PDA

View Full Version : ALPA USA Reconsiders Age 60 Rule?


FoxHunter
17th Sep 2004, 00:29
AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL
94TH REGULAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING
September 14-15, 2004


SUBJECT
Age 60 Education Campaign

SOURCE
MEA MEC


DELEGATE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

WHEREAS the current financial crisis in the airline industry has
caused tens of thousands of ALPA pilots to experience a dramatic
and permanent reduction in their career earnings through
furloughs, pay cuts, displacements, and reduced promotion and job
opportunities, and

WHEREAS a significant proportion of ALPA's membership has also
experienced an erosion in their projected retirement earnings
through a variety of factors, including the dramatic and
permanent reduction in their career earnings; lower-than-expected
investment returns due to declines in the equity markets, and
increasing pressure on defined benefit plans, including
reductions in benefits, the freezing of future benefit accruals,
or the termination of some of these plans, and

WHEREAS many ALPA pilot groups have not been able to successfully
bargain for defined benefit plans, and

WHEREAS the negotiating environment is not favorable to
addressing these issues in the near future, and

WHEREAS the cost of retiree medical insurance has increased
dramatically over the years, and

WHEREAS airline pilots in the U.S. are required to retire at age
60, and

WHEREAS ALPA policy is to endorse mandatory retirement at age 60,
and

WHEREAS there is a significant gap between the mandatory
retirement age for pilots in the U.S. and the age at which many
pilots are eligible to receive Social Security and Medicare
benefits, and

WHEREAS the Executive Board recently reaffirmed its desire to
obtain necessary changes to the U.S. Medicare and Social Security
laws to make retired airline pilots eligible for Medicare and
full Social Security benefits upon reaching age 60, and

WHEREAS the current White House Administration has not been
amenable to addressing these issues, and

WHEREAS an increasing number of ALPA pilots are concerned that
they may be compelled to work either in other professions or as
pilots outside the U.S. beyond the current U.S. mandatory
retirement age due to a reduction in their career earnings,
retirement earnings, and/or to bridge their income and medical
benefits to Medicare and Social Security, and

WHEREAS an increasing number of ALPA pilots have expressed a
desire to have the mandatory retirement age in the U.S. increased
to enable them to continue to work as a pilots in the U.S to
increase their career earnings, retirement earnings, and/or to
bridge their income and medical benefits to Medicare and Social
Security, and

WHEREAS the Age 60 Rule is a safety rule established by the
Federal Aviation Administration in 1959, and

WHEREAS a change in the Age 60 rule would require a change to
applicable FAA regulations based upon aviation safety, and not
pilot income or benefits, criteria, and

WHEREAS discussions among rank and file U.S. ALPA members
regarding changing the mandatory age raise issues related to the
impact on career earnings, retirement earnings, defined benefit
plan provisions and funding, pilot medical certification
standards, and air safety, and

WHEREAS it is appropriate that Association policy on safety
issues be consistent with the best available scientific
information, and

WHEREAS the establishment of Association policy is driven by the
interests of the rank and file membership, and

WHEREAS arguments both in favor and against maintaining the
current Association policy preserving age 60 as the mandatory
retirement age must be focused on facts rather than emotion or
speculation,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the President is hereby directed to
initiate a thorough communications effort to educate the U.S.
ALPA membership regarding the rationale for the existence of the
Age 60 Rule and the possible implications of increasing the
mandatory retirement age, including the impact on career
earnings, retirement earnings, defined benefit plan provisions
and funding, pilot medical certification standards, and air
safety, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this communications effort shall
include a poll of the U.S. ALPA membership regarding mandatory
retirement age issues, including their views regarding ALPA's Age
60 policy, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the President is also directed to
report on the status of this initiative to the May 2005 Executive
Board.

MercenaryAli
17th Sep 2004, 04:50
Well! How would it be if a bus driver was told "Hey bud you are now 60 years old so you have to quit|" or maybe a Doctor was told to stop practising just because he had reached the grand old chronological age of 60 years. Stupid and policitically motiviated.

There are people of 35 who should not be allowed to operate public transport of any kind and there are 70 year olds who are fit and able to pass a Class 1 medical and fly!!

The law is an ASS!

Krueger
17th Sep 2004, 11:01
So, let's fly till we die.:}
Thank's but no thank's. I love flying but love other thing in life, too. So, I would like to be able to enjoy those things while I'm able to.:ok:

kriskross
17th Sep 2004, 11:14
Surely, the point of this is not that you MUST work past 60, but that you may if your circumstances and situation so dictate.

With the erosian of job security, retirement benefits, pension entitlements, not to mention the demographic fact that people are living longer and have to finance an increasing retirement period, from a reducing retirement pension pot, then this problem needs to be considered dispassionately in th States and those European countries that enforce the 60 rule.

