Age 60 Hearing For Ex-Air Canada Pilot
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Chilterns/Blighty
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by silverhawk
Does the new rule allow crew aged 60 to 65 to still be captain?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a link to the ICAO web site, FAQ page, that clearly specifies the changes about to take place on November 23rd:
http://www.icao.int/cgi/goto_m.pl?ic...arch_icao.html
and here is a link to the actual wording of the regulation, on a different part of the site:
http://www.icao.int/HyperDocs/displa...App%2ED&Lang=E
These and other links to relevant policy and legislation are posted on tohe www.flypast60.com web site, under the menu item Regulatory / ICAO.
Effective November 23rd, the ICAO standard age limit will be raised to 65, with two qualifications. Over age-60 Captains must have an under age-60 complementary crew member, and there is a change in the licensing renewal period from one year to six months.
The age restriction applies only to Captains, not First Officers.
The essence of this change is that although countries may file a "Difference," regarding their own licensing that allows a less restricted age limit for their own licence issuances, they can no longer prevent foreign carriers with over-60 year old Captains from entering into the airspace and/or landing at their airports.
This will end all of the "scheduling" difficulties that airlines with now over-60 year old Captains have, and will have a major impact on flight operations within countries such as the U.S.A., France and Italy that now prohibit carriers that have over-60 year old Captains from entering.
If the F.A.A. does not issue licences to its own citizens who are over-60, then everyone in the world will be able to fly into and out of the U.S.A. with over-60 year old Captains, except the Americans themselves.
------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the issue of what the majority of pilots at Air Canada find offensive about this complaint--I believe that it is the potential adverse economic impact that the change in the law will have on those pilots whose seniority and income will be affected by the reduction in the number of pilots moving off the top of the seniority list.
This is economically-related, not human rights-related. The allegation is that the senior Captains are being "greedy," that it is unfair to the less-senior pilots, for a number of reasons, including the fact that the senior Captains accepted the job knowing the rules, they benefited by those rules throughout their careers, and now when they have the best jobs and the best pay, they want to change the rules to benefit themselves to the detriment of their juniors.
That is the concern. There would be a greater acceptance of the change, I believe, if the change were to apply to everyone hired after the implementation of the change, effectively "grandfathering" the existing seniority rights of the now-employed junior pilots.
But that is not the question before the Tribunal. The question is not one of fairness (regardless of how one views the impact question) but rather one of whether the individual's human rights are being contravened.
http://www.icao.int/cgi/goto_m.pl?ic...arch_icao.html
and here is a link to the actual wording of the regulation, on a different part of the site:
http://www.icao.int/HyperDocs/displa...App%2ED&Lang=E
These and other links to relevant policy and legislation are posted on tohe www.flypast60.com web site, under the menu item Regulatory / ICAO.
Effective November 23rd, the ICAO standard age limit will be raised to 65, with two qualifications. Over age-60 Captains must have an under age-60 complementary crew member, and there is a change in the licensing renewal period from one year to six months.
The age restriction applies only to Captains, not First Officers.
The essence of this change is that although countries may file a "Difference," regarding their own licensing that allows a less restricted age limit for their own licence issuances, they can no longer prevent foreign carriers with over-60 year old Captains from entering into the airspace and/or landing at their airports.
This will end all of the "scheduling" difficulties that airlines with now over-60 year old Captains have, and will have a major impact on flight operations within countries such as the U.S.A., France and Italy that now prohibit carriers that have over-60 year old Captains from entering.
If the F.A.A. does not issue licences to its own citizens who are over-60, then everyone in the world will be able to fly into and out of the U.S.A. with over-60 year old Captains, except the Americans themselves.
------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the issue of what the majority of pilots at Air Canada find offensive about this complaint--I believe that it is the potential adverse economic impact that the change in the law will have on those pilots whose seniority and income will be affected by the reduction in the number of pilots moving off the top of the seniority list.
This is economically-related, not human rights-related. The allegation is that the senior Captains are being "greedy," that it is unfair to the less-senior pilots, for a number of reasons, including the fact that the senior Captains accepted the job knowing the rules, they benefited by those rules throughout their careers, and now when they have the best jobs and the best pay, they want to change the rules to benefit themselves to the detriment of their juniors.
That is the concern. There would be a greater acceptance of the change, I believe, if the change were to apply to everyone hired after the implementation of the change, effectively "grandfathering" the existing seniority rights of the now-employed junior pilots.
But that is not the question before the Tribunal. The question is not one of fairness (regardless of how one views the impact question) but rather one of whether the individual's human rights are being contravened.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Las Vegas!
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Age 68
I can just see it now... It is 57 plus year olds that are pushing for a change to the age 60 rule here in the U.S. O.k. so if it changes to 65, I will bet a million pesos these same greedy people will be pushing for a change to age 68 as they approach age 63 etc....
THE GREED IS NOT TRANSPARENT!
The only way an increase in retirement age should take affect is for only new hire pilots to have the ability to fly to the new retirement age...
Cheers!
THE GREED IS NOT TRANSPARENT!
The only way an increase in retirement age should take affect is for only new hire pilots to have the ability to fly to the new retirement age...
