Is older better?

F

foxtrot

New Member
I have read a few posts on another forum and also on a flight school's web page which stated that regional airlines would rather hire someone who's fifty-five than twenty-five because they know they're not going to jump ship and go to the majors.

Is there any truth to this? It's good news if it is.
 
I think in this day and age the regional airlines are hiring experience. They may have held the hire older philosophy 3-4 years ago, but things are different now. Majors will not likely be hiring for a long time to come, so I don't think the regionals are as concerned about someone leaving for the majors.

Look at it this way. If you have a 55 year old candidate and a 25 year old candidate. The 55 y/o will have to retire in 5 years, the 25 year old may desire leaving for a major, but the majors won't be hiring for a long time to come. Based on age only, I think the 25 year old may offer more for the company because he likely will be around more than 5 years. The 55 year old has to retire in 5 years.

Who really knows for certain. This is just my opinion, I could be wrong.
 
I think the only advantage is they have more personal experience, then a young guy, which gives them more stuff to talk about in an interview.

On a side not, did you guys see how young that pilot who flew the presdient was yesterday. He looked late 20's, not a bad gig flying the president onto a carrier.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The 55 year old has to retire in 5 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, now it would be 8 years. But the point remains the same.
smirk.gif
 
No need to aplogize!
smile.gif


It passeda few months back - MRA is now 63. But to get those last three years you must pass extra medicals/tests, etc. So in practice I doubt many will take advantage of it.
 
I'm pretty sure it was tacked onto the Homeland Security Bill (one of the 7 infamous "riders") I don't think it's been implemented yet but I'm pretty sure it has been through the Congress and across the President's desk.
 
Hmmmm - I thought the MRA had changed to 63 too... or would soon ... as attached to the Homeland Security package. Could be wrong.
 
The Transportation committee has voted 13-8 to raise the MRA to age 63 for part 121 pilots, however it still has to be passed by the senate.

MRA
 
ALPA’s Involvement in the 107th Congress
Age 60

Legislation was introduced in the 107th Congress in both the House and Senate to raise the mandatory retirement age for pilots from 60 to 65. The measure never moved in the House, but there was action in the Senate. S. 361, introduced by Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-AK), was reported out of committee with an amendment to change the age to 63, but never scheduled for floor consideration. Murkowski offered his bill, as amended, as an amendment to the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, but it was tabled by a vote of 53-47 and not considered again in the 107th Congress. Consistent with existing ALPA policy, the Government Affairs Department opposed passage of this legislation and worked for its defeat. (Mar 2003)


BTW Avi8tor, your reference was from April 2001
 
[ QUOTE ]
On a side not, did you guys see how young that pilot who flew the presdient was yesterday. He looked late 20's, not a bad gig flying the president onto a carrier.

[/ QUOTE ]

One article said he was a full commander (O-5) and executive officer of his squadron, which means he's likely in his mid- to late-thirties. Flying jets onto carriers either keeps you young or ages you in a hurry, I'd imagine.

A friend of mine is just finishing up IOE at SkyWest, she said there were a few dudes in their 50s in her class.
 
Quite honestly, I don't think it really matters since none of us can change our age anyway. I'm 26 and if an airline doesn't want me because of that I guess I'm just SOL.
smirk.gif
 
Hello Jason

"I was hoping they'd change it the other way. I want to retire when I'm 40 "

How about 20 years seniority or age 60, whichever comes first? ...need to spread the wealth around!

JR
 
"One article said he was a full commander (O-5) and executive officer of his squadron, which means he's likely in his mid- to late-thirties." He could be in his late 20's to early 30's if he went through ROTC since you are commisioned as an officer once completed
 
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
confused.gif


Your commisioned as an officer no matter what route you go; acadamy, OTS, or ROTC. No matter what route you choose you start of in the same rank.
 
HE'S clearly not sure what he means by that. There's been at least one officer commissioned as young as age 18, but I don't think it's possible to make O-5 in 12 years, even with below-the-zone promotions. With most folks receiving their commission in their early to mid twenties, that dude was in his mid-30s to early 40s, guaranteed.
 
[ QUOTE ]
There's been at least one officer commissioned as young as age 18, but I don't think it's possible to make O-5 in 12 years, even with below-the-zone promotions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know about the other services, but in the Air Force, they did away with BTZ promotions to O-4, so the earliest you will be considered for O-5 is around the 14 year point or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top