PDA

View Full Version : Stop The Law Project To Let Pilot Work Until 65 Years Old


ANGELOPINTO
7th Jan 2006, 22:00
THERE IS AN ONGOING LAW PROJECT IN JAA WORLD TO LET PILOT WORK UNTIL 65 YEARS OLD INSTEAD OF 60. THIS WILL MEAN DELAYING 5 MORE YEARS NEW PILOT JOBS DUE TO THOSE PILOTS WHO WHOLD RETIRE NOW AND SO ON EVERY YEAR WHEN THEY REACH 60.
CAN ANYBODY HELP IN WRITING A NICE LETTER TO BE SENT TO JAA head quarter and all european CAA and all european government, a nice letter about young unemployed people, who could start work, and about old people who already has hadd all the satisfaction possible from commercial aviation and most of them , by the way , are tired and are looking forward to retire.
I wil give it a try and pass it on to everybody, but i am not good in writing this kind of letters. The letter must be well written and polite and i believe that if those ADMINISTRATIONS will receive thousand of copies of the same letter signed by so many young pilot, they might stop doing this crap.
I am positive that labour and left side political parties, if they will heard our point of view will understand better the problem and defend the right of a young person to find a job in what he has been studying with so much sacrifice. If somebody comes up with a nice letter please post it here and then everybody e-mail to those administration.
Also we need help in finding all the relevant email addresses who could help and who will decide about this law.

Rainboe
7th Jan 2006, 22:11
So let me get this right. You want your 'young people' to not be affected by new age discrimination laws, but then they will be able to hold a pilots licence until 65 if they want so they would benefit from the laws? I see.

What exactly do you think age discrimination laws are being introduced for? It's not hard this one- it's to prevent age discrimination! Therefore what you want is to discriminate in pilot employment in particular so that pilots aged over 55 or 60 and under 65 are discriminated against.

I think my head hurts.

P.Pilcher
7th Jan 2006, 22:13
The chief flying instructor at my club has recently retired at age 80. His predecessor retired when forced to do so at about 75 by the advancement of terminal cancer. In his case, having lost his medical, he continued flying with qualified pilots in an advisory capacity as long as he possibly could.

These people were enthusiasts with thousands upon thousands of hours of instructional experience which they were happy to pass on as long as they were physically capable. I have no intention of taking any action which could help to persuade any regulatory body to prevent such people from flying. There is a shortage of good (fixed wing) instructors. This is because that the current economic situation enables FTO's to pay them peanuts. In the future this situation may change and the private flying movement may well be grateful for any good instructors that it can get irrespective of age, provided of course that they meet the necessary medical criteria.

P.P.

gas path
7th Jan 2006, 22:31
Folks'll need to work until 65 (at least:eek: )to get a half decent pension these days:hmm: :hmm:

pulse1
7th Jan 2006, 22:43
I am not a professional pilot but I have several friends who are, and who are over 60. None of them qualify for a sensible pension for various reasons e.g. one didn't get his ATPL until he was 50. They will not get their state pension until they are 65 and cannot afford to stop working until then.

As the retirement age to state pension is going to be increased over the coming years I think it is appalling that anyone should be deprived of the right to earn their living using the only skill they have. As far as I can see, not all professional pilots work for large airlines with pension schemes which are calculated on them retiring before they are 60.

Empty Cruise
8th Jan 2006, 00:10
Angelopinto, I think you might have missed out on some crucial detail here...

Today, many pilots are already working to the age of 65 - only they move from the left seat back to the right. A few good mates of mine are about to take that step soon - but they're not gonna retire, just because they hit 60!

So - what you call "crap" is not gonna take away a lot of jobs for low-hour guys overnight. Already today, there are a lot of jobs available for the guys with experience-levels commensurate with being close to 60, but not that many for low-houred pilots. Passing this law might actually help the industry to take up some of the slack of recruitment for low-hourered pilots. Look to FR - they are desperate for trainers, so the prospect of keeping them on as trainers for another 5 years is sweet music to Ryanair. If they are forced to retire, the availability of trainers (or lack thereoff) will only perpetuate the current situation where people wait for months to start their linetraining (the consequences of this are dealt with at length in other threads on this forum).

This step is only partly fuelled by union demand - the industry movers & shakers have a lot more to do with it. They need pilots, and they need them fast. If, however, a new downturn hits before the law is passed, it'll probably be put on ice until the next upturn is at hand. Sorry if that sounds a bit hard - but that's the industry for you :(

So - my two eurocents worth: don't take this fight. It's gonna happen, no matter how many letters are sent to the EU Parliament, and it does not endear you to the people who now have a shot at retaining their command for another 5 years, doing a job that many of them love (or at least keeps them in beer money). If you want to fight a just cause, join the MAF and help spread education & healthcare in the third world, or work for Amnesty or the Red Cross, don't chase laws that will ultimately benefit the aviation industry. :*

Empty

steamchicken
8th Jan 2006, 00:20
Bollocks. The big economic question in most of the developed world is that fertility rates are low and life expectancy is going up - and you want to stop people working longer?

Piltdown Man
8th Jan 2006, 00:42
Agelopinto:- Exactly what will you be your offering employers? Your lack of experience? Your skill at flying? Your ability to really hack your older colleagues off? Or is it the way that your incisive brain cuts through the many facets of an argument and then comes to a hypocritical conclusion? Maybe the reason you don't have a job is because you are a plonker?

The old wrinklies are the people who, despite the numerous and varied attempts by incredibly qualified youngsters (and we haven't talked about those made by weather, passengers, ATC, engineering, management, etc.) to kill them, are still alive. There's alot to be learnt from them - ignore them at your peril! And if they want to work, let them.

mutt
8th Jan 2006, 04:22
There was talk that the USA would also increase the age to 63, does anyone know how these discussions are going?

Mutt

Fly3
8th Jan 2006, 04:24
I recently attended a briefing by the chairman of the ICAO committee who recommended the increase in retirement age to 65. I can assure you that no amount of letter writting is going to change the fact that in November of this year all member states will have to adopt the 65 retirement age rule. Of course individual companies in these states can impose a lower limit if they so desire but countries such as France will no longer be able to block over 60's from overflying or operating into French airports.

Loose rivets
8th Jan 2006, 04:28
old wrinklies !!!???

Speak for yerself mate.

FlyVMO
8th Jan 2006, 04:43
If pilots can stay healthy longer now than they did in the past (better healthcare, knowledge of diet/exercising etc), then they should be allowed to work longer if they so desire. Thats the way I see it anyway (and FWIW Im only 26).
Don't forget we all get old eventually-do you want to be sent home for it?

edited for spelling.

cactusbusdrvr
8th Jan 2006, 05:28
Age 60 rule in the States may be changed by Congress this session. I believe the rationale is to bring us up to ICAO standards. The original reason for the age 60 rule in the states was CR Smith of American Airlines getting his good buddy the head of the FAA to impose an age limit to rid his airline of the top captains who were the highest paid. There was some discussion by the FAA saying that these captains were having difficulties adjusting to the new jets in their transition from DC 6/7 and Connies. Most of the reasons cited were not true but that didn't stop the FAA from enacting the Age 60 rule. F/Os everywhere cheered, until they got to age 59 and then they demanded the rule be changed.

skol
8th Jan 2006, 06:29
I fly longhaul with over 60 f/o's and it's often not a pretty sight. Many of these guys are there for the ride and the others are doing the work.

Capt Claret
8th Jan 2006, 06:49
ANGELOPINTO,

How old are you?

What will you think of your law to force pilots out of work when they've accuumulated the hours that you in your youthfullness have deemed is enough, when you get to be 60?

You say, they will "defend the right of a young person to find a job in what he has been studying with so much sacrifice." How do you think I got my job? Do you presume that I have not made any sacrifice for it?

I note that your profile indicates that you're current on the B737. One of my sacrifices was to take 16 years from the time I obtained a CPL to be presented with the opportunity of my first jet endorsement. How many years have you waited?

I have just spent AUD$15k for my share of a B717 endorsement. I could have chosen unemployment instead of accepting the cost but I'm not about to retire quickly just to let some youngster be given a job that they want, but that I have worked very hard for, just because they believe that they are entitled to it.

The world is full of older pilots like me. Some would retire tomorrow if they could afford to. Others, don't want to retire until they get to the point when they're not really up to the job. I'm in the latter category and hope that I recognise the time to go before some one says I'm no longer making the grade, however, I'll not be pushed aside by the young turks!

Cappice?

skol
8th Jan 2006, 07:01
Claret,
As you get to the stage where you no longer make the grade it is incumbent on others to help you out. Sim instructors and checkers defer to older pilots and their peers are reluctant to fail, relying on line pilots to do the dirty work for them. No one wants to become involved and the standards go downhill.

411A
8th Jan 2006, 08:10
Problem is Skol, at many companies, younger First Officers are there just warming the seat, as they are (brain-wise) out to lunch.
Sometimes it's just a plain and simple...'I'm bored with the job, and oh by the way, when is my next day off.'
Several others have recently (or perhaps, long ago) failed their upgrade assessment, and now are bitter at being left behind.
Well, it's their own damn fault, and they have only themselves to blame...and absolutely, positively no sympathy from me, period.
At our company, we have a couple of over 60 Captains and First Officers, and they can outperform the younger guys any day of the week.
Them's are the facts, Bubba, like it or not.;)

Jagbag
8th Jan 2006, 08:11
In India airline flying has been cleared for pilots to the age of 65. Only restriction is 2 over 60s cannot fly together. Also there is some increase in medical requirements. All private airlines have accepted this. The government airlines are sitting on it coz of some people like the starter of this thread.