Abbeville
17th Sep 2004, 11:24
I agree with Kriskross. Due to circumstances beyond my control I need the option. Good luck to those who don't.

411A
17th Sep 2004, 11:27
The one and only reason that ALPA is considering whether it would be practical or desirable to 'extend' the age sixty retirement schedule is the impending loss of pension benefits at some major carriers.
The younger First Officers have always wanted the senior Captains out ASAP, so these guys could slip into their four bars earlier.
Now that the elusuve pension benefits look like possibly disappearing, a rethink is in order.

The gravy train has reached the end of the line.:ugh: :uhoh:

Devils Advocate
17th Sep 2004, 12:09
The option is very much required - what with the erosion of 'final salary' pension schemes and the like !

Sleeve Wing
17th Sep 2004, 12:20
>The gravy train has reached the end of the line.<

Always the cynic, 411A.
It couldn't also be that guys are now a damned sight fitter at 60, 65, even 70 than they were when you started.
I retired at 60 because I wanted to - I'd had enough - but I'm still happily teaching aerobatics virtually full-time and with a Class 1 Medical.

I also work with a chap whose still teaching at 84 - he's given up the aeros though. He still works out in the gym but says the aeros give him too much of an appetite !

Rgds, Sleeve.

:cool: :ok:

Flying Guy
23rd Sep 2004, 10:10
The supposed reasons the FAA mandated (and maintains) the retirement age of 60 has to do with an increased possibility of sudden incapacitation and deteriorating skills. In all the discussions on this site that I have seen in the past though, it has always been about money and advancement to the left seat. Frankly, it makes me sick that ALPA is now considering supporting extending the age limit - because of personal finances. What hypocritical baloney.

I was forced to retire last year at age 60 and it really irritates me to no end because it had nothing to do with my flying skills and I am in excellent physical condition. I WANT to continue to fly - I actually like it!

There always seems to be a lament by someone "I don't want to fly past 60." Well quit, dammit! You have that privilege at any age. Allow us that want to fly to continue.

I got lucky and found a position overseas where they allow flying to 65, fortunately.

Krueger
23rd Sep 2004, 22:28
In Portugal, the age lmit is 60 as well.:cool:

Ray Darr
24th Sep 2004, 10:17
If you are fit to fly, then FLY!

If you want to retire, leave when YOU decide, not when some crazy, red-tape, non-scientific (and non-sense) rule DICTATES you retire.

Scrap the "Age 60" rule. Scrap ANY age-based retirement rules, anywhere - period!

Cheers,
~ R.D.

FlapsOne
24th Sep 2004, 11:10
Some people want to fly beyond 60 because they enjoy it.
Some don't want to.

Some people need to fly beyond 60, for financial reasons.
Some don't need to.

The point is, irrespective of ability or health, NOBODY has the choice!

GrandPrix
25th Sep 2004, 01:43
From a younger sub-35 perspective.
You want to fly after sixty?
Fine, move over to the right seat.
You continue to accrue benefits, FO seniority, retirement etc...
Get paid at top FO pay scale.
Company gets to keep the experience in the cockpit. Saves $$$ by not having to hire and train off the street.
Younger/junior guys still get to upgrade in a reasonable time frame.
Win, Win, Win
Now, if over age 60 person was a pr*ck, he or she will have to live with that too. What goes around comes around. There might even be some major attitude re-adjustment at about age 55.

russellackland
25th Sep 2004, 04:57
Fine.....

But I hope that some consideration is given to the folks that have been furloughed for several years at the major ailines in the USA. Perhaps an extension of furlough time commensurate with the increase in retirement age would be appropriate! I hope ALPA looks at this seriously as it may seriously erode their existance as a Union. They have already allowed SCABS into the union, if the decision is to support the retireing members at the expense of junior members...I can foresee the day when ALPA loses its 'power,' especially if Bush remains in office. The fathers of ALPA, the "Old Guys," must be turning in their graves.........

ackland

Omark44
25th Sep 2004, 12:31
Think you may have missed the point here Grand Prix, the idea is to let pilots fly to a normal retirement age, as was always the way before some highly controversial and discriminatory legislation was introduced to reduce the retirement age to sixty.

In case you are not aware of this, the NORMAL retirement age always was sixty five, NOT sixty. All we ask is to have our entitlement back. Offering me the RHS is just a bloody insult.

