US House of Representatives passes the Freedom to Fly act of 2007
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why we want to work on......
Not all of the US Part 121 work force have the luxury of a pension from the majors (albeit diluted).
Many of the freightdogs have labored amongst the freight/charter companies that have rolled in and out of existance.
Now we have equality with the rest of the US workforce and can at least work (our choice) doing what we love, until age 65 brings full social security.
The age 65 rule will benefit ALL part 121 pilots. If you elect to work past 60,
think what the value of 5 years of LHS pay will be for you.
Many of the freightdogs have labored amongst the freight/charter companies that have rolled in and out of existance.
Now we have equality with the rest of the US workforce and can at least work (our choice) doing what we love, until age 65 brings full social security.
The age 65 rule will benefit ALL part 121 pilots. If you elect to work past 60,
think what the value of 5 years of LHS pay will be for you.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ExRAF: '...will benefit every 121..."
No.
Try persuading most of the 25-year-plus FO's at American that. And the loss of upgrade income compounded over a career is enormous. I'm done with the US - it's been nothing but a disastrous experiment for me. The key is that the industry here is neither regulated nor de-regulated, and the Gov. feels an overwhelming desire to keep meddling with it and moving goalposts. From what I'm seeing today, the big winner is AA management, as our union is now totally fractured into those who are WB Captains and refusing to move, and everybody else. I'm sure it's the same at all the other carriers. This is one of the most reckless moves ALPA has ever made - a result of them rolling over like sick lambs when their pensions were under threat. Whimps.
Ex-RAFalso...
No.
Try persuading most of the 25-year-plus FO's at American that. And the loss of upgrade income compounded over a career is enormous. I'm done with the US - it's been nothing but a disastrous experiment for me. The key is that the industry here is neither regulated nor de-regulated, and the Gov. feels an overwhelming desire to keep meddling with it and moving goalposts. From what I'm seeing today, the big winner is AA management, as our union is now totally fractured into those who are WB Captains and refusing to move, and everybody else. I'm sure it's the same at all the other carriers. This is one of the most reckless moves ALPA has ever made - a result of them rolling over like sick lambs when their pensions were under threat. Whimps.
Ex-RAFalso...
This is an absolute disaster for any US 121 pilot who is not now a captain.
John Prater, President of ALPA lied to and tricked the very members who pay his salary with their dues.
Upon taking the position of ALPA President he stated that he would not support a change to age 65. He did an about face and pushed this rule through then urged Bush to sign it. He is a two faced lying SOB. Anyone who is not a captain and is paying ALPA dues is having his money ripped off and was horribly mis represented.
ALPA harmed my career by convincing my former airline to file bankrupcy so a larger airline could purchase them the next day with no standing contracts thus placing over 3000 pilots on the street. Now as furloughees were finally being called back ALPA endorsed this P.O.S. legislation.
I then went to another Major airline hoping to advance only to find absolute stagnation for the last 3 years. Looks like it will be another 5 now!
I am extremely dissapointed with our govenment and our industry. I am not however surprised by ALPA.........this is the type of back stabbing I have come to expect from them. Anyone who has been harmed by age 65 should well consider pulling out of ALPA if they don't want to waste any more money.
John Prater, President of ALPA lied to and tricked the very members who pay his salary with their dues.
Upon taking the position of ALPA President he stated that he would not support a change to age 65. He did an about face and pushed this rule through then urged Bush to sign it. He is a two faced lying SOB. Anyone who is not a captain and is paying ALPA dues is having his money ripped off and was horribly mis represented.
ALPA harmed my career by convincing my former airline to file bankrupcy so a larger airline could purchase them the next day with no standing contracts thus placing over 3000 pilots on the street. Now as furloughees were finally being called back ALPA endorsed this P.O.S. legislation.
I then went to another Major airline hoping to advance only to find absolute stagnation for the last 3 years. Looks like it will be another 5 now!
I am extremely dissapointed with our govenment and our industry. I am not however surprised by ALPA.........this is the type of back stabbing I have come to expect from them. Anyone who has been harmed by age 65 should well consider pulling out of ALPA if they don't want to waste any more money.
