cxlinedriver
22nd May 2008, 23:37
Could someone explain how RA65 is not age-discriminating whereas RA55 is?
Surely having any forced retirement age is age-discriminating.
I know that some countries have retirement for pilots at 65. How was this determined?
I have also heard that in New Zealand one simply can not have a retirement age. Is it true that some Air New Zealand pilots are so old that they fart dust and can not command into the USA, but can be command elsewhere. If pilots can work past 65 in NZ, how can CX onshore here with RA55 or 65?
If a pilot holds a medical and passes their checks should they not hold their job?
Isn't retirement age all down to whatever an individual agreed to in their employment contract? If a new contract is agreed to then this can change the conditions, but how can the AOA agree to a new contract for all CX aircrew when the AOA membership hovers around 50% on a good day?
Surely having any forced retirement age is age-discriminating.
I know that some countries have retirement for pilots at 65. How was this determined?
I have also heard that in New Zealand one simply can not have a retirement age. Is it true that some Air New Zealand pilots are so old that they fart dust and can not command into the USA, but can be command elsewhere. If pilots can work past 65 in NZ, how can CX onshore here with RA55 or 65?
If a pilot holds a medical and passes their checks should they not hold their job?
Isn't retirement age all down to whatever an individual agreed to in their employment contract? If a new contract is agreed to then this can change the conditions, but how can the AOA agree to a new contract for all CX aircrew when the AOA membership hovers around 50% on a good day?