A and C
8th Jan 2006, 08:23
I was outraged when I looked at the first post on this thread but guys your replys are first class and have said all that I would have wanted to.

Say NO to age discrimination !

Wingswinger
8th Jan 2006, 09:06
I am p*ss*d of to the back teeth with young whippersnappers wanting my job before I am finished with it. I'll decide when I retire, Angelopinto, unless the licensing authority decides for me beforehand. It's a tough world for us all. Get used to it.

mmmbop
8th Jan 2006, 09:29
We should all be allowed to work until the day WE decide to do otherwise, provided we are actually medically fit and performing as required.

65? Give me a break. If I haven't retired to do something else a decade before that age, I'm going to authorise my wife to hit me squarely over the head with a cricket bat.

Oh that's right - I will be able to do that, cos she is my first and only wife.... :ok:

sapco2
8th Jan 2006, 09:34
I have flown with a 62 year old f/o on several occasions recently - in my opinion the guy should definitely be back in the left hand seat; he is one of the most pleasant and switched on pilots you could ever hope to fly with. We didn't discuss his reasons for working as a B757 co-pilot but my guess is... "needs must"!

Standby Scum
8th Jan 2006, 09:54
65 YEARS OLD INSTEAD OF 60Another way of getting youngsters airborne early is to create more jobs. Ban all aircraft with more than 50 seats. The DeHavilland fixed undercarriaged Heron would be OK for domestic flights and the DC3 for international ones mixed in with parts of long trips done by ship. People are in too much of a hurry these days. Australia to Europe by air should take at least 2 weeks so one can savour the diverse cultures along the way. Pilots skills should be tested, not by the use of a simulator but by sacking all the meteorologists . This thread should immediately be upgraded to 4 bars.
Only joking.:}

Capt Claret
8th Jan 2006, 10:22
Skol, would you care to back up your assertions with evidence?

I've been checked by some younger than I, some older. I've checked some older than I and some younger.

I'm not aware of any defference towards me for my age, nor have I given any based on age, young or old. I don't believe that any checkers at my current employer would pass Clarrie "coz he's a good bloke."

Whilst what you assert might happen from time to time, to suggest it's the norm to leave it to the poor young know-it-all F/O line drivers to weed out the oldies, seems to me to be a wild generalisation.

Mind you, I really hope I can reflect on my own perfomance objectively, and know when it's time to hang up my wings. :}

fmgc
8th Jan 2006, 10:44
The way that demographics are going, especially in the UK, we must work longer as there are not enough young people to support us when we are in our dotage.

I wouldn't worry about jobs for the wannabes, in the long term, with the predicted growth in air traffic, there will be more than enough jobs around.

Personally I would be devastated if I was forced to retire at 60 and I wanted to go on. Please don't try to take that opportunity away from me.

stue
8th Jan 2006, 10:58
Guys/Gals,
I’m just about to start my ATPL training, and am a "young whippersnapper."

Please don’t put us all in the same category as the first poster, I agree with all that has been said buy you guys. Id rather have experienced pilots in work to A, let us gain experience from you and B, because (no offence) I don’t want to be paying for your retirement any more than I have to. Let everyone work till his or her medical has run out.

Please don’t jump on me because I’m not an experienced pilot, but I think that the option should be there to work until whenever you want.

Just my 2pence worth.

Rainboe
8th Jan 2006, 11:17
Stue- fair point I think. The law is coming, like it or not. I think most people agree for once with the fairness of the law and the fact that people at any particular age now are like previous generations 10 years younger- people are more able these days, and retirement should reflect that. With the coming age crunch where there are not enough youngsters, quite suddenly the (developed) world will move into young worker shortage. There will certainly be jobs for all. Then throw into that pot Avian Flu.............

stue
8th Jan 2006, 11:23
There will certainly be jobs for all.

I hope so!:p

The Yank
8th Jan 2006, 11:26
Hook Line and Sinker Me thinks!!!

Someone is havin a giggle!
;)

sky9
8th Jan 2006, 11:36
I saw this happening some years ago.
We started with Final Salary pensions Schemes at 55
That changed to FSPS's to 60.
Then money purchase pension schemes.
Then no schemes at all.
Finally pay for your own type rating and uniform and "think your self lucky if I allow you to fly".
As someone who was lucky to retire at 55 and have interests outside flying let me advise you all. If you go at 65 you will all be too old to enjoy the fruits of your hard work over the previous 40 years. The grim reaper is behind you and a lot closer at 65 than 60.

Frankly I cannot see what would attract any young person to pay the cost of joining this profession other than the old Ernest Gan reason: Big Watch big wings and a **** to go with it – something most people grow out of by the time they are 30. As someone said many years ago “show me your salary slip; Ill show you your status”. Welcome to the world of a Mug in a cheap suit - Virgin Rail train drivers get better remuneration than half of the contributors on this site.

Dani
8th Jan 2006, 12:06
I agree with sky9's facts (but not with his conclusions):

Everyone who took on the profession of pilot knew that it will end with 60 (or even 55). If you haven't have your money piled up until 60, then you did something wrong, spent too much or saved too little. It was part of your "life contract" that you would go to pension. You can't change the rule afterwards.

I'm 40 years old and I am actively planning my financial future. I have to find a way to retire at 60, because there is no other way. You have to base your planning on given facts, you can't hope on future luck.

I agree that a lot of guys stay in good health with 60, but I know at least as much pilots who really are burnt out, not at their top anymore. Flight deck technology change also contributes to the attrition rate.

Dani

Up & Away
8th Jan 2006, 12:14
Its the individual choice to work or not that matters.. not the actual age.
The control limits are one's own medical and financial circumstance.

I refuse to give 'date of birth' these days. I'm 'over 21'.

AlexEvans
8th Jan 2006, 12:30
At 29, I may be considered a young whipper-snapper by some of the experienced pilots on this forum. I'd be happy to see the retirement age of pilots extended as far as as is safely possible, if only because by the time I eventually "self improve" my way into a paying right hand seat, I may not have many years of paid employment ahead of me :sad:
Also, by the time I reach 55 I'd hate to lose the job I had worked so hard for if I was still fit to do it. I don't think that is a fair situation for anyone to find themselves in.
Then again, if life was fair, daddy would be paying for my fATPL. :p

boogie-nicey
8th Jan 2006, 12:37
It's really quite simple, you can keep working until the increased retirement age of 65 or if you can afford to do so retire earlier. As pilots we seem to be fixated on regulations and have a mentality of being lead by rules and regs, think for yourself. If there's anything you don't like then don't do it, all this does is allow those who want to continue working later to do so. In fact it may help some mid life pilots starting out to gain a better chance of getting into the industry because they'll have potentially more mileage until retirement.

Malcolm G O Payne
8th Jan 2006, 17:04
I have recently been told by an old freind who has just retired that there is a critical lack of experienced captains in the airlines.

alexban
8th Jan 2006, 17:19
Last year I had 3 fellow cpt's dying at less than 55 yrs,while enjoying a class 1 medical,with no health problem whatsoever. Fortunately ,all of them were not at the job when that happened.
I also know one that fainted with no reason found for that even after months of med exam.
This job of ours has a lot of felt or unfelt stress.
Also,I guess most of us want to enjoy our retirement.I don't want to retire at 60 or 65 ,and to live only 1 or 2 yrs after that. There are many things I'd like to do then.Grandchildrens,trips,work in my garage,do some joy flights now and then,.... I have almost no time for this things now.
How I see it: no matter what the retirement age is.It can well be 65 ,or even 70 .(you can fly a Bus at 70,no problem). Let everyone decide when to retire (of course with some serious med exams after .X.age.I guess there will be few pilots in perfect health after 55 yrs.).
My plans are to retire,if posible,at less than 60 yrs old.And,somehow ,I feel sorry for the ones that want to fly untill they die,like they have nothing else to do at home.Or maybe they haven't.
And for the young ones....don't worry,the olders are not keeping your seats taken.You are simply not in the same class.I thought the same for my instructors,while I was a junior FO,or now as a cpt.I'm still not in the same class with some of them,and they are not holding my seat,even now.
I want to be like some of them,but when I'll finally reach their level,they'll probably be someplace else..A nicer one,I hope.
Brgds... And a long,happy retirement for those that've reached it.
Alex

handflying
8th Jan 2006, 18:28
I have flown with a 62 year old f/o on several occasions recently - in my opinion the guy should definitely be back in the left hand seat; he is one of the most pleasant and switched on pilots you could ever hope to fly with. We didn't discuss his reasons for working as a B757 co-pilot but my guess is... "needs must"!

What type of needs? Buying a second Ferrari or being able to feed the family. Needs to be relativised a bit here. I know some ex-BA cpts retired, earning their BIG pension and still flying offshore to increase the benefits!!

Also, older pilots try to think a bit about the consequences this would bear: e.g. talk about this thread to the senior F/O's from thomas cook that have been loyal to the company and waiting for a command for several years (for an opportunity to be given to them-not even talking about the ones having been considered "unsuitable" for a LH seat).

