Bof the issue very much transcends your few pilots over 60 looking for work. The watershed moment would be in the airlines being able to break open their contracts, from a competitive point of view, to base their pension scheme on a higher age than we are now seeing pilots retire at. As an example BA could up its scheme to 60 years of age as a first step. Than your argument of "As for the ethics of old preventing progress of the young, it really isn't a problem", becomes silly in the extreme. And don't make any mistake that is what we are talking about here. Not the few you mention.
The airlines executive are standing on the sidelines and enjoying the show of us fighting against each other. They don't have to exert any pressure, or spend management time on it. We will fight their battles for them.
In my previous posting I mentioned that there are enough possibilities to extend your career. Under no circumstances is it right for someone to want to change a vital contract clause as they see a deadline heading their way which was there long before they started in this industry.
If as most people seem to support in this thread; to increase the age limit it will have huge implications which will stretch far beyond their brief career extension. Anyone saying different is just trying to put one over on all of us, or isn't able to clearly analyze the issue out.
Also the argument that the no side deploys of life expectancy (like AIRWAYS) is a none starter. I know from our pension office that the average life expectancy of our pilots is slightly more than two years beyond the non-flying population. This does not mean that our job isn't costing us years off our life, as we tend to be a more healthy and better monitored group than the average Joe, but we certainly don't drop dead at the rates sometimes quoted. I know statistics at two major US carriers bear this out as well.
So I would suggest both sides keep the arguments they employ as pure as possible.
Greetings O.