American to furlough again...

Dynasty22 said:
Worth not even close to what it used to.



Wow, you make no sense. SO you want the "geezer" to quit his job that he/she loves doing day in and day out just because they turn sixty years old while they can do it for another five years? Not all these sixty year old pilots have been with one company for thirty to forty years. They are too far and in between. Its the same situation that these folks at the regionals are having to put up, just ten, fifteen, twenty, or thirty years ago.

Tell me if YOU were in THEIR situation YOU wouldnt DO the same thing?
Click to expand...

I don't think it is a matter of love, but timing. A good family friend was going to retire at 60 from CAL. He obviously had planned on it his whole career. The 65 rule didn't change his mind however he had a lot of retirement money in the stock market which he didn't take out before it dropped. He decided to stay in until he recouped some a percentage of what he had. I can imagine there were more than few people in this situation. For him it was a matter of necessity, not love.
 
Although I still look at ATN's signiture on a daily basis :) and am planning my retirement outside of the stock market.
 
mxflyer said:
I don't think it is a matter of love, but timing. A good family friend was going to retire at 60 from CAL. He obviously had planned on it his whole career. The 65 rule didn't change his mind however he had a lot of retirement money in the stock market which he didn't take out before it dropped. He decided to stay in until he recouped some a percentage of what he had. I can imagine there were more than few people in this situation. For him it was a matter of necessity, not love.
Click to expand...

Also depending on how old he was, there could have been a LOT of money lost when the A plan was "frozen". I have a family member that lost close to 800k just right there, plus what amounted to a 50% paycut for a year (without being displaced or anything) with very little (less than 8 years) time to recoup that money that he planed on having at 59 1/2. Now in order to even think about being financially secure in retirement he is going to have to work until 62 at a minimum.

You can blame a MEC and NC that was in bed with management on that one.

Like he said, necessity not "a love of being a money hoe" is going to keep him there. Again some of those issues are uniquely CAL, but I'm sure there are A plan decimation stories like that industry wide. You also need to remember that the "rules of the game" for these guys was to have a million plus A plan upon hitting the eject button at 60.
 
jynxyjoe said:
I have it on good authority from many pilots on the interwebs that the pilot shortage is coming. I also believe anything I hear or makeup as long as it sounds good for me.
Click to expand...

positive-thought1.jpg
 
It seems like a ploy to me. As Firebird mentioned, the arbitrator rules in February on when the seniority must be awarded to the AE guys.

Remember when all of a sudden AE went up for sale a few years back? Turned out to be a ploy to get rid of some cruddy investors.
 
I had that thought cross my mind too.
AMR to the arbitrator: "We really want to take on all those Eagle pilots but due to the economy and what not we are currently furloughing and it just isn't possible."
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Everyone started this career under the same rules: you have to retire at 60. To change the rules mid-stream, in the middle of a decade-long industry downturn, was absolutely unconscionable.
Click to expand...

You're hating the player when you should be hating the game. Stuff changes. Take the military for instance. When I joined, upper-level officer promotions didn't require a master's degree, now they do. I can't say that "when I joined, it wasn't required, so now why am I required to have one if I want to be promoted to X rank?" Sometimes stuff just happens, and thats where timing truly comes in.

It's like the complaint here about American and A-scale pay that the upper level guys are making. Why are people complaining about something that they never were even eligible for in their lifetime, or even in their airline time? B scale payrates that began coming out in the mid-80s happened before most people here were over 5 years old at worst, and before many even began had their PPL at best. So those complaining are going to hold something over the head of the A-scale pay holders, when the A-scale payholders were doing this job far longer and/or had timing on their side?

More and more I'm disappointed by some airline guys' outlooks. The profession is seemingly permeated by this thought process of (as it was put to me recently, and seems to be demonstrated) "Screw you, I've got mine".....RIGHT up until the point that someone doesn't have theirs anymore. Then it ALL of a sudden it turns to "Hey guys, we're in this together, right?"
 
subpilot said:
I had that thought cross my mind too.
AMR to the arbitrator: "We really want to take on all those Eagle pilots but due to the economy and what not we are currently furloughing and it just isn't possible."
Click to expand...

Which would be an interesting case, considering it's been proven that the AE pilots with AA numbers should have gone, therefore, all the monetary benefits due them since then would still be at issue.