If the decision is suddenly to postpone it for 5 years it means other F/O's might wait another 5 years to be given opportunity for command, and thus for the 200 hr pilot for getting an opprtunity to become F/O on a turbojet/prop. It is the whole chain that is going to become longer. I don' think it is good, definitely not moving it immediately for 5 years! Maybe 1 or 2 yes, no more.

Let's have some reaons coming up in this thread, not sentiments about how getting along with a "young " or "old" fellow or how pleasant (s)he is!!

Wizofoz
8th Jan 2006, 19:16
handflying,

No-one owes you or anyone either a job or a promotion. If someone is qualified and capable, it is entirely up to them when they retire. If you are currently filling either seat of an airliner, leaving would open up an opertunity for an up-and-comer. Going soon?

This is a professtion, not a charitable act. We do our jobs to earn a living and it is up to each of us to assess our own circumstances and decide when we want to hang it up. I sincerely hope to be in a position to quit when I'm 60, but that will have more to do with the world economy than with me.If I make the decision to work on, that is MY right, and I would ask you to butt out!

Helipolarbear
8th Jan 2006, 19:21
Bollox to the age descriminators, tree huggers etc... If you are fit to fly....then you are fit to fly!!!If you want to retire or change jobs...off ya go!
If you want to continue flying......up you go! Reasons are varied and far apart. One thing is clear, since they came out with the 60 year rule...in all that time they have never come out with the actual considered rational and convention for such a rule other than some hyped mumbo jumbo with medical conatations attached. BOLLIX!!

handflying
8th Jan 2006, 19:53
Wizofoz,

As far as I know nobody started as a Cpt in aviation; when upgrades are done there must be places available. When an F/O moves it is only to the LH seat (not in the jumpseat) and his place as f/o becomes free: that's the chain!! And the chain depends on world economy AND these kind of decisions, changes in rules being made (Agree totally with "lifecontract" of Dani and sky9: 60 years almost since beginning of aviation).

It is just unfair for the younger ones: world economy has allways been good untill about 5 years ago (type-ratings were almost allways paid for; few people were having to work abroad; upgrades were done within a reasonable amount of time). Younger guys have had a tough time last 5 years: 9/11, majors collapse, paycuts, bonds, upgrades now all at the sudden postponed maybe by another 5 years?

For myself Wizofoz I am trying to prepare retirement asap (hopefully well before 60!) because the generation after me is even far worse off then me and that for the benefit of the job in it as a whole worries me.

Just thinking about those to come more then myself. (how many people with an ATPL licence obtained in the last 5 years have never gotten a job in aviation? I know lots of them, and they would still join if they could...maintain their licence...do I have to give up my post for them? Don't think so, especially when I am sitting next to someone who has allways believed 60 was going to be the limit). Even being a good guy I grant another year or two, but not 5! Very sorry.

For better times...

His dudeness
8th Jan 2006, 19:54
Quote:
This is a professtion, not a charitable act. We do our jobs to earn a living and it is up to each of us to assess our own circumstances and decide when we want to hang it up. I sincerely hope to be in a position to quit when I'm 60, but that will have more to do with the world economy than with me.


Absolutely spot on ! :ok:

JW411
8th Jan 2006, 20:04
Well, the young chap who started this thread is not getting much support.

I am not going to give him any either. I retire in two months time at 65 and I am still in the left seat and still managed an above the average rating on my last base check.

Indeed, my company has asked me to continue in the sim after I retire.

Your turn will come, son!

handflying
8th Jan 2006, 20:13
No hobbies in life old chaps? and too old to start new ones I guess... too sad...

People should think for the benefit of the job, not their own selfish little interest (forgot how they entered the job, forgot how they became cpt,...)

fmgc
8th Jan 2006, 20:18
handflying (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=115099)

That is utter rubbish, why should I give up 5ish years flying so that a newbe gets 5 years more flying?

Do Doctors, Accountants, Lawyers, Politicians and any other profession have forced retirement ages purley to allow younger chaps a chance, of course they don't, it is a quite ridiculous notion? vbmenu_register("postmenu_2310311", true);

Krueger
8th Jan 2006, 20:22
Ahhhh! Everyone is looking at their own belly button.
If you're a captain , you want to fly til 65 or 75 or ..., so you won't have to listen to your old lady back home.
If you're a newbie , you want the 60 age rule so you can get in or get promoted quickly.
So , let's cut the hipocrisy and say what we really want, $$$.
For me, I am confortable with my situation. Hopefully, I'll become captain this year and will have plenty of time to figure out the transition to my reform. Actually, there's plenty of other stuff not related with flying that I like to do. So I'm working on it.

No stress....

Check Six krueger...:ok:

handflying
8th Jan 2006, 20:26
fmgc

Because your "lifecontract" was made for 60 and the guys that are starting are confronting a much worse "lifecontract": the job isn't the job it was 10 years ago! They are worse off then we were when we started, that's why:give them as much chances as you have had when you started. Fair!

HectorusRex
8th Jan 2006, 20:47
I suggest that Angelopinto puts himself in the position of being nearly 60, a senior captain, and trying to extend the retirement age in his country to bring it into line with others, and being blocked by selfish and shortsighted junior First Officers.
For what it's worth my career ended at age 55 because of this scenario.

skol
8th Jan 2006, 20:49
I get off my rest after 6 or 7 hours into a longhaul flight and most (not all) of the over 60's are asleep or having trouble staying awake. Most are there for the ride and not on top of the technical stuff because they know they are not going anywhere. Some of the performances I've seen from older pilots has been appalling and I ask myself how they're passing their checks. Unfortunately many delude themselves that the're onto it and a couple have told me that they have so much experience that it has to be shared. This is what I call the indispensible syndrome. Many like to tell the new guys "did you know I used to be a check captain" or something similar. I'm sure a couple are in the early stages of senility but tell me how a doctor diagnoses that in a 20 minute medical.
There needs to be a set retirement age and that's it for everyone.

Rainboe
8th Jan 2006, 20:52
Yup! How about 65?

DD777
8th Jan 2006, 22:02
I'm 40 years old and I am actively planning my financial future. I have to find a way to retire at 60, because there is no other way. You have to base your planning on given facts, you can't hope on future luck.
I agree that a lot of guys stay in good health with 60, but I know at least as much pilots who really are burnt out, not at their top anymore.
Dani
Dani, I can't agree enough. I am in the same situation agewise and have been waiting for a left seat for 12 years now. The situation where we are is changing to 63 and then 65 soon after. Now we are going to have to wait at least 5 possibly 8 more years!
How many new cars, new houses, new wives, and more bucks do we need to retire? When we all started, we all knew that we had to retire early and everyone should have made provision for that from the start. We all knew what we were getting ourselves into when we started. Flying is a thing done out of love. It was never meant to make money - if planned properly, money would be a by-product. If anyone wanted to make money, they should have chosen another profession!
By the way, there are plenty of "experienced" left seaters that I fly with regularly and admire them greatly for their operation, but in the same breath, some should have been retired by age 40 if today is anything to go by!
As long as we don't lose sight of why we do this wonderful thing, if its for cash its time to retire anyway!:ok:

Random Electron
8th Jan 2006, 22:21
Wind up. wind up! Angelopinto is just a wind up!

skol
8th Jan 2006, 22:31
Picture this:
you get out of your rest well into a 12/13 hr flight and in the RHS is an elderly man head tilted over virtually unconscious (some would argue incapacitated) dribbling out of the corner of his mouth as a new S/O is trying to dodge the CBs. Funny? Not to me, I see it every now and then. Is that the way you want to be remembered?
Occasionally I run into an S/O I flew with recently and we have a laugh about an F/O we did a flight with that was completely incompetent. It's not really that funny because it was and is a pathetic case.

Basil
8th Jan 2006, 23:05
JW411
<<I am not going to give him any either.>>

Aaaaa - that's not what you said to me at Benson a couple of years ago :D

Best foot forward
8th Jan 2006, 23:09
I'd be happy to retire at 55 or 60 and let someone younger get a job so long as they agree to pay for my retirement, its only fair since my taxes have paid for their health and education.

BlueEagle
9th Jan 2006, 00:11
Hand Flying, Dani and others. As recently as the 1970's in the UK the maximum age was 65 not 60! It was arbitrarily changed without discussion by a government minister. Many of us started our flying career expecting to work until we were 65 and then had five useful years chopped off for no good reason.
One major point that should be considered, of those eligible to continue to 65 how big a percentage do you think will actually take the option?.

Skol, saw some pretty dozy SOs and FOs during my time on long haul too!;)

touch_of_glass
9th Jan 2006, 01:12
I'm only 36, have been flying professionally for nearly 6 years and have 3000 odd hours.....feels like a lifetime already! I hope I don't have to go another 25-30 years! I think a lot of people cling on as long as they can because the pay is good (you earn more in your last 10 years than the first 20) and the pension provisions are increasingly bad. Highly extrapolated pay scales and the dreaded seniority list are tools that airlines use to keep pilots in their place and stop them from "carrier hopping" (the longer you stay, the harsher it is to leave) If a pilot can pass the medicals, checks etc then there should be no age limit, he/she is doing the job just as well as before, but airlines like to retire people prematurely so they can recruit new crew on lower salary, or even B or C scales. Going off on a slight tangent I know, but the entire career would be a better place to be if all salaries were the same for a particular rank within a particular company (and set at a sensible amount for a professional job). Fantasy I know, but new recruits would get be able to pay off their training debts a lot faster, have some cash for a quality of life and older pilots would not have to go on into their 60's "making hay while the sun is still shining" in order to get a better pension.

