My personal opinion here, but I think you guys are wasting your money fighting this as discrimination. What makes this any different than limiting a drivers or pilot to have a license at 18, or an ability to attend a bar at 21? I could drive a car just fine at 16 just like you argue you can continue to fly past 60.
Im not saying its good or bad to go either way. Im just calling it as I see it. Each case has its own merits... retire 60, or 65. But I don't see much of a benefit for 65 where a good pension is involved. It really looks more like a case of not being able to let go. Making the transition to retirement is tough for some that really embrace their work, and perhaps love flying as much as I do. I can understand it, but it doesn't mean its a legal right or a discrimination. Its just the way it is, insofar to manage a group of employees. A general retirement that must be applied fairly to everyone. Maybe we can change it, but we have to look at how we can do it and minimize the negative affect on other demographics. Perhaps we should look at other factors. How it affects the finances of the company or how it might reduce the opportunities for young hopefulls wanting to join. Maybe its possible, but just not practical for everyone. If it benefits a smaller group to a lesser extent, then maybe its not the right thing to do.
Last edited by 555orange; 9th May 2010 at 08:30.