Age 67 legislation reintroduced

I am not torn at all. I know there are some who it feels like, maybe in their own mind, are too valuable to lose, but there is a deep bench of players ready to take their place. It is important to let the freshman QB take some snaps from time to time so that when the Sr QB leaves, the freshman has some experience.
 
Kingairer said:
I am not torn at all. I know there are some who it feels like, maybe in their own mind, are too valuable to lose, but there is a deep bench of players ready to take their place. It is important to let the freshman QB take some snaps from time to time so that when the Sr QB leaves, the freshman has some experience.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Plus, a lot of these guys ALREADY got 5 extra years from when they originally signed on. And like I said above, a lot of us are going to have our careers cut short by automation as is, so get the olds out of the way and let the good times roll while they can.
 
Kingairer said:
I am not torn at all. I know there are some who it feels like, maybe in their own mind, are too valuable to lose, but there is a deep bench of players ready to take their place. It is important to let the freshman QB take some snaps from time to time so that when the Sr QB leaves, the freshman has some experience.
Click to expand...

I am very replaceable, by intention. A professional is always training their replacement.

Even after all I’ve done over the years beyond flying airplanes, I’ll just be a picture on the wall somewhere in the back of the LAX CPO that some newbie is going to think is a stock photo with an authentic-looking model.

And that’s exactly how it’s supposed to be.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Some on JC hate it when parents provide for their kid after 18, but I commend you for this. As a parent too, I wholeheartedly agree. Never understood the “can’t take it with you” mentality. You take it and enjoy, but also leave some (a lot) for your kids.


The way things are going, I think our kids generation is going to have to rely on family-pass downs (houses, money) in order to make it.
Click to expand...
Depends on your perspective. If you want a more selfish approach for your family then yes hoard that money. However, there is something to be said for retiring earlier and allowing there to be more high paying jobs for the younger crowd in society.

Your kids will already have much better tools provided to them than most due to the privilege money provides and will likely still get a good chunk of change when you die.

Every day a retirement eligible boomer doesn't retire is another day a young person is stuck in a crap job with no movement. It is a reason why millennials took so long to break out and finally start buying homes and such. It is looking like it could be worse for Gen z.
 
Maurus said:
Depends on your perspective. If you want a more selfish approach for your family then yes hoard that money. However, there is something to be said for retiring earlier and allowing there to be more high paying jobs for the younger crowd in society.

Your kids will already have much better tools provided to them than most due to the privilege money provides and will likely still get a good chunk of change when you die.

Every day a retirement eligible boomer doesn't retire is another day a young person is stuck in a crap job with no movement. It is a reason why millennials took so long to break out and finally start buying homes and such. It is looking like it could be worse for Gen z.
Click to expand...





Hold up. Age 60 passed in Dec 2007 and until Dec 2012 froze everyone in place. My prime 20s were spent at $20-39/hr for the 4.5 yrs at a regional, while senior guys worked from 60 to 65 in the highest paying equipment as CAs and FOs. They got their 5 yrs extra at the very top end of a legacy.

Where was this kind of talk back then?


More than half the 121 industry entered a major after 2014. They didn’t get to see truly tough times, other than the pandemic which was bailed out by PSPs. They have not had an age-related stagnation and age 67 failed, again.


As long as I’m alive, healthy, and can hold a 1st class medical, I would go to 65. And 65 isn’t even that old. By the time my Gen gets there, SS age will be even higher than what it is today for full benefits.




This idea that the younger gen is owed our jobs, so retire already - is not a good look. This generation should be thankful they didn’t have to live under Age 60 turning to 65.
 
Roger Roger said:
Exactly. Plus, a lot of these guys ALREADY got 5 extra years from when they originally signed on. And like I said above, a lot of us are going to have our careers cut short by automation as is, so get the olds out of the way and let the good times roll while they can.
Click to expand...
...I wonder if Boeing's new narrowbody now under development will be fitted for one or two pilots.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
My prime 20s were spent at $20-39/hr for the 4.5 yrs at a regional, while senior guys worked from 60 to 65 in the highest paying equipment as CAs and FOs.
Click to expand...

