UN- Ageism

[TheAdmirableCretin]

We discovered recently that the UN stipulates an age restriction of 60/65 (60 with another pilot <60... no pilot >65) on Pt 135 (FAA: Charter/Taxi Ops) contracts.
As their web-site indicates only that pilots need to be qualified legally under their licensing authorities regulations it's difficult to see how the UN of all people should be able to employ discriminatory tactics universally forbidden in the wider world...

[His dudeness]

forbidden ? I think you will find that is the same in Europe under JAR & EU-OPS.

That will produce a lot of grief, since there will be a lot of pilots that will be unemployed after 65 and yet e.g. in Germany pension age starts at 67...and there are plans to go to 70 years for the pension...

Actually, there is a problem already for some small aircraft operators here in Germany and helicopter air rescue services: these are almost all single pilot flown. Now the pilots will have to retire at 60...thats 7 years to the pension. Go figure. (Germany has opted out of this rule for 5 years, so if you´re 60 now you will be able to fly to 65)

Another example of just how grossly unfair a lot of regulation in the social sector has become these days...

[TheAdmirableCretin]

UN- Ageism

We discovered recently that the UN stipulates an age restriction of 60/65 (60 with another pilot <60... no pilot >65) on Pt 135 (FAA: Charter/Taxi Ops) contracts.
As their web-site indicates only that pilots need to be qualified legally under their licensing authorities regulations it's difficult to see how the UN of all people should be able to employ discriminatory tactics universally forbidden in the wider world...


I don't doubt that each country has it's own reg's... but the FAA which dictates the rules on this contract has no age restriction on Pt 135 pilots... as long as you qualify medically you're good to go. The licensing authority in this case considers it safe... and the UN contracts dept. states no age restriction when you look at their procurement web-page... so someone is just slipping this in arbitrarily. We sent someone out to Asia before discovering that they were'nt welcome.

[[email protected]]

As from July 1st 2012 ..EASA Rules states, that provided a pilot maintains his health by holding a Class 1 Medical......there is NO upper age limit:ok:

So all you 'Young..would be left hand seat grabbers'...Stew a little longer !!

Think about it seriously you yoths ..You too can fly on beyond 65

:D:DYIPPEE:p:p:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Pace]

Think about it seriously you yoths ..You too can fly on beyond 65


By the time the youths get to 65 medicine will be advanced so much they will probably be flying at 100 :)

Pace

[Cathar]

The age limit is an international standard set by the International Civil Aviation Organisation in Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention.

So the UN is complying with the safety standard established by one of its specialist organisations. Hardly shocking news.

While the FAA may allow it it, it is illegal in many countries, even on an N reg, as it contravenes the international standard. The CAA recently grounded a LOT aircraft at Heathrow for a breach of this requirement.

As from July 1st 2012 ..EASA Rules states, that provided a pilot maintains his health by holding a Class 1 Medical......there is NO upper age limit

Have you read Part-FCL?

FCL.065 Curtailment of privileges of licence holders aged 60 years or more in commercial air transport
(a) Age 60-64. Aeroplanes and helicopters. The holder of a pilot licence who has attained the age of 60 years shall not act as a pilot of an aircraft engaged in commercial air transport except:
(1) as a member of a multi-pilot crew; and
(2) provided that such a holder is the only pilot in the flight crew who has attained the age of 60 years.
(b) Age 65. The holder of a pilot licence who has attained the age of 65 years shall not act as a pilot of an aircraft engaged in commercial air transport.

[TheAdmirableCretin]

The CAA recently grounded a LOT aircraft at Heathrow for a breach of this requirement.

Again.. we're not talking here about scheduled passenger ops.. this is air-taxi... non-scheduled GA .. totally different.

[CaptainProp]

By the time the youths get to 65 medicine will be advanced so much they will probably be flying at 100

....or they are all dead before even reaching 55 because they've been flying loco ops with 850+ hrs per year.....

CP

[mad_jock]

They more than likely can't get insurance for over those requirments

[Pace]

Mad Jock

With the rest of Europe moving to later and later retirement age i wonder how long it will be before a court challenge is made in the European Courts.
One poster highlighted the problem of retirement age and state pensions moving to 67 and the discrepancy such retrictions would place.

With people living longer and longer and with medical advancements there is even talk of the state pension age ending up at 70.

As long as pilots are medically fit and meet the standards without counter evidence pointing to deterioration over 60 it will be hard to justify restrictions on those over 60.

It will be hard for insurance companies to place those insurance limitations on older pilots without proof that there is a justifiable deterioration in medical standards in those over 60.
Whether those over 60 want to continue is another matter? With the new 60s being the old 50s not everyone wants to spend their time tending the garden.