Cheers!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: the twilight zone
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
acflier
You sound like one of those typically arrogant hot**** AC guys who had your little bubble burst a few times in the last few years first with the merging of lists with CAL, then with your little pay cut during the restructuring. Just like the hot**** AC guys who had their dose of reality off the end in NB with a tree stuck in the middle of their CRJ, or the guy who didn't know the difference between lbs and liters and ended up on some dragstrip in Manitoba.For heavens sake man, you work for the national flag carrier of Canada, world poster country for equal rights, non-discrimination and gay marriage.If a guy wants to work past 60,thats his bussiness.He's been with the company for many years and deserves the right to choose.Happy flying Air Canadas
Last edited by sec 3; 25th Jun 2006 at 04:24.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sec 3
On the contrary. I brought the issue here for a meaningful discussion in the international community, because the issue affects many, and the facts are sometimes elusive. My own motivation and situation are irrelevant.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UA320Cap, you're looking for a slightly younger Captain pushing for 65? Right here. Age 44 with a money purchase pension. I would love to knock off @ 60 but with this type of pension it might not be a good idea. Perhaps part time working (50% roster?) may suit. I just don't know right now. Either way I want the choice to be mine and not brought about by the turn of a page in the calender. Outside the luxury world of the boardroom and final salary pay schemes everyone's circumstances are different and the flexibility to continue to 65 will be vital.
We must ensure that the choice to work to 65 is available to those who need it.
We must ensure that the choice to work to 65 is available to those who need it.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If any "young" copilots are angry at the prospect of the retirement age moving to 65 because of their promotional prospects, think about this. There are many pilots from the UK who several years ago worked very hard to gain a CPL, and spent a great deal of money doing so when there were not many jobs to be had. Reaching the great day of licence issue was tempered by the moving of the goalposts during the qualifying period. In short, a CPL no longer offered the chance to get flying earn some money and gain experience, it simply meant, spend more money and back to school. Now it seems that there is to be another change to the regulations. Are those same chaps supposed to accept that it will not apply to them as it was not that way before. Of course its the older pilots that are happy (mostly) to see this change, the youngr ones will be just as happy in a few years time. Is it greedy to want to work for a living? Is it a healthy professional attitude to want to see a healthy 60 year old retired against his will, and his family suffer, to enhance the prospects of his collegues who will continue to 65? Not all captains were born with a silver spoon in their mouths, nor have they all been flying for so many years that retirement is welcome. Some of us had to do other jobs to find the money for flight training, and that don't happen when your a puppy.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Zealand
Age: 76
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another interesting function of the ICAO change is that FAA license holders will be forced to gain a license from another ICAO country in order to gain employment to fly into their own country. Senate Bill 65 now has approaching 60 co-sponsors and will go before the Senate when Sen. Frist believes it will carry......possibly soon!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: On the sunny side of the street
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I refuse to fly with anyone over 60. Why? He may be over 60 - but I must be under 60. Thatīs discrimination against me.
Pack up granddads. Your not wanted. Your greed is going to force us all to fly to 65 or even later. Thanks a lot.
Pack up granddads. Your not wanted. Your greed is going to force us all to fly to 65 or even later. Thanks a lot.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: South Africa
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nowhere do I see anybody suggesting that pilots over 60 move to right seat. That would solve the upgrade problem for the junior guys and keep the older guys unretired.
Or am I being over-simplistic?
Or am I being over-simplistic?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Las Vegas!
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bernoulli
UA320Cap, you're looking for a slightly younger Captain pushing for 65? Right here. Age 44 with a money purchase pension. I would love to knock off @ 60 but with this type of pension it might not be a good idea. Perhaps part time working (50% roster?) may suit. I just don't know right now. Either way I want the choice to be mine and not brought about by the turn of a page in the calender. Outside the luxury world of the boardroom and final salary pay schemes everyone's circumstances are different and the flexibility to continue to 65 will be vital.
We must ensure that the choice to work to 65 is available to those who need it.
We must ensure that the choice to work to 65 is available to those who need it.
Just one thing, age 65 will still force you out at the turn of the calender no?
Cheers!
By its very definition, differences in age will result in differences in perspective and viewpoint. Ironically, those younger pilots who may be so vehemntly opposed to the 'grandads' still flying may not share that view when they too are 'grandads,' but still feel like 35 year olds!
When you are 18 does a 30 year old seem old? Sure he does. When you are 25 does a 40 year old seem old, and a 60 year old seem ancient? Sure they do. When you are 45, does a 50 year old seem old? Not really. When you are 60, do you feel like a 45 year old? probably.
Therein lies the problem.
I gather that Capt. Al Haynes retired soon after his Sioux City crash as he reaching 60; seems a pity to force that sort of experience off the flight deck arbitrarily.
When you are 18 does a 30 year old seem old? Sure he does. When you are 25 does a 40 year old seem old, and a 60 year old seem ancient? Sure they do. When you are 45, does a 50 year old seem old? Not really. When you are 60, do you feel like a 45 year old? probably.
Therein lies the problem.
I gather that Capt. Al Haynes retired soon after his Sioux City crash as he reaching 60; seems a pity to force that sort of experience off the flight deck arbitrarily.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kingsnake
I refuse to fly with anyone over 60. Why? He may be over 60 - but I must be under 60. Thatīs discrimination against me.
Pack up granddads. Your not wanted. Your greed is going to force us all to fly to 65 or even later. Thanks a lot.
Pack up granddads. Your not wanted. Your greed is going to force us all to fly to 65 or even later. Thanks a lot.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: the midnight sky
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If my contract was the same as it was when I joined my company 27 years ago then I would agree with some of the comments on this forum, but it is not and my terms and conditions have changed to my disadvantage over the years. If by working till 65 allows me to recoup some of my benefits so be it.
We all pay to some extent (and rightly so) for anti discrimination legislation, cherry picking what we like and dislike is not an option, live with it, its called progress.
We all pay to some extent (and rightly so) for anti discrimination legislation, cherry picking what we like and dislike is not an option, live with it, its called progress.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: South Africa
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by faheel
As for Kingsnake, no matter how much you rant and rave the only way out for you is to get another line of work if you don't like it .
Not all countries have such a touchy-feely bill of rights.