Seeking Data re Mandatory Retirement Ages
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeking Data re Mandatory Retirement Ages
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Skies:
I am a B777 Captain with Air Canada, and coincidentally legal counsel to over 50 Air Canada pilots and former pilots whose cases of termination of employment at age 60, pursuant to the provisions of the applicable collective agreement provision forcing mandatory retirement, have been referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for adjudication.
In Canada, under the provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act, mandatory retirement is currently exempted from the general prohibition against discrimination on the basis of age found within that statute, provided that the termination of employment, in the words of the statute occurs at "the normal age of retirement for individuals doing similar work."
As everyone knows, "normal age of retirement" these days is a moving target, so far as airline pilots throughout the world are concerned. My hope is to describe the location of that target at the present time.
I therefore am humbly seeking your assistance in providing me with factual information to assist in determining the current mandatory retirement ages for pilots at various carriers throughout the world, other than in Canada and the United States, be they pilot employees or contract airline pilots. Is there a different age for Captains or pilots-in-command versus First Officers and/or augment pilots at the airline?
It would also be extremely beneficial if I might obtain a ballpark figure of the number of pilots employed and thus subjected to the mandatory retirement age at each of the carriers.
Any assistance that you might be able to provide me would be very greatly appreciated.
Airline /
Approx. No. of Pilots /
Current Mandatory Retirement Age, if any
Does any carrier based in the European Union still adhere to Age 60?
I am a B777 Captain with Air Canada, and coincidentally legal counsel to over 50 Air Canada pilots and former pilots whose cases of termination of employment at age 60, pursuant to the provisions of the applicable collective agreement provision forcing mandatory retirement, have been referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for adjudication.
In Canada, under the provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act, mandatory retirement is currently exempted from the general prohibition against discrimination on the basis of age found within that statute, provided that the termination of employment, in the words of the statute occurs at "the normal age of retirement for individuals doing similar work."
As everyone knows, "normal age of retirement" these days is a moving target, so far as airline pilots throughout the world are concerned. My hope is to describe the location of that target at the present time.
I therefore am humbly seeking your assistance in providing me with factual information to assist in determining the current mandatory retirement ages for pilots at various carriers throughout the world, other than in Canada and the United States, be they pilot employees or contract airline pilots. Is there a different age for Captains or pilots-in-command versus First Officers and/or augment pilots at the airline?
It would also be extremely beneficial if I might obtain a ballpark figure of the number of pilots employed and thus subjected to the mandatory retirement age at each of the carriers.
Any assistance that you might be able to provide me would be very greatly appreciated.
Airline /
Approx. No. of Pilots /
Current Mandatory Retirement Age, if any
Does any carrier based in the European Union still adhere to Age 60?
Last edited by Raymond767; 10th Dec 2008 at 00:53.
Raymond,
Air France: 60, no exceptions that I know of.
KLM: normally 56, maximum 60 if working part time for a certain period before reaching age of 56.
Both these carriers do not employ contract pilots, no difference between FOs and skippers, pilot numbers in the thousands (KLM about 2800, AF far more).
Maximum legal retirement age is 65 for all JAR-states. A heated debate is now erupting since there is mounting pressure from governments and managements to raise retirement age. In Holland there has already been a clash between some pilots wanting to work longer (claiming age discrimination) and the Dutch ALPA defending the retirement age as it is. In France the government recently raised the maximum legal retirement age to 65 from 60, provoking a 4-day strike by AF pilots (retirement age of 60 in AF was not at stake. Yet, that is...)
Good luck,
LH
Air France: 60, no exceptions that I know of.
KLM: normally 56, maximum 60 if working part time for a certain period before reaching age of 56.
Both these carriers do not employ contract pilots, no difference between FOs and skippers, pilot numbers in the thousands (KLM about 2800, AF far more).
Maximum legal retirement age is 65 for all JAR-states. A heated debate is now erupting since there is mounting pressure from governments and managements to raise retirement age. In Holland there has already been a clash between some pilots wanting to work longer (claiming age discrimination) and the Dutch ALPA defending the retirement age as it is. In France the government recently raised the maximum legal retirement age to 65 from 60, provoking a 4-day strike by AF pilots (retirement age of 60 in AF was not at stake. Yet, that is...)