Pace

[mad_jock]

I can see where your coming from.

But just like young car drivers you can't force insurance firms to take on risk that they don't want to.

Its not only aircraft insurance its all the other stuff as well such as health insurance etc.

And to be honest it doesn't really matter what the EU rules are because I don't know of a single one of these UN contracts which is operating within the EU. They are all in various ****eholes around the world where the legislation does not apply.

[Cathar]

The CAA recently grounded a LOT aircraft at Heathrow for a breach of this requirement.

Again.. we're not talking here about scheduled passenger ops.. this is air-taxi... non-scheduled GA .. totally different.

Air-taxis etc are still commercial air transport operations and the same requirements apply. The CAA will not treat an air taxi differently if they find it in breach of this requirement.

[Pace]

Does anyone know what the age restriction is based on?
If there ever was an age discrimination case what would the argument be for treating aviation differently to others employed in society?
Presuming those pilots pass the medical requirements then there must be other medical data which supports a cutoff point regardless of the fitness and condition of the individual ?

Pace

[Bertie Thruster]

Here's what the UK CAA are presently basing their 'age 60 single pilot' decision on:

"In 1978, ICAO introduced an age limit of 60 years for all flights,
regardless of the number of pilots onboard, which was adopted by the UK
and the other States. It was the UK that was one of the first, if not
the first, of the States to allow pilots to continue to fly commercially
up to the age of 65 in a multi-pilot aircraft, provided that the other
pilot was under 60. These limitations were embodied in the Air
Navigation Order 1985, effective 21/12/86, for public transport
operations using aircraft under 20,000kg MTOW. In 1989, the weight
discriminant was removed, so that the age limits applied to all public
transport flights. Other countries, including the USA, disagreed with
the UK position and for some time refused access to their airspace for
UK licence holders who had reached the age of 60.

During the 1980's and 90's there was significant international debate on
this issue and eventually agreement was reached within ICAO and the JAA
that a pilot over 59 but under 65 could fly commercially in a multi-crew
operation provided that the other pilot was under 60. The difficulty of
achieving this agreement demonstrated to us that there was no prospect
of the UK being able to justify that any pilot could be allowed to
continue to fly commercially beyond the age of 64.

I am advised by medical specialists that the current absolute limit of
65 years is derived from data for cardiovascular risk; this being the
most common cause of incapacitation in the male population. The data
shows that the risk of incapacitation increases exponentially with age,
such that the 'annual acceptable risk' is exceeded at age 65.

In 2000, the wording of the UK Air Navigation Order was varied by
exemption to match that embodied in JAR-FCL and the text that was under
development at that time in ICAO. The internationally agreed wording was
formally incorporated into the Air Navigation Order 2005 and has been
carried forward into the ANO 2009. The current wording is consistent
with ICAO Annex 1 Amdt 167 (and subsequent) and the wording of the
proposed European Part-FCL.

European legislation will come into force on 8th April 2012 and this
will make the current age limitations set out in UK legislation legally
binding for all commercial flights by all aircraft registered in the EU.
This will override national legislation for pilot licensing in Europe.

It is appreciated that Police aircraft fall outside the EU legislation,
but Article 1(2) reads:

2. This Regulation shall not apply to:
(a) products, parts, appliances, personnel and organisations referred to
in paragraph 1(a) and (b) while carrying out military, customs, police,
search and rescue, firefighting, coastguard or similar activities or
services. The Member States shall undertake to ensure that such
activities or services have due regard as far as practicable to the
objectives of this Regulation;

Therefore as far as practicable we must apply the EASA rules to police
aircraft, operations and aircrew. The answer is therefore no.
If we were to entertain this, it would immediately raise the question of what age the pilot should be limited to - 61?, 63?, etc. There are large numbers of commercial pilots who have been compulsorily retired - and clearly many more to come - due to this rule. It would be unfair to them to make any exceptions."

[His dudeness]

There are large numbers of commercial pilots who have been compulsorily retired - and clearly many more to come - due to this rule. It would be unfair to them to make any exceptions.

So 'we' introduced a grossly unfair limitation/rule and therefore can´t change it anymore because a large number has been a large number of victims to this rule ignoring the very fact that the same regulators (politicians) change the pension age time and again and therefore large quantities of pilots will be in the need of social welfare after having paid loads of taxes/unemployment insurance etc?

One has got to love em.

Same is true for anyone working, say, in construction.

