restrictions on many things that no one is all up in arms about, except this one that EVERYONE knew about getting into this paticular line of flying (part 121).

You can leave the snide remarks at the door next time.
 
Age 65 signed.

President Bush has concluded the third step of the bill's journey and 65 years old will officially be the new retirement age for airline pilots.
 
Re: Age 65 signed.

I figured it would happen...will be interesting to see what stipulations there will be. hopefully, there are some.
 
Re: Age 65 signed.

Already, 3 days from Congress to The Senate to President. So what do how long do you think it will take before it comes into effect. What are the next steps?
 
Might turn into a 10 year career at the regionals though. 3-4 to upgrade, 2-3 building TPIC, 3-5 waiting for the people who should have retired to retire (though not in that order, some of the "extra years" will be as FO, some as CA, and it depends on how many stay after 60).

So I might be 35 when I can get to a major instead of 30-32. That's 3-5 extra years at regional pay, but as a reward for "paying my dues" I get...drumroll please!...the same 30 year career at the majors. And thats assuming I want to/can make it to 65.

Definitely a win for the guys sitting in the left seat at a major. I really don't see what it does for me though. Old guys get 5 more years at $200k+ (which ALPA gets a percentage of...hmm why did they support this again?), I get X more years (don't know how much, but it will be more) at $30-60k.

However, this is not really a complaint post. We talked about the age 65 change years ago in college, and I (and everyone else) knew it was coming long ago. Just don't hand me **** on a stick and tell me its icecream :)
 
Re: Age 65 signed.

Pilot84 said:
Already, 3 days from Congress to The Senate to President. So what do how long do you think it will take before it comes into effect. What are the next steps?
Click to expand...

In addition to allowing Part 121 airline pilots to fly up to age 65, H.R.4343 will clarify non-retroactivity, provide sufficient liability protection for unions, prohibit unilateral changes to labor agreements and benefit plans, eliminate the over/under split for domestic operations, and make the rule change effective as of the date the legislation is enacted.
Click to expand...
 
Some of us are already prepared to burn the house down, that's just like dropping an incendiary bomb on a whole mess of kindling.
 
"What sickens me is that this is about nothing but greed on the part of the geezers, and they are willing to compromise safety and harm the careers of their union brothers just to benefit themselves from the elimination of a rule that they have reaped the rewards of for their entire careers"

Man, PCL, you're come so far from your days at Gulfstream Academy. I'm soooo proud of you...

I think you have NOTHING to say about compromising safety and harming careers. Think about it...
 
I'm pretty neutral on the age 65 thing. It's gonna cost me between 5 and 10 percent on the ONT Capts list. I used to watch the guys turn 60 and celebrate another number in the seat. Those days are over.

At the same time, there is no doubt that some guys who are 60+ can do the job. I'm not going to pass judgement on them. I'll hit 60 in 13 years. When that time comes, and if I feel up to it, it will be nice to have the option to keep my job. I see nothing wrong with that, or with guys wanting to do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top