Haha, not to diminish the rest of what you said, but dude, i have never heard anyone use the term “my prime 20’s”. That’s the ramen decade for most people. It is by definition not your prime earning years. Prime health perhaps. By most standards, we have only recently entered our “prime earning years”.
 
///AMG said:
Haha, not to diminish the rest of what you said, but dude, i have never heard anyone use the term “my prime 20’s”. That’s the ramen decade for most people. It is by definition not your prime earning years. Prime health perhaps. By most standards, we have only recently entered our “prime earning years”.
Click to expand...

Ok fair.

But in the past ~ 10 yrs of regional activity, oh it’s been nice.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Ok fair.

But in the past ~ 10 yrs of regional activity, oh it’s been nice.
Click to expand...

Off hand I can think of at least 6 regionals that have been Comaired or otherwise gone out of business in that time. And most regionals have only been hiring pilots in very limited numbers, if at all, ever since AS1282. Even before that most of them would like hire you if you were were qualified to upgrade immediately.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Hold up. Age 60 passed in Dec 2007 and until Dec 2012 froze everyone in place. My prime 20s were spent at $20-39/hr for the 4.5 yrs at a regional, while senior guys worked from 60 to 65 in the highest paying equipment as CAs and FOs. They got their 5 yrs extra at the very top end of a legacy.

Where was this kind of talk back then?
Click to expand...
It existed but of course back then pay and pensions were cut or destroyed. It is far easier to have more empathy toward individuals getting ready to retire that have everything cut down at the last moment followed by an economic crash.

Then again you and I were stuck in a world of stagnation with very low compensation. Had retirement eligible (capable) pilots not stuck around till 65 it would have helped people on furlough get their jobs back and provide some movement in an otherwise stagnant industry.
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
More than half the 121 industry entered a major after 2014. They didn’t get to see truly tough times, other than the pandemic which was bailed out by PSPs. They have not had an age-related stagnation and age 67 failed, again.
Click to expand...
This generation recently had the opposite occur than we had. Tons of early out packages causing a massive demand for pilots at all levels. This caused pay and benefits to increase across the board. Funny what happens when retirement eligible people get out if the way en mass.
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
As long as I’m alive, healthy, and can hold a 1st class medical, I would go to 65. And 65 isn’t even that old. By the time my Gen gets there, SS age will be even higher than what it is today for full benefits.
Click to expand...

SS age depends on how they want to deal with the surplus going away. Smaller payments are another option. Besides, you and I both know SS is going to be a minor contribution to our retirement. We have some of the highest 401k contribution rates in corporate America. So high that many pilots don't have to contribute a dime and they will still max out the yearly contribution. Most of corporate America is lucky to get a 50% match up to a total 6% contribution.

Cherokee_Cruiser said:
This idea that the younger gen is owed our jobs, so retire already - is not a good look. This generation should be thankful they didn’t have to live under Age 60 turning to 65.
Click to expand...

It is necessary if you want a natural flow to an economy. Forcing younger generations to stagnate at low wages is a big factor for why they don't have kids, homes, etc, etc. Younger generations are having to wait around an extra 10+ years or so for equivalent opportunities that their parents had in their early 20s.

I personally experienced this as I made over $40k only once prior to the age of 30 despite having worked my ass off and sacrificing most other things in life. Forced retirements have improved the QOL for people at all levels.
 
Maurus said:
It existed but of course back then pay and pensions were cut or destroyed. It is far easier to have more empathy toward individuals getting ready to retire that have everything cut down at the last moment followed by an economic crash.

Then again you and I were stuck in a world of stagnation with very low compensation. Had retirement eligible (capable) pilots not stuck around till 65 it would have helped people on furlough get their jobs back and provide some movement in an otherwise stagnant industry.

This generation recently had the opposite occur than we had. Tons of early out packages causing a massive demand for pilots at all levels. This caused pay and benefits to increase across the board. Funny what happens when retirement eligible people get out if the way en mass.