Captain Airclues
9th Jan 2006, 01:23
BlueEagle

The maximum age in the UK is 65, not 60. However, many airlines insist on either retirement or a move to the RHS because of restrictions in other countries.

Airclues

MungoP
9th Jan 2006, 03:47
Persoanlly I find it outrageous that an extremely capable and highly experienced pilot can be dumped simply because of a calendar date.... we have a 20,000 hrs American ex A330 ( plus just about everything else) capt flying with us who hit the magic number and was dumped.....he's as sharp mentally as a 40 year old and physically in better shape than many pilots 10 or more years younger.... the whole thing is ludicrous.... as for young pilots trying to get on the ladder....tough....we've all been there....and when the dark brown stuff comes into contact with the big whirly thing who would you rather be sitting next to.... the 20K hr senior capt or some little joker with a 'Frozen' ATPL who's only occupying the seat because the bean counters can get away with it and the CAA let them ?

Kopeloi
9th Jan 2006, 03:47
Ours must be the only occupation where these wannabes like you to leave that they will have your job. Same time their are refusing the tax payments to finance your early retirement. It will obviously take them some years to realize that aviation business is not an amusement park with interesting rides.

skol
9th Jan 2006, 04:08
I've been thinking about some of the reasons I've heard from the guys over 60 as to why they stay on:

1. I've got no money. (too many bad investments, wives or toys)

2. I've got nothing else to do and I get bored on leave. (no life)

3. The old lady will divorce me if I go home permanently.

4. I've got so much experience that I'm going to stay on and become a check and training F/O. (indispensible)

5. ITS MY RIGHT!!!!

6. Some or all of the above.

BlueEagle
9th Jan 2006, 04:39
Capt. Airclues - It may be 65 now but I can assure you that it was dropped to 60 sometime in the seventies and stayed there for a very long time. If the age is now 65 then only in fairly recent years have you been allowed to command a British registered aircraft above a fairly low weight, around 20,000kgs I think.

Kopeloi
9th Jan 2006, 05:44
Dear Skol,
It looks like you miss the point. If the retirement age is 65 that will be the age when one can start to receive pension. Not 5 years earlier. Your list of reasons has nothing to do with facts. In case you know how to receive the pension few years early please let us know.

handflying
9th Jan 2006, 06:25
Spot on skoll!!

Kopeloi:did you just now manage to count your money (with calculator) and found out you are short of it for another second residence (in which country=where is your mistress?)

H.Finn
9th Jan 2006, 07:40
Handflying, you are still missing the point. Whether I, Kopeloi or whoever else wants to keep flying until 65, it is none of anybody elses business. This is life, not a charity. We all have different reasons to choose to fly until 65, or retire at 52, if we so desire. If I want to have that second Ferrari it is something I'm entitled to, assuming I'm medically fit and pass the checkrides.
And yes, I was young and eager once, could not wait for the first proper job and did pay my dues. Today there are much much more jobs available for pilots than there were thirty or forty years ago.

stue
9th Jan 2006, 09:08
some little joker with a 'Frozen' ATPL ]
MungoP, Not many of us jokers are trying to boot you out of your job. Y whould i want to? as i said before, i dont want to pay for your retirement any longer than i have to.
Alot of us jokers just like flying, and as stated before, dont want to do it for the money. The money is a by-product of doing what we want to do. Just remember that you one day started out as a joker.
Lay-off with the insults mate, alot of us agree with you.

handflying
9th Jan 2006, 09:22
And yes, I was young and eager once, could not wait for the first proper job and did pay my dues. Today there are much much more jobs available for pilots than there were thirty or forty years ago.[/QUOTE]

Finn:

Just recognize (and it doesn't require a lot of common sense) that aviation has gone downhill and if you want to make career it is more difficult for many reasons: majors have gone bankrupt , 9/11, oil prices, you name it.

Yes you still can make career if you are ready to live in a suitcase or expatriate yourself for the rest of your life...well that is just what I would like future generations to avoid. I am sure most old guys made career in their own country and remained in the same company for 20 years. Nowadays it is luxury!!! And life suffers from it. I'd like to revert to the old situation even regardless of money!! That's why I am against flying till 65 even if I can't avoid you from doing it and yes IT'S YOUR RIGHT!!

Agree with stue "money is by-product of what we want to do".

Kopeloi
9th Jan 2006, 12:24
Handflying,
Just for your info, I have been flying and living out of my suitcase last 30 years as there was no jobs in my own country in that very time. Good luck for you and your colleagues and I hope that you will be able to live in your own home and work in a steady company. I wasn't lucky enough and therefore need to keep working on for my pension scheme. Would you really like to change seats with me?

handflying
9th Jan 2006, 13:03
I am not working in my country but in a "steady" company now (for what it's worth nowadays) and in the last 5 years I have been travelling allover to keep my job. As 60 is still the rule so far that's where I am planning to (financially wise).

I can't leave a tear for guys who have been working in a decent company or a major for the last 30 years and not having been able to save, plan to retire at 60 regardless of how many children, wives etc. they have. Sorry if your planning didn't work out the way you wanted, but 60 it was and has almost allways been.

Why would the rules need to be changed right now? Who are the greedy selfish people here, the senior cpts or the junior f/o's?

Aviation safety can go without 60+ers.

BenThere
9th Jan 2006, 14:53
For every lucky pilot who flew a wide-body for a major and retired with a six-figure pension that is still secure, saving a couple million along the way, there are a hundred who didn't step right into the premier job but have had their employers go belly-up, lost their pension, lost half or more of their savings in divorces, lost their medical, etc. etc.

If a crew member falls asleep while in the seat without coordinating with the other crewmember(s), that is a serious deficiency at any age and should be roundly debriefed and, if necessary, reported and documented for possible further action.

But the above are all chaff regarding the Age 60 rule. Basic principles of freedom and anti-discrimination, if applied, would return a rule which stated: Any pilot may operate so long as that pilot is able to maintain proficiency and successfully undergo required periodic physical evaluations. Period.

If your position on this issue is determined by how old you are or how you would personally benefit or be hurt by a rule change, then you should recuse yourself from the debate as you cannot be objective.

Good discussion, everyone.

Cheers,

fantom
9th Jan 2006, 14:59
"If your position on this issue is determined by how old you are or how you would personally benefit or be hurt by a rule change, then you should recuse yourself from the debate as you cannot be objective."

well that doesn't leave anyone else. :8

DD777
9th Jan 2006, 15:27
, if applied, would return a rule which stated: Any pilot may operate so long as that pilot is able to maintain proficiency and successfully undergo required periodic physical evaluations. Period.

I think that Mother Theresa would have made her medical to the last year of her life and how old did she go till. She would have had the ultimate unselfish answer for this wouldn't she?
Bollocks gents, if you want to fly longer than you planned, you either a.)screwed up your planning, or b.) didn't know how to plan in the first place. in either case, don't make your problems ours. Retire while you can still stay awake and remember your licence number at best.
:{

fantom
9th Jan 2006, 16:27
I just cannot resist a bit of bait...
"Bollocks gents, if you want to fly longer than you planned, you either a.)screwed up your planning, or b.) didn't know how to plan in the first place. in either case, don't make your problems ours. Retire while you can still stay awake and remember your licence number at best."
"gents" ? what would the Ladies say?
as for a) or b), the rules have just changed sunshine. now they have changed, it seems to me that a) or b) apply to you!
I look forward to discussing this matter traversing the pond with you until about October 2010. welcome to the real world. :8

Krueger
9th Jan 2006, 17:20
But the above are all chaff regarding the Age 60 rule. Basic principles of freedom and anti-discrimination, if applied, would return a rule which stated: Any pilot may operate so long as that pilot is able to maintain proficiency and successfully undergo required periodic physical evaluations. Period.

So , following this logic , there should be no 60 Age Rule neither a 65 Age Rule. So if you find some nice guys who pass you on your medical and flight checks, you're good to go till you die.:suspect:


Check Six Krueger...

Luke SkyToddler
9th Jan 2006, 17:38
Seems like discrimination to me, to have to have compulsory retirement ages at all?

All you people quoting examples of good vs bad old vs young pilots that you have known, are kind of missing the point. We all know there are some 40 year old chain-smoking lard-eating clogged-arteries bored disinterested lazy useless permanent-RHS-warming idle gits out there, and there are also 70- and 80- + year olds who are still sharp as tacks, running marathons, dispensing priceless training and advice and showing the rest of us mere mortals how it should be done (remember Bob Hoover anyone)?

We are already the most stringently assessed and harshly tested profession on the planet. If a pilot is good enough to keep on passing the non stop assault of medicals and proficiency checks, then it seems to me that '65' is just as much of a cruel and arbitrary number to remove someone's passion and their livelihood, as '60'.