Good luck,
LH
In Australia, pilots won a case against mandatory retirement at any age, under age discrimination legislation. Pilots may keep their positions as long as they can pass the medical and their sim checks. I flew with guys over 65 in Ansett - which doesn't exist now (financial failure after Sep 11), but it was a major airline with 13,000 employees, and about 1000+ pilots.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
European Carriers
With the maximum age raised in France, effective November 18th, with the passage of the law by the Senate, do Air France pilots now have the legal right to continue to age 65 if they so choose, or is there some other constraint within the process that would allow the employer to still terminate their employment.
Ditto for KLM. Can individuals exercise their legal rights to go beyond 60, or is that a matter of negotiation between the carrier and the pilot association?
Do you have any knowledge of the subject at Lufthansa? Apparently, there was a legal challenge some months ago by three pilots wanting to stay beyond age 60. Has that been resolved, or is there still a dispute between the individual pilots, their Association and the employer?
Ditto for KLM. Can individuals exercise their legal rights to go beyond 60, or is that a matter of negotiation between the carrier and the pilot association?
Do you have any knowledge of the subject at Lufthansa? Apparently, there was a legal challenge some months ago by three pilots wanting to stay beyond age 60. Has that been resolved, or is there still a dispute between the individual pilots, their Association and the employer?
Last edited by Raymond767; 10th Dec 2008 at 15:01.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Holland there has already been a clash between some pilots wanting to work longer (claiming age discrimination) and the Dutch ALPA defending the retirement age as it is.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditto for KLM. Can individuals exercise their legal rights to go beyone 60, or is that a matter of negotiation between the carrier and the pilot association?
The courts in the Netherlands have ruled that the KLM contract is overriding, so individuals do not have the right to work there past 56 (or up to 60, if they have flown part-time before retirement)
The courts in the Netherlands have ruled that the KLM contract is overriding, so individuals do not have the right to work there past 56 (or up to 60, if they have flown part-time before retirement)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re KLM Contract Legality
Longhaul:
Would you happen to know the dates of those court decisions? Specifically, did they occur prior to the implementation of the EU Directive on Employment Law, required to be implemented as law by all EU member states prior to December 1, 2006, that foreclosed age discrimination by companies in the EU?
If so, wase the contract or legal decision of the courts challenged before the European Court of Justice, as being contrary tot he EU Employment Law Directive?
Two recent decisions of the EU Court of Justice have upheld the right of countries to employ mandatory retirment, specifically at age 65, but only when justification is provided. It would be difficult, I believe to argue effectively that it is justified in one country when it is allowed in all other countries in the EU.
Would you happen to know the dates of those court decisions? Specifically, did they occur prior to the implementation of the EU Directive on Employment Law, required to be implemented as law by all EU member states prior to December 1, 2006, that foreclosed age discrimination by companies in the EU?
If so, wase the contract or legal decision of the courts challenged before the European Court of Justice, as being contrary tot he EU Employment Law Directive?
Two recent decisions of the EU Court of Justice have upheld the right of countries to employ mandatory retirment, specifically at age 65, but only when justification is provided. It would be difficult, I believe to argue effectively that it is justified in one country when it is allowed in all other countries in the EU.
Under Dutch labour law, a collective labour agreement is legally binding if the government endorses it. As far as I know, it has been challenged by pilots wanting to work longer but they lost their courtcase. I'm not sure if the government could force a later retirement age on pilots, since the collective labour agreement is between a company or group of companies in the same sector and the unions. As long as these two don't come up with something that's outside the general rules and labour law the government will not intervene (e.g. they can agree to a retirement age lower than the legal maximum, but not higher). The retirement fund for KLM pilots is for KLM pilots only, is independent from the company and government and financially sound (oversight by the Dutch national bank, as for every pension fund in Holland). KLM and it's pilots pay high premiums to keep it that way. This construction allows for politics to be kept out of play to some degree in case of discussions on retirement age. NB: the discussion is on age discrimination here, not money.
