ATC Retiring Ages...

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

From the 'AvWeb' site....

"Study Shows Older Controllers Can Do The Job — But Do They Want To?

Older air traffic controllers can head off mid-air collisions at least as well as younger controllers, using experience to compensate for age-related declines in mental sharpness, according to a report published this month by the American Psychological Association. Controllers in the U.S. face a mandatory retirement age of 56, which the report suggests should be reconsidered"........

The article goes on to say that only about 2% continue working up to the Retirement Age.

What is the feeling of the current AUS ATCers I wonder??

Got the mortgage paid?
Had 'enough'?
Nothing sinister guys and gals - just curious is all.

Best Regards :ok::ok:

Is 56 too 'young'?

[sixtiesrelic]

"Older air traffic controllers can head off mid-air collisions at least as well as younger controllers, using experience to compensate for age-related declines in mental sharpness"

Like flying this is bulldust. The only people who need the lightning reflex is a fighter pilot or BMX rider.
Controllers like airline pilots are mostly experience and adhering to the rules.
Seems to me they'd be staying longer if they were treated properly.
In the fifties in Oz pilots were regarded as too old at 45 and had to retire.
Who decided THAT?
Bet it was young ground dwellers... Psychological Association people perhaps?

[mcgrath50]

I am not denying that experience is why the Captain gets the big bucks, but a number of airline pilots blogs I read mention that they will let a competant/experienced but younger co-pilot fly the 'hairy' approaches as they have better eyes/reflexes etc.

Without being that age I can't comprehend how much of a change you older blokes experience BUT it makes sense if it is a noticeable drop to do this as you are still monitoring and your experience can kick in and take over if needed.

Just thoughts with absolutely no scientific backing :ok:

[topdrop]

Two of the older controllers where I work run rings around all the so-called young guns. It's often complex, difficult work and experience counts for a lot. You don't necessarily work quicker, but you certainly work smarter.

[Whiskery]

........fly the 'hairy' approaches..........


............as with the Lockhart River and Mt. Hotham approaches.

Is that what those "blogs" are referring to mcgrath50? :mad:

With an attitude like that, those airline pilots shouldn't be flying anything other than plastic models on the end of a line!

[airman1]

Absolute Crap...... Age/Experience can’t be beaten in aviation! If a pilot or ATC controller holds a current medical and is current with training ECT then there probably the best person to have in the hot seat. A "Young Gun" listening/learning and observing will learn vital skills that will assists in a professional and safe career!:bored::bored:

P.S And.............for everything the old pilot or controller misses or forgets the “young gun” is there to back them up after all were all human!:eek::eek:

[Hornet306]

Hi Griffo,
I had thirty years working in ATC and I was glad to get out. I have many friends still "inside" and from my observation of current conditions it is a toxic environment, working in a chook shed in ML or BN, difficult to run a decent family life shift working and all the pressures from management and fellow workers to work overtime. Money isn't everything, and as you have found out - there is life and meaningful (and enjoyable) employment outside of AirServices. Thirty years is enough contribution to the community, ATCs should be allowed to depart with dignity after that and contribute to society in a more manageable and enjoyable way. My best wishes to all those working in the chook sheds.

[BN APP 125.6]

Depends on what kind of ATC you are doing I think.

Some of the guys admit to not wanting to work by the 'seat of their pants' as they get well in to their 50's even though they can still do it well. Add to that the 'environment', those who can afford financially to 'step back' usually do.

In a more sedate workplace, things may be different - but some places still require a fast 'CPU' - and everyone's CPU slows down as you get older, no matter how good you think you are in your 30's and 40's.

Luckily I can afford to leave now - and I consider it more and more every day I see another 'smartest guy in the room' come out with a 'new' idea to make the place work 'more efficiently'!

That is probably the reason more guys jump - not the job, but the 'environment'.

[sixtiesrelic]

There's one over sixty working in a tower I'm told.
As the others say, it's the conditions and they're dictated by the new industry, MANAGEMENT. (Similar sort of concern to Airport security)
In the olden days, managers mostly came up through the ranks. Now they're products of a uni degree, coming straight out from there with all the answers and don't think they need to know much about the industry they come to ... they won't be staying long, so why waste time learning about what the plebs actually do.
Added to this they bring wonderful computer programs that other similar uni grads have come up with.
Oh YES! the writers of the books they study interviewed practical people and come up with their masterpeices. The practical people leave out things that normal practical people take for granted in the interviews, so our wonder writers don't actually have the whole story.
The method that is used to work out if someone is tired and should have a longer rest peoriod is a BEAUTY. Punch in the duty times start and finish times and Bob's ya' uncle.
Oh Dear! worker has gone over the magic number that says can can't come to work... NO problem, we'll just start him five minutes later.
Bung in new start time, and wonder of wonders, he's legal now.
This sort of cr*p is getting too common and people who once were loyal employees decide they have enough money to leave.
Treated properly and humanely they'd stay years longer.
As it astands most will leave after the managers have flitted off to the next industry to bugg*r THAT up.