Eagle ALPA is swinging for the fences on this one, right up to asking for compensation for all those downgraded and furloughed that wouldn't have been if those 200+ had been gone.
 
MikeD said:
More and more I'm disappointed by some airline guys' outlooks. The profession is seemingly permeated by this thought process of (as it was put to me recently, and seems to be demonstrated) "Screw you, I've got mine".....RIGHT up until the point that someone doesn't have theirs anymore. Then it ALL of a sudden it turns to "Hey guys, we're in this together, right?"
Click to expand...

x2

If people are suggesting furloughing guys over 60, why stop there? With the lack of movement and hiring, why not decrease mandatory retirement age from 65 down to, say, 50? That will get things moving again.

Better yet, why not furlough the most recent 180 guys who busted a checkride? Pilot unions are always pro-safety, right?
 
MikeD said:
You're hating the player when you should be hating the game.
Click to expand...

The players are responsible for the change in the game. APAAD and similar groups pushed and pushed to get the rule changed, despite the fact that thousands of pilots were furloughed. Their selfishness is despicable.
 
Justin172 said:
x2

If people are suggesting furloughing guys over 60, why stop there? With the lack of movement and hiring, why not decrease mandatory retirement age from 65 down to, say, 50? That will get things moving again.

Better yet, why not furlough the most recent 180 guys who busted a checkride? Pilot unions are always pro-safety, right?
Click to expand...

x3. Still won't be a pilot shortage :)
 
ATN_Pilot said:
The players are responsible for the change in the game. APAAD and similar groups pushed and pushed to get the rule changed, despite the fact that thousands of pilots were furloughed. Their selfishness is despicable.
Click to expand...
Aren't you the one who always rails on about the change being inevitable as an alignment with ICAO, and unions were right to not put too much effort into fighting it? Or am I thinking of another poster (surreal maybe? Velo?)
 
Roger said:
Aren't you the one who always rails on about the change being inevitable as an alignment with ICAO, and unions were right to not put too much effort into fighting it? Or am I thinking of another poster (surreal maybe? Velo?)
Click to expand...

You might be thinking of Velo, who doesn't post here anymore. He supported the change.

I do agree that the change was inevitable, though, but I think we easily could have prevented it for several more years, which is all it would have taken to prevent the furloughs that haven taken place since the change. I thought ALPA made a big mistake to not fight back.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
. I thought ALPA made a big mistake to not fight back.
Click to expand...

Curiously, why did ALPA take the stance they did? Especially with (i would imagine) much of the membership opposed? To me, the FAA probably had something to get out of it too.
 
MikeD said:
Curiously, why did ALPA take the stance they did? Especially with (i would imagine) much of the membership opposed? To me, the FAA probably had something to get out of it too.
Click to expand...

ALPA's stance changed when Captain Prater came into office in 2007. Captain Woerth, the previous ALPA President, was a staunch supporter of Age 60. Captain Prater, on the other hand, wanted the limit increased. The polling data showed a majority of the membership in favor of keeping the Age 60 limit.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
..........The polling data showed a majority of the membership in favor of keeping the Age 60 limit.
Click to expand...

I sure you know this, but a majority also said that if the age 65 rule is inevitable, they wanted ALPA to support it to push through the best solution for the pilots. Prater, "and the rest of ALPA national" thought that it was inevitable, so voila its 65.

Wilson is VERY good at getting polling results to be what ever you want the outcome to be.
 
meritflyer said:
If a pilot can pass a medical and safely operate an aircraft until 65, what is the big deal?
Click to expand...


Not a thing. There are plenty of pilots flying people and property for hire whom are over 60. The real test to see if those at the 121 level really wanted this for "fairness" is to allow ALL pilots who had retired and have been retired because of age 60 to come back to their seat and all seniority adjusted appropriately.

The "fair" way to do this, was to enact the age 65 rule for all people who are 23 years of age at or after the date the rule went into effect.
 
Justin172 said:
x2

If people are suggesting furloughing guys over 60, why stop there? With the lack of movement and hiring, why not decrease mandatory retirement age from 65 down to, say, 50? That will get things moving again.

Better yet, why not furlough the most recent 180 guys who busted a checkride? Pilot unions are always pro-safety, right?
Click to expand...

Then I guess you can retire at age 50 and have nothing to retire on. Have you truly thought this through?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top