I love doing this job, and if some bunch of Brussels politicians want to stop me doing it just because I've reached some specific number of years then they can all bite me. :ok:

beamer
9th Jan 2006, 17:46
Godforbid who wants to go on that long !

foxmoth
9th Jan 2006, 18:45
There seems to be a lot of bleating on about how bad the job situation is for newcomers, looking back I can think of many periods when jobs were harder to come by than now. For those that go on about this and say "if you can't afford to retire at 60 it is your own fault" I wonder how many have lost their job due to the company going broke and had to start again at the bottom of a new seniority list - possibly having spent some time unemployed.
Yes some of us might need to work beyond 60 and not because we are paying for a new Ferrari!
I hope those bleating about the possible retirement age increase do not end up in this situation and can afford to retire early:p

handflying
9th Jan 2006, 19:05
Quote:
I wonder how many have lost their job due to the company going broke and had to start again at the bottom of a new seniority list - possibly having spent some time unemployed.

Foxmoth:

I know many more 200 hr pilots with a frozen ATPL licence whose families paid around 100 000 USD for training and never even made it to an aviation job!! They had to convert themselves to other jobs cause couldn't maintain their licence!!

Ooh how long were you maybe out of a job? (because you didn't wanna go middle or far east probably maybe because you have a family which I completely understand!!) So you have a life? Good for you!!

How low were you on the seniority list?? What the hell do you care if you are cpt earning decent money!! You wanna be another chief pilot immediately after losing your previous job? Go away!

(Typical 12 hr flight as cpt:sleep 6 hrs-eat 2hrs-try to convince f/o how smart you are 1 hr-try to seduce purser 1 hr and maybe work 2...)

There is a time to come and a time to go...maybe till 62 but not 65...no good for nobody...

Sailor Vee
9th Jan 2006, 19:54
DD777we all knew that we had to retire early and everyone should have made provision for that from the start.
Never heard of divorce? It has been queried here 'how many wives?', well only one ex can seriously screw any planning you may have made, but if that hasn't happened to you yet, don't come back here and bleat if it does!
handflyingHow low were you on the seniority list?? What the hell do you care if you are cpt earning decent money!! You wanna be another chief pilot immediately after losing your previous job? Go away!
You can end up fairly near the bottom of the F/O list, maybe gaining a couple of years for experience. Then you are in the same position as a 'newcomer' and have to wait your turn for the jump across the flight deck. You may even have a big mortgage and kids in higher education/university, most of the 'newcomers' won't be in that position, how do you save for your retirement then?

Dani
9th Jan 2006, 19:59
Most of the "pro senior league" above seems to worry about the magical number 60. If it goes up to 65, it's still a magical number, and some of you will still fight against. Where would you end? 100? Give me a break! You will always find an exeptional guy (who isn't necessarily you) who is still fit with XX years.

And to those who say there shouldn't be any limit: Do you really believe that it's yourself who can decide if you are good enough? Then we should all sign our base check form ourselves, right? You have no medical knowledge. So someone else has to do it for you. And everyone of you knows that medical check-ups are sometimes, how should I say, very friendly conversations with an old buddy...

By the way: I know that national pension schemes start at 65. That's why you need additional insurance, in Switzerland called Bridge Insurance. If you don't get it from your employer you need to do it on the open market by yourself. It's part of your salary. You might have to save a pinte per day!

Dani

DD777
9th Jan 2006, 20:03
now they have changed, it seems to me that a) or b) apply to you!
I look forward to discussing this matter traversing the pond with you until about October 2010. welcome to the real world. :8
Fantom, thanks for taking the bait...

By the way, explain again to me how the rules a) or b) apply to me ?

I also "look forward to discussing this matter traversing the pond with you until about October 2010"....hope you're awake though.:ok:

H.Finn
9th Jan 2006, 20:15
Handflying, you are blaming pilots who are willing to work until 65 for bad planning of their economies. Likewise, a kid whose famlily has paid 100K for the said kid's ATPL, is guilty of bad choice of career, if he can't find a job as pilot. 911 or not, there still are a lot more job opportunities for pilots today than there were decades ago. That is, if you are willing to start from bottom and work your way up.
65 is indeed a magical number, because in several countries that is the age when you are entitled to be paid a pension. Unless you have made financial arrangements of your own, you'll get nothing between the time you choose to quit and the day you reach that magical age. Several reasons for not being able to make those arrangenments have been given on this thread already, many or most of them beyond the individual's own control.
Dani, I don't imply that I am myself able to decide that I'm good enough for my job. That is exactly why we have medical checks, sim checks, line checks etc. I for one do not have a buddy to chat with as a doctor. And you say "if it goes up to 65". FYI it already has gone up there, at least in most of the JAA world, so you are too late.

Again: how could it be anybody else's business when an individual decides to quit? Just wait, young fellows, you'll be 40, 50 and 60 sooner than you realise.

skol
9th Jan 2006, 20:45
There was some talk about 3 years ago whether the FAA was extending the retiring age past 60. I wrote to FAA HQ in Oklahoma City and asked what the story was. The answer I got was an absolute and emphatic-no.

ZQA297/30
9th Jan 2006, 21:43
Why all this fuss over the age of the pilot, surely the question is whether we need pilots at all? :confused:
Since the technology is already available to fly from A to B totally automatically (or even the planets for that matter), the age of the man watching the lights flash is really of no consequence, if he falls asleep or dies, the automation is going to do the job anyway.
The new job market is in computer minders,- you are all already 5 years behind the new trend, pilots are irrelevant. ;)

boeingdream787
9th Jan 2006, 23:25
ZQA......me thinks u've been spending too many hours doing the boeing flight simulator on ur PC.Now give ur ass a rest and smell the roses.This is the REAL world my friend and not your home puter where u can "reset" everytime things get outta control!! As long as theres flying machines....theres gonna be the boys who fly em.And THATS here to stay my friend.Moreso......those boys can now be 65......:} . Cheers matey......:cool:

Rainboe
9th Jan 2006, 23:33
Are there really still people like that? Just watched the Sioux City DC10 on TV, one of the most desperate and heroic human aviation acts ever. The numerous other times a year when systems break down and people survive because humans take over.......ZQA....just shut up!

skol
9th Jan 2006, 23:52
All you guys planning to fly to ripe old age need to bear in mind your mortality. Some of the guys I've known haven't made it to 65.
You fall over dead or acquire a terminal disease and not long after they put you in a wooden box.
Some workshy opportunist moves in with your Mrs. because she's lonely and not long after that he's helping himself to your hard earned bank balance. The kids are extolling your virtues and telling each other what a great late dad you were as they're on their way to the nearest Jaguar dealership.
A little fanciful maybe, but I'm sure you get the message.

Kopeloi
10th Jan 2006, 00:30
Now you start to approach the real reasons. That's why we need to keep working!

ZQA297/30
10th Jan 2006, 00:50
Skol, in my casual observation, admittedly only a relatively small group averaging about 200 pilots and by no means scientific, there have been noticeably more "sudden" licence losses in the under 50 age group than there have been in the over 50 age group. The over 50 group has had several instances of cancers, but not much else.
The under 50s had 3 fatal heart attacks, a quad bypass, a cancer, 2 diabeties, and a couple of miscellaneous (eg psychological, and neurological). I exclude loss of licence/life due to motor accidents.
My rather unscientific conclusion was that by the time you are 50 you have survived to a point where gradual decline is more likely to take you out than a sudden event.
As someone else said, this discussion is not really about age and ability but promotion/dollars and the "right" to rapid progress to left seat.
I am wondering whether corporations can now expect pressure on CEOs to move out, because many of the upwardly mobile execs are finding their upward progress is too slow? :ooh:

fmgc
10th Jan 2006, 01:02
I am wondering whether corporations can now expect pressure on CEOs to move out, because many of the upwardly mobile execs are finding their upward progress is too slow?

This is exactly my argument, it is ludicrous to argue that people should retire to make way for the youngsters, what other profession does it?

And many people go on flying (often in the RHS) not because they need the money but simply because they want to, and that is their given right to do so.

Margarita
10th Jan 2006, 01:26
Fmgc,
These kind of "birthright chargers" already changed the aviation for ever by putting airlines out of business through their unions. Now when the low cost operators took over they need to attact them about their policies. This 60/65 doesn't change anything but gives a good chance for them to make a lot of noise and confusion, again.
Maybe next their will demand that every man and women must be able to fly as captain 2-3 years if they so demand and then start to receive unemployment benefits for the rest of their life.
Well, I go sailing!

Capt Claret
10th Jan 2006, 02:21
I'm stunned at how many people presume that they can tell another when and why they should retire, or, how they should have managed their financial life, or, cast wild assertions as to why some one wants to work beyon a given age and then offer criticism of that person's reasons.

Why I want to work as long as I can is my business and no one has the right to judge my reason. Similarly I won't judge their reasons for their choices or desires.

On the other hand, if people like ANGELOPINTO, or anyone over 25 were to retire now, it would allow aspiring student pilots to break into the industry. Perhaps they should do that!

Flying Guy
10th Jan 2006, 02:57
It is interesting that many young stallions on this thread seem to feel they deserve command simply because they have chosen flying as a profession. They are the ones who want the more experienced guys to be dismissed so they can advance to the left seat. They feel they "deserve" it.

We started this profession to be a PILOT. If you are a pilot, congratulations. If you work hard, pay attention, show wisdom and maturity, then you might have an opportunity to fly in the left seat - not because someone more qualified and experienced than you has been forced to retire by an age limit.