MercenaryAli
25th Sep 2004, 15:48
Why does Gran Prix believe that just because he may be a great First Officer he will also be a great Captain. If the Captain is over 60 can still pass his Class 1 medical and his flight checks/sim rides etc etc then HE should remain in the left seat, he has earned it.
I get sick to death of young "Know-it-all" First Officers (and it is not a majority by any means) who think promotion to command is simply "Dead mens shoes" - it is not! There are some pilots who are first class competent First Officers but will NEVER be first class nor competent Commanders!! Just like the military not everyone becomes a General !! Well, there are a few more aircraft Captains but don't think just because you happen to be a senior First Officer that you are NATURALLY command material, because it does not work that way. Remember no matter how many hours/sectors a First Officer has he has still been the Second in Command NOT the Commander. Some people are born to lead, others learn to lead but some are born to be led forever!!.

As far as the age 60 rule, it is completely arbitary, it has no basis either medically nor in law and it HAS TO BE CHALLENGED! Either that or EVERYBODY must be made to give up their job at 60.

We must be given the CHOICE and for those who cry " I don't want to fly past 60" then that is your choice and I am happy for you, enjoy tending your rose garden, but as a previous PPRuner wrote, many pilots are over 70 and some over 80 still with Class 1 medicals and perfectly capable of showing the young "sprogs" a thing or two!!

Ray Darr
25th Sep 2004, 18:02
Are there any organization that can be approached to help banish this sadly inaccurate "rule"?

MercenaryAli
26th Sep 2004, 06:22
I have just re-read the script from Gran Prick ooops Prix.
and noted that he is more arrogant than I first thought .

I hope he never gets into the left seat, he demonstrates neither the aptitude nor the attitude for it!

BusyB
26th Sep 2004, 06:58
MercenaryAli,
Having sympathy with both sides of this issue I conclude that you and Grand Prix deserve each other!

MercenaryAli
26th Sep 2004, 08:45
Perhaps you are right! However at my stage in my career it is unlikely that I shall ever have the dubious pleasure of flying with this character. My point is still the same, there is no medical evidence that a pilot who can pass his Class1 medical is any less fit to command just because he chronologically passed his 60th birthday. How would it be if EVERYBODY were to be forced to stop doing what they do just because they got to 60?

Many of the leading experts in medicine, law, politics, business are well into their 60's and long may they continue to contribute to society. Gran Prix's attitude that mature and experienced Captains should sit in "his seat" and he should take the Commanders seat is just arrogance, nothing more!!

Anyway, have a nice life, I only post here cos I am bored with sitting in the office and quite honestly after 34 years in aviation I have heard it all before from the young "know it alls"...

Flying Guy
27th Sep 2004, 21:00
Grand Prix demonstrates an immature attitude that will hopefully improve over time. The Captain enjoyes the left seat because he/she has demonstrated the knowledge, competence and EXPERIENCE to fly in that position. It doesn't make sense to put a 25 year veteran in the right seat under command of a person with half the experience. The passengers wouldn't want it, the airline wouldn't want it, and Grand Prix won't want it after he has been in the left seat for several years - if his attitude doesn't get him canned first.

Ray Darr
28th Sep 2004, 09:39
Found via the link posted by I-FORD:

Another Website to check out re cancelling the "Age 60" Rule (http://www.age60rule.com/)

(Thanks, I-FORD)
~R.D.

Flying Guy
30th Sep 2004, 21:33
Spaceship One was piloted yesterday by Mike Melville. He had to wrestle with the aircraft through continuous instability when the craft entered space, rolling more than 15 times! He maintained his composure through this physically difficult exercise and brought the craft back to earth with a grin.

He is 62 years old.

pilotusa
30th Sep 2004, 22:09
I would love to see the age 60 rule retained. But my union gave away my pension, and we are poised to give away retiree medical benefits in the latest cuts.

So with a pennies on the dollar retirement and no medical benefits, where does a 60 year old go if he gets seriously ill? When I started this career there was some assurance that, since you have to retire at 60 you will have a health "safety net" in place until at 65 your government guaranteed Medicare health insurance kicks in.

Now, at this late date, they want to take away the "safety net" and leave a huge bunch of 60-65 year olds to just flap around in the wind as far as health care goes.

Since the government takes it upon themselves to call us too old to fly at 60, then the government should make an exception for airline pilots to the 65 rule for Medicare eligibility.

Flying Guy
6th Oct 2004, 18:10
Hear a rumor from several sources this week that JAR pilots are now allowed to fly into the US up to age 65. Anybody know if this is true?

GrandPrix
6th Oct 2004, 20:59
Mercenary Ali and Flying Guy,

Touchy touchy touchy!
You received your command because someone was forced out of the seat by the same rule that you now want to change. Seniority got you your "COMMAND". Did the ego come with it too?
I bow down to your most excellent status. NOT!
All airlines hire captains, not F/Os. You both sound like the types that would benefit most by an attitude adjustment.
Lose the arrogance, the first astronaut was a monkey!
My idea at least is a plausible one, yours are pipe dreams.

C-ya