Last edited by Stearperson; 16th Dec 2007 at 02:29.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Age 65 into Law
A bit of information you might find interesting from faa.gov:
InFO - President Today Signed Age 65 Into Law (December 13, 2007)
Notice Number: NOTC1079
Subject:
President Today Signed Age 65 Into Law, Affecting Pilots Under Part 121
Purpose:
This InFO announces the "Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act" (the Act), effective immediately, December 13, 2007, and highlights key provisions of the Act.
Background:
In November, 2006, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) revised the maximum age for certain pilots in international operations from age 60 to age 65. Until 12/13/07, the United States, an ICAO member state, limited its pilots operating under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 to age 60. Now those pilots may continue until age 65, as specified in the Act.
Discussion:
Key provisions of the Act include the following:
. As of 12/13/07, part 121, § 121.383(c), specifying age 60, ceases to be effective.
. A pilot age 60+ acting as pilot in command (PIC) in international operations must be paired with a pilot under age 60 (consistent with the current ICAO requirement).
. In domestic operations both pilots may be age 60+.
. It permits the continued employment of a pilot who reaches age 60 on or after 12/13/07.
. It permits the employment as a new-hire a pilot who reached age 60 before 12/13/07.
. A pilot age 60+ will not be subjected to different, greater, or more frequent medical exams.
. Any pilot age 60+ must hold a first-class medical certificate, renewable on a 6-month cycle.
. Any air carrier employing pilots age 60+ must adjust its training program to ensure such pilots' skill and judgment continue at acceptable levels.
. Any pilot age 60+ must undergo a line check at 6-month intervals.
. For a pilot age 60+ acting as second in command (SIC), a regularly scheduled simulator evaluation may substitute for a required line check.
Recommended Action:
Directors of safety, directors of operations, chief pilots, trainers, and pilots under part 121 should be aware of the Act and should collaborate immediately in implementing its provisions.
The exact language of the Act can be downloaded at the following public Web site:
http://thomas.loc.gov . In the "Search Bill Text" box click on "Bill Number," enter "HR 4343" and click Search.
An InFO contains valuable information for operators that should help them meet certain administrative, regulatory, or operational requirements with relatively low urgency or impact on safety.
For more information on this and other InFO's please go to the following URL:
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviat...ne_safety/info
InFO - President Today Signed Age 65 Into Law (December 13, 2007)
Notice Number: NOTC1079
Subject:
President Today Signed Age 65 Into Law, Affecting Pilots Under Part 121
Purpose:
This InFO announces the "Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act" (the Act), effective immediately, December 13, 2007, and highlights key provisions of the Act.
Background:
In November, 2006, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) revised the maximum age for certain pilots in international operations from age 60 to age 65. Until 12/13/07, the United States, an ICAO member state, limited its pilots operating under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 to age 60. Now those pilots may continue until age 65, as specified in the Act.
Discussion:
Key provisions of the Act include the following:
. As of 12/13/07, part 121, § 121.383(c), specifying age 60, ceases to be effective.
. A pilot age 60+ acting as pilot in command (PIC) in international operations must be paired with a pilot under age 60 (consistent with the current ICAO requirement).
. In domestic operations both pilots may be age 60+.
. It permits the continued employment of a pilot who reaches age 60 on or after 12/13/07.
. It permits the employment as a new-hire a pilot who reached age 60 before 12/13/07.
. A pilot age 60+ will not be subjected to different, greater, or more frequent medical exams.
. Any pilot age 60+ must hold a first-class medical certificate, renewable on a 6-month cycle.
. Any air carrier employing pilots age 60+ must adjust its training program to ensure such pilots' skill and judgment continue at acceptable levels.
. Any pilot age 60+ must undergo a line check at 6-month intervals.
. For a pilot age 60+ acting as second in command (SIC), a regularly scheduled simulator evaluation may substitute for a required line check.
Recommended Action:
Directors of safety, directors of operations, chief pilots, trainers, and pilots under part 121 should be aware of the Act and should collaborate immediately in implementing its provisions.
The exact language of the Act can be downloaded at the following public Web site:
http://thomas.loc.gov . In the "Search Bill Text" box click on "Bill Number," enter "HR 4343" and click Search.
An InFO contains valuable information for operators that should help them meet certain administrative, regulatory, or operational requirements with relatively low urgency or impact on safety.