By the way, I am 62 and flying left seat on a Jumbo. I am at top of my game in the airplane. I am having a blast, love doing it, and by God I earned it after more than 40 years of study, passing checks, and staying fit. You want me to retire after all that time and effort because you "deserve" to have my job? How long have YOU been paying your dues? Five or ten years?

Baloney!

skol
10th Jan 2006, 03:38
Flying Guy,
How do you occupy the LHS over 60 in US airspace?

As I mentioned in one of my previous post I have flown with a couple of elderly gentlemen who I am sure are in the early stages of senility. On one of my recent medicals I asked the doctor how they are going to cope with elderly pilots and detect mental deterioration for example. I was told that he had no way of detecting it in a short space of a medical and basically it was up to me to report it.

Lucky me.

Flying Guy
10th Jan 2006, 07:20
Dear Skol,

I fly overseas, not in the USA. Hopefully the USA will come in line with the rest of the world and raise the age there to 65. Regards the "early stages of senility," I am not a Doctor and I assume, nor are you. I have seen a lot of beginning FO's though that have a hard time remembering and reading back a complicated clearance in a busy environment like Amsterdam or Frankfurt, (as did I when I was at that stage of flying.)

Now then err..., what were we talking about??????

Devils Advocate
10th Jan 2006, 08:05
Flying Guy - touché & keep on truckin' mate ! :ok:

Captain Mercurius
10th Jan 2006, 08:51
Angelo Pinto,

I am baffled!

So, in your opinion your job has been robbed by “old pilots” insisting to work until 65.
And they should be forced to retire to give place for people like you to take place.

I wish to work until 65, firstly because I need to work until this age as a professional pilot.

And more, I do intend to still flying even after the retirement age, and the main reason is that I do love to fly; I dedicated my entire life to be near airplanes.

It is sad if you have a license to fly , because it is required a lot more to place airplanes in the sky full of people, it requires integrity and honesty!

The Professional Pilot profession it is suffering the effects of “grabbers and opportunists” like you who the only think they wish is to fill their pockets and ego.:}

Mercurius

Rainboe
10th Jan 2006, 11:29
Well said Capt Claret and Flying Guy! What these people are missing the point of is it's going to become their right,by law. They won't have to make excuses to keep working. It's nothing to do with bad pensions/bad marriages/bad investment, it's a legal age thing which will apply to everybody. Premature retirement is not going to be forced on people for age reasons, and it will quite rightly be legal. Funny how pilots are supposed to go senile over 60, yet surgeons, lawyers etc are at their peak then!

I agree with the point that if some of these aspiring wannabees would 'retire' from the professsion before wasting all that expense getting started, it would certainly ease up the pressure on their juniors following! The senior experienced people would then be able to give the job the benefit of their experience!

Taildragger67
10th Jan 2006, 12:13
Flying Guy,

I'll fly with you any day.

There's an old saying:

there are old pilots,
there are bold pilots,
but there are very few old, bold pilots.

The wisdom being that some of the boldies should learn from some of the oldies. A bit more wisdom in the skies? Can't see the problem.

aviate1138
10th Jan 2006, 12:55
Why not till the medical bods say "no more" I wonder how many would have made it to the late [sadly missed] Ray Hanna's 77 years and still flying single seat Warbirds?
Met a BA retiree recently, who is in his 60th year, ex 747-400 Senior Captain who claimed he had no money and a small pension to live on! Is
that really true or a smokescreen for the ex-wife?
Life's a bitch and then you die!
Aviate 1138 :)
"I spend my money on aircraft, cars, booze and women - the rest I just waste."

funfly
10th Jan 2006, 16:42
I am not a professional pilot but a PPL. However I am well over 65 and have only just decided to stop running my own business (sold it) and am now being called on for consultancy work. Also married again 3 years ago and nothing amiss in that department (maybe to the surprise of the youngsters;) )
It's not about age, it's about ability - we all vary in our capabilities and abilities. The decision when we stop should be made, iether by ourselves or by experts (medics etc.) based on that.
People get 'old' at different ages:hmm:

Dani
10th Jan 2006, 17:56
Very well said, funfly, it's about ability... - and about risk assessment! Imagine a curve, the incident rate per 1000 flight hours caused by pilot incapacitation. I rely on the thesis that this curve is inclining by age. Maybe there are some physicians here who can proof or decline this theory. At a certain point, the national air authorities had to draw the line, when it becomes unwise to let them fly, because you put life at risk. It became standard that this line was 60, some airline even had it on 55. So now it should be 65, ok, the physicians have to know that. It might be possible that this curve is less inclined lately because people live longer and more healthy. But there is certainly a line, and you can wail and whine as long as you want: It's not you who decides. Period.

Gunship
10th Jan 2006, 18:40
Age discrimination is one thing but how can a company decrease the ex-Captain's salary when he unwilfully warms the right seat just because France has a problem with them golden oldies flies over their occupied territory :E

I-FORD
10th Jan 2006, 20:23
Quite frankly I'm fed up of providing links to the numerous studies (ICAO, FAA, CAMI) that show no relation between age and accidents in aviation.
I think that all the supporters of the opposite can do their homework and perform their own researches before posting unsupported theories.
They could start here: http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/age60/media/age60_1.pdf
and here: www.icao.int/ICDB/HTML/English/Representative%20Bodies/Air%20Navigation%20Commission/Working%20Papers%20by%20Year/2004/AN.2004.WP.7982.EN/AN.2004.WP.7982.APPC.EN.HTM
Age limits have nothing to do with safety, everything with social and financial issues.
I (being financially able and not greedy) am in the position of being able to stop working tomorrow (I'm 46).
Nevertheless I love flying big planes and would like to continue doing it until able to pass medicals and proficency checks.
I don't like anybody telling me I have to stop doing what I like just because somebodyelse wants to take my position.
Please go and find your own place without trying to steal mine.

handflying
10th Jan 2006, 20:59
[QUOTE=Flying Guy]It is interesting that many young stallions on this thread seem to feel they deserve command simply because they have chosen flying as a profession. They are the ones who want the more experienced guys to be dismissed so they can advance to the left seat. They feel they "deserve" it.

We started this profession to be a PILOT. If you are a pilot, congratulations. If you work hard, pay attention, show wisdom and maturity, then you might have an opportunity to fly in the left seat - not because someone more qualified and experienced than you has been forced to retire by an age limit.

By the way, I am 62 and flying left seat on a Jumbo. I am at top of my game in the airplane. I am having a blast, love doing it, and by God I earned it after more than 40 years of study, passing checks, and staying fit. You want me to retire after all that time and effort because you "deserve" to have my job? How long have YOU been paying your dues? Five or ten years?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Response:
Bunch of old hypocrits:how many hours did you have when you were proposed a LH seat? You know that since 9/11 there are a lot of f/o that have more then 10000 hrs and never have been given an opportunity for command and why???Not because they are not good, but because their company just got bankrupt when they were doing the upgrade course!!Bunch of selfish old idiots!!Ever paid for a type-rating?? No it didn't exist 20 years ago!! Yes there are jobs around...where:emirates, etihad, singapour, what if I don't wanna go there because I have a life, family, friends where I work and my actual company isn't going to go bankrupt very soon now.

So who has paid their dues??? The old guys have had the good times all their life and now they want even more...NO way 65!

That is for the upgrade subject, now I allready talked about the 200 hr pilot that couldn't get a job...bad choice of career according to H.Finn...not true because he can still manage maybe to hold his licence for another year financially wise...unless the rules change like this one moving from 60 to 65...and that wasn't neither in his hands when he started!! So if you move you give everybody the same chances you've had guys!! Divorces allready existed 20 years ago!! No mercy...it is life...not charity like you guys can say so well!!

Passed times were better in aviation then they were now H.Finn. You seem to have been working in only 1 major company all your life (good for you!!) but don' tell me you need the money. Because it is MORE luxury you need and we (younger guys)'d like thinking going back to good old times of aviation: it is no more type-ratings to be paid by yourself, no more having to expatriate yourself all your life to find a job, etc...

All this is possible...if you guys give in!

Captain Airclues
10th Jan 2006, 21:16
Could somebody please explain exactly which law is being changed. The JAA rules already allow pilots to fly in either seat until they are 65. Pilots in the UK are forced to change seats because they generally have to fly over countries like France, which do not follow the JAA rules. So what is the rule change that is being refered to?

BTW, after reading handflyings post, is anyone else beginning to regret all the time and effort spent helping the many wannabes to get their first foot on the ladder?

Airclues

H.Finn
10th Jan 2006, 21:19
Handflying, you're being pathetic. That's all I can say. How do you know I've only held one job in one major company for all my life? That's not true.
Now that the rules have relaxed, you'll also have a chance to work longer. Keep yourself in good shape and enjoy it. That is what I intend to do.

P.S. Etihad did not exist 20 years ago. And I would have liked to go to Singapore at one stage of my life, but it just didn't work out, OK? That's life.

Baron rouge
10th Jan 2006, 21:41
Captain airclues, the rules beeing changed are in fact ICAO rules : from september 2006 if the ICAO concil accept and vote it the new rule will be:

1 crew member over 60 and less than 65 to the condition that the other crew member is less than 60... and the crew member above 60 could be either Captain or first officer. it is all explained in correct english on the ICAO website.