Friend of mine started at age 15, is now 46 and has to work til 67 under the changed German rules...he says he rekons he wont make it healthwise, but who in hell will take on a brickbuilder at, say, 55 with healthproblems? Or a pilot at 59 for that matter? OTOH Plenty of state servants such as teachers, policemen etc, retiring early 'due to burnout'. What a fu.... joke.

They rule us, the tail wags the dog.

[TheAdmirableCretin]

Yes.. the debate over cumpulsory retirement ages for pilots is an
ongoing one with many protagonists demonstrating partisan beliefs...
The point of my initial posting was that the UN procurements people have contracts (look up procurement/Long Term air-charter) that state clearly the rules laid down for those bidding for contracts...
It states unequivocally that the pilot requirements will be based on the rules laid down by the licensing authority of that country... in this case the US.. ie. The FAA.
The FAA have no age limit for Part 135 ops as opposed to Part 121 (airline/scheduled ops)... Part 135 pilots (Air-Taxi/Charter/GA for reward) can continue to operate provided that the pilot holds an appropriate medical.. in this case a 1st Class medical.
The age limit has been arbitrarily imposed by an organization that is fundamentally the guardian of Human Rights. Interestingly, it makes no mention of age in the contract that we're operating... we're just 'told'

[mad_jock]

Where are the flights taking place though?

You have to abide by both sets (US and Local) regulations outside the US.

[Pace]

Okay FAA!! But this is becoming a global issue with Bi lateral agreements which will come more and more into play between EASA and the FAA!
I wonder how factual increased heart attacks with age are as I always thought 45 to 60 was the highest heart attack age group tailing off after 60 ?
I would like to see the documented evidence?
That still doesn't take away from the fact that we are individuals and the only way can be through individual medicals and past history / makeup.
This will become a bigger issue with EU age discrimination laws and the growing bridge between enforced retirement and state required retirement .

Pace

[TheAdmirableCretin]

Contract is in Afghanistan but that's irrelevant.. it's nothing to do with local laws.. they're applying this to all contracts...The UN has no 'in-house' flight dept. This is simply a prejudicial ruling which would not stand in a court of human rights. If the UK CAA or the US FAA or any other countries licensing authority make a ruling that's understood... it may not be popular and may not stand up to statistical evidence but it is their ruling nevertheless. The UN is not a licensing authority in Aviation and can point to no laws that would support this ruling.
If you or your company hired a chauffer for the night and then refused to use him as he was over 50 (prime age for heart attacks) you'd have trouble defending a case of age prejudice in court. This is no different.
We may not be 60 or 65 yet but we're all on the way there. The pilot concerened would easily pass for mid 50s, never smoked, keeps fit.. great outdoors guy..and legal to fly.. what right right does the UN of all agencies have to arbitrarilly impose an age rule. What would happen if they tried to discriminate against pilots from third world countries based on a higher accident rate... ? At least they'd have some statistical evidence to support the ruling...but imagine the outcry.

[mad_jock]

The afgan AIP list those max ages.

[cldrvr]

In Afghanistan, one pilot may be over 60, but not over 65 as long as the second pilot is less then 60, no flying over 65.

This has nothing to do with the UN, or any other operator, it is Afghan MoT rule. commercial ops only, rules do not apply to private ops, but does cover foreign operators operating in Afghanistan specifically.

This rule is a direct copy from ICAO Annex 1: 2.1.10.1; 2.1.10.2R

10.5 FLIGHT CREW MEMBER QUALIFICATIONS
10.5.1.1 GENERAL
(a) Foreign air operators shall ensure that their flight crew have the appropriate licences and ratings for the operations to be conducted in [STATE].
10.5.1.2 AGE LIMITATIONS
(a) Foreign air operators shall ensure that the required PIC engaged in single pilot operations on aircraft operating in [STATE] shall be less than 60 years of age.
(b) Foreign air operators shall ensure, for aircraft engaged in operations in [STATE] requiring more than one pilot as flight crew members, that if one pilot is between the age of 60 and up to age 65, the other pilot shall be less than age 60.

[TheAdmirableCretin]

Thank you for that CLDRVR.. clears things up..
Strange that the UN didn't respond with that when we queried it...
Thanks again... TAC.

[cldrvr]

Glad to be of help. I even found you a copy of the Afghan AIP covering foreign operators on the web for you. It is a word for word copy of the ICAO rules.

http://www.motca.gov.af/fileadmin/user_upload/doc/regulations/PART10_Nov-COMMERCIAL_AIR_TRANSPORT.pdf

The full AIP is here:

AIP - Important Information (http://www.motca.gov.af/index.php?id=8)