For more information on this and other InFO's please go to the following URL:
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviat...ne_safety/info
NewBS:
Well-spoken. We could be sort of like the AMA for doctors or the ABA for attorneys.
Until one experiences a merger, whereby the resulting corporate entity is a
totally new entity, one might believe that we have a national union. Many pilot groups are totally self-centered. One group of senior pilots last week filed a lawsuit to challenge some adjustments in very small pension targeting. The younger, very junior pilots-many of whom just came back from 4-5 years furlough (I fly with many)-have no pension right now. None.
As for solidarity, let's nor forget Delta after Eastern went under. Were more than three Eastern pilots hired by Delta? I can name about eight or more at my company with whom I've flown or trained.
As for age limits, it is doubtful that the age limit would have been raised, if pilot salaries at several US majors had not been slashed by 30-38%.
The second factor concerns many senior pilots, who lost up to 60 or 80 % or their pensions due to severe under-funding over many years by Upper Mgmts, allowed by various US regulations.
Even if pilots can work 3-5 extra years (before they lose their medical certification etc), this will not begin to really compensate for the pillaging of this industry by various forces, stated below.
The clever, ruthless tactic of some US airlines to terminate pension plans has inspired other US industries to do the same, which created much more pressure on the quasi-private PBGC to wonder how it can help fund the smaller lost pensions. An airline pilot might receive about $28,000-$45,000 per year from the PBGC. Nice retirement you wonder, after 30 years of loyal service, training and focus on safety/pax comfort?
The pressure to destroy the US airline pilot profession comes from a few or all of these angles: Wall Street hedge-fund managers, some airline CEOs
(often paid tens of millions of dollars in cash and stock bonuses-AFTER atrocious 30-38% pay cuts demanded from labor), airline Board Members, various powerful anti-labor factions within the GOP (let's be frank here) executive, legislative and judicial branches and other departments (i.e. DOT) of the US govt, or the fact that US labor laws allow that when large numbers of jets/routes are switched to another carrier, that the currently qualified pilots are NOT sent with the jets/routes.
Will continuous flying of long-haul widebody trips (i.e. if already performed since age 53) over numerous years allow most of those pilots to retain their First Class medicals until age 65, if they exercize and eat healthy food, compared to narrow-body pilots?
Well-spoken. We could be sort of like the AMA for doctors or the ABA for attorneys.
Until one experiences a merger, whereby the resulting corporate entity is a
totally new entity, one might believe that we have a national union. Many pilot groups are totally self-centered. One group of senior pilots last week filed a lawsuit to challenge some adjustments in very small pension targeting. The younger, very junior pilots-many of whom just came back from 4-5 years furlough (I fly with many)-have no pension right now. None.
As for solidarity, let's nor forget Delta after Eastern went under. Were more than three Eastern pilots hired by Delta? I can name about eight or more at my company with whom I've flown or trained.
As for age limits, it is doubtful that the age limit would have been raised, if pilot salaries at several US majors had not been slashed by 30-38%.
The second factor concerns many senior pilots, who lost up to 60 or 80 % or their pensions due to severe under-funding over many years by Upper Mgmts, allowed by various US regulations.
Even if pilots can work 3-5 extra years (before they lose their medical certification etc), this will not begin to really compensate for the pillaging of this industry by various forces, stated below.
The clever, ruthless tactic of some US airlines to terminate pension plans has inspired other US industries to do the same, which created much more pressure on the quasi-private PBGC to wonder how it can help fund the smaller lost pensions. An airline pilot might receive about $28,000-$45,000 per year from the PBGC. Nice retirement you wonder, after 30 years of loyal service, training and focus on safety/pax comfort?
The pressure to destroy the US airline pilot profession comes from a few or all of these angles: Wall Street hedge-fund managers, some airline CEOs
(often paid tens of millions of dollars in cash and stock bonuses-AFTER atrocious 30-38% pay cuts demanded from labor), airline Board Members, various powerful anti-labor factions within the GOP (let's be frank here) executive, legislative and judicial branches and other departments (i.e. DOT) of the US govt, or the fact that US labor laws allow that when large numbers of jets/routes are switched to another carrier, that the currently qualified pilots are NOT sent with the jets/routes.Will continuous flying of long-haul widebody trips (i.e. if already performed since age 53) over numerous years allow most of those pilots to retain their First Class medicals until age 65, if they exercize and eat healthy food, compared to narrow-body pilots?