This way, france will be in no position to refuse overfly of it's territoty.

As for the youg guys wanting to put the older out of buiseness, they are pathetic and I sincerly hope they will never make it , even to the right seat, they do not deserve it.

handflying
10th Jan 2006, 21:49
BTW, after reading handflyings post, is anyone else beginning to regret all the time and effort spent helping the many wannabes to get their first foot on the ladder?

We all thank someone to get their first foot on the ladder!! How did you get there? By God your talents!!!

H.Finn:

I enjoy it, keep in good shape (trying) but am just against the principle moving it for 5 years all at the sudden. I could maybe agree gradually, like for now 62 and in 10 years maybe 65 if studies can show safety etc? Anyway I am working financially wise to 60, whichever happens. It is not selfish but principle, fair.

What paying type-rating concerns never had any answer no?? What about 20 years ago? Have we moved forwards or backwards?

What familylife concerns: I still think family IS a big value and moving to whichever country can be done with wife and children but not with brothers, sisters, parents, etc. So there I don't think neither we have moved forward but rather backwards.

Where HAS progress been made in aviation the last 20 years? This new rule??? I keep big doubts!

handflying
10th Jan 2006, 22:06
I agree with the point that if some of these aspiring wannabees would 'retire' from the professsion before wasting all that expense getting started, it would certainly ease up the pressure on their juniors following! The senior experienced people would then be able to give the job the benefit of their experience!

Rainboe:

Negative because you wouldn't be able to sleep anymore 3/4 of the flight and I don't wanna think how you'd like in that case...

funfly
10th Jan 2006, 22:41
The young have always had this attitude to their elders and betters.
"Move over you old fart - we are on our way up".

Jumbo Driver
10th Jan 2006, 23:12
The young have always had this attitude to their elders and betters.
"Move over you old fart - we are on our way up".
Yes indeed - and when they have got the old farts jobs they become just as resistant to being forcibly retired by the next group of self-interested upstarts snapping at their heels - and so it goes on ...
;)

Capt Claret
10th Jan 2006, 23:35
Handflying, your tone puts me in mind of a spoilt child who squarks to get their own way, and I have little doubt that you'll be squarking louder when you're older and have youngsters telling you that you should retire to let them have a go. :(

Margarita
10th Jan 2006, 23:53
Handflying,
Go and change the job! Pressure like that can't be good for you.

handflying
11th Jan 2006, 00:02
No argument of a relative young guy would stand against the "5 year golden handshake dollarbill" the older guy just sees on the other side of the fence!!
You deserve it, younger people not (they haven't paid their dues)

Maybe younger, as the same rule will apply to us or even worse later 70 (oh no...!!), we can have a more objective point of view about this as the dollars are a buy-product and we can think for the benefit of aviation in general...

Anyway, sorry you will still have to do with younger blokes and good luck with your medicals.

Margarita
11th Jan 2006, 00:16
That's better, just keep waiting your turn! Think the way that some 100 years ago folks didn't even live up to 65. You may be able to keep flying easily until 70! And then you are talking big money...

BlueEagle
11th Jan 2006, 00:25
Dani - A number of studies into the older pilot's health have been conducted, one by a well known Specialist in Aviation Medicine who works in London.
I think you will find that the danger period for heart problems is between the ages of 48 and 58 so that 'line' you talk about isn't going to keep going up, is it?

and handflying, try to get it into your head that the age 60 rule doesn't go back to the dark ages, only about thirty years!;)

skol
11th Jan 2006, 04:10
Flying Guy,
If you are as you say you are and don't fly in US, Japanese, or French airspace (including Tahiti OCA) and can't divert enroute or at destination through this airspace:
1. You operate an extremely limited route structure or:
2. You operate extremely short range 747s.

MungoP
11th Jan 2006, 06:21
Fortunately I still have many years ahead of me but I would hate to think that I'm going to be booted out simply because of a date in my passport....
Some people are old at 35...others run marathons when into their 70's...
many of the the post war generation are physically a world apart from the previous generation for a variety of reasons involving medical care, diet and health awareness.
If a pilot is making the grade down-line and on base checks why the concern that someone is 60 yrs of age.... If their is real concern regarding physical health ( currently not born out by statistics ) then additional tests can easily be implemented such as stress ecg's. If the French are so concerned about air safety they would be better off targeting the problem of their pilots and ATC using the French language in busy international airspace. But let's not allow this to become yet another French bashing thread...

Dani
11th Jan 2006, 06:25
I-FORD, the FAA study you cite here says (just as an example): While less concerned about sudden incapacitation, OTA
(1990) was concerned about the effects of subtle age-related changes in cognitive abilities
that could have a significant influence on pilot performance.

I agree that after lifting the 60-years-ban, there will not fall hundreds of aircraft from the skies, but you and me, as everyone else, know, that with age, you are not as good anymore, your mind, your eyes, your whole body. Noone can deny it (except the pilots who still feel they are equal with gods).

I agree that one can discuss where this age limit has to lie and where we want to accept a certain risk, but there has to be a limit. I still think that 60 is a good one, since we have more responsibility than a clerk or some other "down-to-earth-employee". The above cited study always argues that "pilots have no more age degrading than other proffessions". Nobody doubts that, what a complete nonsense. But every failure in the air may lead to a dangerous situation.

Dani

NiteKos
11th Jan 2006, 07:14
Handfly after 40 years in the business two things come to mind.

Look after Number 1
Never expect to hear the words.. "After you"

You have a lot to learn, when the law changes nobody approaching 60 will give a toss about your own self interest. Life just aint fair, learn to live with it.

Baron rouge
11th Jan 2006, 07:21
If the French are so concerned about air safety they would be better off targeting the problem of their pilots and ATC using the French language in busy international airspace.

There has never been a concern for air safety in the French law to limit pilots flying after 60.
The real reason behind the law was to solve a seniority problem between AF and IT and to make the French Pilots pension fund pay for the redundancy of IT pilots imposed by AF pilots union. Air safety... what a laugh !!!

captcat
11th Jan 2006, 07:31
Dani
I am a Cabin Attentand and in my whole career I had 2 pilots incapacitations. One was 36. The other 30.

foxmoth
11th Jan 2006, 08:03
as everyone else, know, that with age, you are not as good anymore, your mind, your eyes, your whole body. Noone can deny it


This is something that has been looked at many times and it depends what you mean by "not as good", no you are not as fast as the younger people, but it has been shown that this is often compensated for by the greater level of experience - and one thing in modern Airliners is to take things steadily and not rush at things.

alghaita ganga
11th Jan 2006, 09:10
I cannot believe that some of these younger pilots can be so selfish either. Many of the posters here are from UK where the age is 65 to receive state pension, and government is talking of increasing it to 67. Most of the pilot I know who have had medical problem have had them between 40 and 50 years. The only things that should decide when a pilot have to retire is either when he decides (so if he is lucky and has made enough by 50 he can go then) or if he cannot any more pass medicals or proficiency checks. In Nigeria the medical for over 60 even has pilots to do stress ecg every year. I do training and I have yet to find any pilot over 60 who is not very proficient, they have to be good to have been around that long. As for falling asleep that is laughable - it is the younger pilot I have observed to have difficulty to stay awake because they are often out 'playing', not like we 'old fart' who get our good rest most nights.

Sleeve Wing
11th Jan 2006, 11:50
I'm one that had to retire at 60. Knowing this, I topped up my pension pot for a number of years with extra payments (foregoing fancy holidays and fancy new cars along the way) and by renewing lapsed ratings a couple of years before the blow fell.
Why did I do this ? Because I'd wanted to fly for as long as I can remember and I didn't want to stop then just because some misconstrued law said I had to.
Now, at 67, I still teach, examine and regularly pull plus 7 and minus 3 and I'm having a ball. And I don't intend to stop yet just.

The difference between Handflying and myself is that I enjoy flying and it doesn't end with the airline job. My flying has been military, commercial instructing, airline ( 22 years command) and back to instructing again.

My one relief at being out of the airline business is that I don't have to fly with misfits like Handfly any more.
Listening to such distractions over a number of sectors are likely to cause more accidents than any 60+ year old skipper.

DryV1
11th Jan 2006, 14:44
Some of the contributors to this thread should remember that if you check through any pilot crewroom you will find a multitude of different progressions through the profession.
Some started late,some after extensive military service ,some even spent their whole working life with one airline and some worked their way up from the bottom.
Just learn to work within the rules as they are today,lobby to change them if you wish,but don't blame anybody else for your lack of progression.
You will get your chance one day if you work hard and don't get up peoples noses!
Above all enjoy the job, where ever you are on the seniority list, it really is the best.
Happy flying

Flying Guy
11th Jan 2006, 19:26
Dear Capt Claret,

Your comment,

"Handflying, your tone puts me in mind of a spoilt child who squawks to get their own way, and I have little doubt that you'll be squawking louder when you're older and have youngsters telling you that you should retire to let them have a go."

I couldn't have said it better.