SS age depends on how they want to deal with the surplus going away. Smaller payments are another option. Besides, you and I both know SS is going to be a minor contribution to our retirement. We have some of the highest 401k contribution rates in corporate America. So high that many pilots don't have to contribute a dime and they will still max out the yearly contribution. Most of corporate America is lucky to get a 50% match up to a total 6% contribution.



It is necessary if you want a natural flow to an economy. Forcing younger generations to stagnate at low wages is a big factor for why they don't have kids, homes, etc, etc. Younger generations are having to wait around an extra 10+ years or so for equivalent opportunities that their parents had in their early 20s.

I personally experienced this as I made over $40k only once prior to the age of 30 despite having worked my ass off and sacrificing most other things in life. Forced retirements have improved the QOL for people at all levels.
Click to expand...


Ok, a lot of that are macro factors. Whose fault was it housing became what it did, after those who got theirs pulled the ladder up via strict zoning and environmental laws? Should we force old people to (for example) not sell their house at the current market price of 1.2 million, instead, force a selling price of 300k which is what they paid 30 yrs ago? One might argue considering their role in what housing became today, would be a more effective way than forcing people to retire. They had a hand in zoning laws, environmental laws, and doing what they could to keep new SFH construction down.


What you are saying is subjective, our evaluation of those near retirement. I didn’t judge those at 60 or 65 back when I was in my 20s. I’d prefer not to be judged if I’m lucky enough to be alive, healthy, and working then.

It’s a SENIORITY system. I can’t hold summer vacation unless I find a couple days in opentime. Someone tell those boomers that their kids are out of high school and above 18, so leave summer vacation for us younger folks who have kids that only get summer break and winter break. Right?

Or the same with schedules. Or fleet.



You can make these arguments all day long, but you are not going to change minds. There are some reasons I could retire early. Doing it for Gen Z won’t be one.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
It’s a SENIORITY system. I can’t hold summer vacation unless I find a couple days in opentime. Someone tell those boomers that their kids are out of high school and above 18, so leave summer vacation for us younger folks who have kids that only get summer break and winter break. Right?

Or the same with schedules. Or fleet.



You can make these arguments all day long, but you are not going to change minds. There are some reasons I could retire early. Doing it for Gen Z won’t be one
Click to expand...
Nobody is asking anyone to get out of the way for younger or junior pilots. The only reason senior pilots are enjoying the benefits of their seniority is because those before them retired when their time came. We're all aware that this is a seniority system and things get better as you get more senior. The problem is those that are now at the top are asking to pull the ladder up behind them so they can enjoy being at the top a little bit longer. Asking senior people to get out of the way would be me lobbying congress to get the retirement age back to 60.

Comparisons to 60-->65 are apples to oranges. ICAO forced that on everyone and the US had to adapt. Fortunately ICAO shut down 67, so we avoided that risk. It's going to be at least 3 years before the next meeting so hopefully the LEPF crowd has retired by then and they can yell at clouds from their house in Brazil with their secret family.
 
luke3 said:
Nobody is asking anyone to get out of the way for younger or junior pilots. The only reason senior pilots are enjoying the benefits of their seniority is because those before them retired when their time came. We're all aware that this is a seniority system and things get better as you get more senior. The problem is those that are now at the top are asking to pull the ladder up behind them so they can enjoy being at the top a little bit longer.

Comparisons to 60-->65 are apples to oranges. ICAO forced that on everyone and the US had to adapt. Fortunately ICAO shut down 67, so we avoided that risk. It's going to be at least 3 years before the next meeting so hopefully the LEPF crowd has retired by then and they can yell at clouds from their house in Brazil with their secret family.
Click to expand...


It doesn’t matter. For years and years it was 60, and everyone before then got to go up based on the above punching out at 60. It was changed to 65 and froze us as RJ FOs for that timeframe with no movement. That was the ladder pulled up. 5 yrs. I understand post 9/11 contracts and losing pensions. But that isn’t an excuse to work 5 more years at the top end and change the game that we all signed up for.


It’s all arbitrary anyway. The only reason it’s an issue is because it’s a seniority system. So we need people to be forced out. Personally, I don’t care about 67. It would result in a 18 month freeze at best. You have to hire ~6 months out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top