Last edited by Ignition Override; 16th Dec 2007 at 04:17.
New BS:
I like your ideas. That is exactly how most unions work. A plumber or longshoreman or electrician can move to a new company and retain their pay and expirience level.
The union also takes care of pensions and medical insurance so greedy CEOs cannot get their hands on it.
ALPA should have taken this approach from the beginning and this would be a much more stable and fulfilling career.
I like your ideas. That is exactly how most unions work. A plumber or longshoreman or electrician can move to a new company and retain their pay and expirience level.
The union also takes care of pensions and medical insurance so greedy CEOs cannot get their hands on it.
ALPA should have taken this approach from the beginning and this would be a much more stable and fulfilling career.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA., USA
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If ALPA operated as you stated above wouldn't the less experienced or more junior pilots still complain that you are taking their rightful seat?
Why does someone who has been a member of a union longer that a junior worker have to retire at certain age just to allow the junior worker to upgrade?
Does this happen at the plumbers union? How about the carpenters union? Longshoremen?
We call ourselves brothers yet we can't wait to stick a knife in the back of the guy ahead us. As individuals we run our life as we see fit yet others (younger) tell us how we should have ran it so they could have our position regardless of whether or not we actually love what we're doing. Unbelievable.
bpp
Why does someone who has been a member of a union longer that a junior worker have to retire at certain age just to allow the junior worker to upgrade?
Does this happen at the plumbers union? How about the carpenters union? Longshoremen?
We call ourselves brothers yet we can't wait to stick a knife in the back of the guy ahead us. As individuals we run our life as we see fit yet others (younger) tell us how we should have ran it so they could have our position regardless of whether or not we actually love what we're doing. Unbelievable.
bpp
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: ANC
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been surprised at the venom in many pilots responses to the new age limit. We are now all working under the same rules, just as we all worked under the same rules when 60 was the retirement age.
There seem to be accusations of betrayal directed toward political parties, unions, "geezers" and anyone else they may think of without considering that ultimately this is the law and we will all live under it as equals.
It will cause inconvenience to some, but I think when we consider what is just for all it becomes apparent that being forced into retirement at 60 has never been fair. Yet we lived under that rule for almost half a century.
There is no question that this has always been a tough business, and it hasn't gotten any easier and probably won't get easier in the future. Being in the right place at the right time has often been more important than many of the skills we have worked so hard to attain.
There seem to be accusations of betrayal directed toward political parties, unions, "geezers" and anyone else they may think of without considering that ultimately this is the law and we will all live under it as equals.
It will cause inconvenience to some, but I think when we consider what is just for all it becomes apparent that being forced into retirement at 60 has never been fair. Yet we lived under that rule for almost half a century.
There is no question that this has always been a tough business, and it hasn't gotten any easier and probably won't get easier in the future. Being in the right place at the right time has often been more important than many of the skills we have worked so hard to attain.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sad thing is, for ~40 years the Age 65 idea would have made everyone gag - senior airline pilots were incredibly well paid, with great schedules and awesome pensions. It was just greed and self-centeredness to want to stay past 60.
But now, the mighty have fallen. According to the AA openers, major airline pay is down 50% in real dollars since 1992. Pensions are extinct. Schedules are "optimized." Working past 60 is a financial requirement for more and more pilots.
My uncle did 20 years at UAL. He retired and gets ~$30,000 a year pension. He's flying Citations to make up the difference, at the age of 66.
So... my career took a big wallop, but there's some righteous guys and gals out there who won't have to push buggies at Walmart, at least for 5 more years.
"Keep on the sunny side....."
But now, the mighty have fallen. According to the AA openers, major airline pay is down 50% in real dollars since 1992. Pensions are extinct. Schedules are "optimized." Working past 60 is a financial requirement for more and more pilots.
My uncle did 20 years at UAL. He retired and gets ~$30,000 a year pension. He's flying Citations to make up the difference, at the age of 66.
So... my career took a big wallop, but there's some righteous guys and gals out there who won't have to push buggies at Walmart, at least for 5 more years.
"Keep on the sunny side....."