Skol, you seem to doubt my credentials. Please go to the web site (my-emergency-information.com) or book, Ghauri's Sword I am advertising here at PPRUNE. You will find my bio there. But to answer your question directly, I currently fly all over the world except over the US and my airplanes are long haul 747-200s. My flights include Europe to Asia, Africa to the former USSR, and all points in between. Somehow, in spite of my senility at age 62, I seem to manage a good airplane and most of the FO's I fly with are respectful and eager to learn. I ride a bicycle 7 miles every day I am home, averaging 15 - 16 miles per hour. I wonder if you are in as good a shape as I am?

flown-it
11th Jan 2006, 20:32
I can't find the thread running last year which visited this topic ad naseum.It's all been said before but just to add realism to the kick-em -out corp here is my story...and I know hundreds are like me.
I knew when at age 42 I got my airline seat that in 18 years I would have to hang it up. Since this was a second career change I had already made plans via a private portable pension.
At age 57 I got the news that my financial advisor had cocked up my pension and the well known British firm was washing their hands of it. Oh sh$t at least I've got my 18 year pension coming in 2004. Think again. 2 days prior to my 59th the airline succeeded in terminating our pension. Now I get a stipend from the quasi government organisation set up to protect mill workers but not airline pilots. So with teenagers to educate and a pension 60% less than promised I was out on the street. At almost 62, I'm fit, I'm well and I occasionally fly right seat in a VERY big and VERY expensive jet but I'm not where I should be.... the left seat of an airliner.
Finally I'm not bitching. I have a full time job in the aviation industry and I'll survive. It just burns me that those whining the loudest will be able to fly to a normal pension age.

stue
11th Jan 2006, 20:34
Flying Guy,

7 Miles a day? thats good! im 21 and only manage to do about 5 and then abit of swimming each day. I take my hat off to you sir!:ok:

I think that DryV1 has summed it up though. Not every young pilot wants to take the place of a 60 year old just because of their age. Life is tough, and you have to work hard and then you will get what you want. And thats the reason why alot of you have enjoyed your careers so much, you have obviously worked at it so hard and now your at the top. Well done to you! Im at the bottom so far, but i hope that one day i will be somewere further up the career ladder than i am now. But i dont want to make you all redundant just bacause of your age, you all have alot of experience behind you which takes time to get. And people can learn from your experience.

Anyways, happy flying all, untill whenever you decide to give it up!:ok:

JW411
11th Jan 2006, 20:34
On the subject of youngsters falling asleep, I had one manage it between the outer marker and 500 feet on finals and another managed to nod off halfway through the SID he was supposed to be flying!

ukwannabe
11th Jan 2006, 20:44
I'm sorry but are we not all missing the point? You plan your retirement with the best information available to you, and within you own personal means. I have a buddy who for Xmas received a seven figure bonus from the city, good for him, but it doesn't mean we should all run to our chief pilot for a bumper end of year bonus.
Experience is needed in this profession, and those who can keep up with the pace until 65 should be welcomed with open arms.

Mini mums
11th Jan 2006, 22:33
I don't usually like this sort of thing, but on this occasion I think it's an interesting thought:
A dedicated shop steward was at a convention in Las Vegas and decided to check out the local brothels.
When he got to the first one, he asked the madam, "Is this a union house?"
"No, I'm sorry, it isn't" , said the madam.
"Well, if I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?" "The house gets $80 and the girl gets $20."
Mightily offended at such unfair dealings, the man stomped off down the street in search of a more equitable shop.
At the second one, he asked the madam, "Is this a union house?"
"No, I'm sorry, it isn't" , said the madam.
"If I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?"
"The house gets $80 and the girl gets $20."
Again offended, the man stomped off down the street in search of a more equitable shop. His search continued until he finally reached a brothel where the madam said, "Why yes, this is a union house."
"And if I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?"
"The girls get $80 and the house gets $20."
"That’s more like it!", the man said. He looked around the room and pointed to a stunningly attractive redhead. "I'd like her for the night."
"I'm sure you would, sir", said the madam, gesturing to a fat woman in her fifties in the corner, "but Ethel here is most senior."
Just because you started first doesn't mean you're the most suitable for command (or for a shag for that matter!);)
your contract says retire at 55 - go at 55, your contract say retire at 60 go at sixty. nothing in your contract, work till you want.
How can I put this without stirring up too stronger feelings . . . for every day you work extra, your stopping someone elses career - imagine if someone was doing that to you? Care? Perhaps you should.
Thankfully, most of us are too professional to take these feelings onto the flightdeck.

daidalos
11th Jan 2006, 23:13
Mini mums,
It is really interesting the comparison of our profession with a brothel and all. And maybe we can agree that the companies are brothels. If you want to feel like a whore please go ahead, do it! It is your privilege. I am not, though, and I think most of us in here are not.
Now for the serious part.
The contract says you have a certain amount due every month as a salary. Do you mean that you will not try to increase this amount for the remaining of your flying days?
Or this is your privilege, but not mine to negotiate a change of my/our/your retirement?
Very interesting …
:rolleyes:

foxmoth
11th Jan 2006, 23:36
for every day you work extra, your stopping someone elses career

True - until they get to 60, then you are allowing them the extra 5 years that you have already negotiated. If they are lucky enough to have joined the right company that has not gone out of business,gives them a good pension and the terrorists have not had a succesful attack that puts them out of a job or keeps them in the RH seat anyway they can then choose to retire early if that suits them. I think the extra time flying should well compensate for a liitle longer in the RH seat - especially if they took it up for the right reason - i.e. that they enjoy flying!:rolleyes:

Capt Claret
12th Jan 2006, 00:14
mini mums,

you said, How can I put this without stirring up too stronger feelings . . . for every day you work extra, your stopping someone elses career - imagine if someone was doing that to you? Care? Perhaps you should.

So what you're saying is that a pilot who works hard to succeed is not stopping another's carreer until the magical and arbitrary day after supposed retirement.

To take your argument about stopping some one elses career to its logical conclusion, if there is a finite number of pilots needed worldwide then every employed pilot is stopping some wannabes career. Therefore all currently employed pilots should retire to let all the wannabes get a job. Then, when the wannabes get the job they'll be stopping some one elses career, so they should all retire to let the next lot of wannabes get a job, and so on.

What a load of toss! :yuk:

You also sort of asked, care? No I don't care. When I started flying 20 years ago there were more pilots than jobs. Now there are more pilots than jobs. I wasn't owed a job. I kept chasing elusive jobs until I got one. I've worked hard at my career, and I don't owe you or any other wannabe a go at my job, until I no longer want it, or I'm no longer able to do it to a satisfctory standard.

As for the young turks who allude to us oldies being past it because we mightn't have the reflexes of youth, I have two words of wisdom for you.

One day you too will be old and not young.
When I was young, about 18, I was amazed at how stuipid my father was. He didn't know anything. By the time I was 23 I was even more amazed at how much he had learned!

I-FORD
12th Jan 2006, 12:56
Dani,
the links I provided are just the beginning for a comprehensive study.
The extract you cited is from an annotated bibliography, most of wich is controversial, by the way the final report of the study based in part on that bibliography (Hilton Study, CAMI, FAA sposored) says this:

"Hilton Systems replicated and extended analyses from previous studies, including statistical analyses. The report describes outcomes from analyses conducted to answer a series of questions examining the relationship between age and accident rates for pilots holding Class I, Class II and Class III medical certificates. Recent and total flight time are utilized as a measure of risk exposure. The results present a converging body of evidence which fail to support a hypothesis that accident rates increase at or about the age of 60 years."

See also:

DOT/FAA/AM 94/22
TITLE: Age 60 Rule Research, Part III: Consolidated Database Experiments Final Report, ADA286247
AUTHORS: Kay, E.J., Harris, R.M., Voros, R.S., Hillman, D.J., Hyland, D.T., and Deimler, J.D.

Coleman Myers
12th Jan 2006, 17:23
Someone has clearly never had a flame out in a first generation jet and had to call upon the dinosaur to the left to save his puckered up bu*t ... Captains of the third age deserve the homage and respect that befits their experience ..:cool:

SMALP
12th Jan 2006, 18:05
hi, the real fact is that the industry,the system doesn't care of the newbees getting their seat or f/o's their upgrade. The truth is that the money it's over. They want us to keep pulling and pushing the stick on and on, and so paying taxes, because they don't have the money for our pensions.
The real heaven would be being able to retire at 50, with the pension as of 70, healthy like at 20!!!!:p

MPH
12th Jan 2006, 18:20
MINI MUMS: On that line of thought, you might well end up in a "brothrel'. Not only contracts, salaries, rules and regulations but, also 'labour agreements, change or are redefined ! Yes, a lot of us did sign an agreement. It never mentioned for 'ever'!!! Times change and by the way, the place you mentioned are now called 'Houses of leisure'!:p

Empty Cruise
12th Jan 2006, 19:27
OK - who banned Angelopinto? :D

This was just becoming fun :rolleyes: - OK, off to JB, then...

Empty

funfly
13th Jan 2006, 12:01
I am well past the magic 65.
What I have realised is just how wise I have become. Some may call it opinionated but I do know a lot and it is only right that I should express these wise opinions to those who I feel will benefit from my wisdom. My views are not dogmatic it's just that I know I am right.I don't have the need to seek advice from young people.
So, you young, fit, healthy young people, just because you can manage sex more times a day (month?) than I can doesn't mean that I am not wiser than you.
(broken off 'cause I have to go to the toilet....)
:=