Raymond: courtcase against KLM / Dutch ALPA was concluded by Dutch supreme court in October 2004, I don't know if the case was subsequently brought to the European Court. If you speak Dutch:
Rechtspraak.nl - Zoeken in uitspraken, look for LJN: AP0425, Hoge Raad , C03/133HR
Good luck,
LH
In the case of AF: the raising of the legal retirement age has no direct effect on the collective labour agreement yet, but there could be severe indirect implications due to the way retirement for aircrew is arranged in La Douce France. Here there is a national retirement fund for all aircrew (pilots and cabin crew from all French airlines). For the moment this pension fund is coping fairly well compared to other funds in France, but since retirement for pilots (60) and cabin crew (55!) is quite early compared to other professions it is only a question of time before trouble will arise. The general situation in France was that people needed to contribute to their respective pension fund for 40 years to get a full pension, with exceptions for certain professions, e.g. railway workers (37.5), pilots and cabin crew. Since the official working week is only 35 hours and there is a generous amount of paid holidays (I think it's 31 days) the retirement system is rapidly becoming too expensive, as is the social security system and state healthcare. The Sarkozy government, desparately short of cash, has introduced measures to combat this. Amongst other things working more than 35 hours became legal (and untaxed), but only on a voluntary basis. The 'regime speciale' for railway workers was abolished under heavy protests (and strikes of course!). Previous governments have promised the French pilots union not to change the law or their pension system without consulting them first, so they were severely p*ssed off when the legal retirement age was raised to 65 overnight. They see it as the opening artillery barrage on their age 60 retirement right, so stand by for more skirmishes on this one! NB: the discussion is on money here, not age discrimination.
Raymond: courtcase against KLM / Dutch ALPA was concluded by Dutch supreme court in October 2004, I don't know if the case was subsequently brought to the European Court. If you speak Dutch:
Rechtspraak.nl - Zoeken in uitspraken, look for LJN: AP0425, Hoge Raad , C03/133HR
Good luck,
LH
In the case of AF: the raising of the legal retirement age has no direct effect on the collective labour agreement yet, but there could be severe indirect implications due to the way retirement for aircrew is arranged in La Douce France. Here there is a national retirement fund for all aircrew (pilots and cabin crew from all French airlines). For the moment this pension fund is coping fairly well compared to other funds in France, but since retirement for pilots (60) and cabin crew (55!) is quite early compared to other professions it is only a question of time before trouble will arise. The general situation in France was that people needed to contribute to their respective pension fund for 40 years to get a full pension, with exceptions for certain professions, e.g. railway workers (37.5), pilots and cabin crew. Since the official working week is only 35 hours and there is a generous amount of paid holidays (I think it's 31 days) the retirement system is rapidly becoming too expensive, as is the social security system and state healthcare. The Sarkozy government, desparately short of cash, has introduced measures to combat this. Amongst other things working more than 35 hours became legal (and untaxed), but only on a voluntary basis. The 'regime speciale' for railway workers was abolished under heavy protests (and strikes of course!). Previous governments have promised the French pilots union not to change the law or their pension system without consulting them first, so they were severely p*ssed off when the legal retirement age was raised to 65 overnight. They see it as the opening artillery barrage on their age 60 retirement right, so stand by for more skirmishes on this one! NB: the discussion is on money here, not age discrimination.
Last edited by Longhitter; 10th Dec 2008 at 15:41.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re Dutch Court Case
Longhitter:
Many thanks. Very helpful indeed.
The date is pivotal, because the EU law (which is enacted as a law within the country by amending the individual country's laws) supercedes the prior law. Members of the EU cannot opt out of the Directive--their laws must be consistent.
However, there is flexibility within the Directive for some adjustment and interpretation depending on the needs of the country. But those differences must be justified in each case.
The recent decisions of the EU Court of Justice have indeed verified that the EU Directive is controlling, and that exceptions must be justified in each case.
It would be good to hear from someone from KLM who is conversant with the existing application of the law to the specific contract--especially, were any modifications to the contract made in respect of the above decision, as a result of the need to be compliant with the EU Directive? OR did the age just get raised to 65?
Many thanks. Very helpful indeed.
The date is pivotal, because the EU law (which is enacted as a law within the country by amending the individual country's laws) supercedes the prior law. Members of the EU cannot opt out of the Directive--their laws must be consistent.
However, there is flexibility within the Directive for some adjustment and interpretation depending on the needs of the country. But those differences must be justified in each case.
The recent decisions of the EU Court of Justice have indeed verified that the EU Directive is controlling, and that exceptions must be justified in each case.
It would be good to hear from someone from KLM who is conversant with the existing application of the law to the specific contract--especially, were any modifications to the contract made in respect of the above decision, as a result of the need to be compliant with the EU Directive? OR did the age just get raised to 65?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SE Asia - oops redundant
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe SAS has kept the retirement age at 60 despite EU legislation ( certainly for Swedish pilots ) and has won court cases contesting this.
My understanding is also that Singapore Airlines retire at 62.
My understanding is also that Singapore Airlines retire at 62.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 74
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re France:
Makolo:
Are you saying that despite the law in France being passed by the Senate on November 18th, that the law will not come into effect to raise the mandatory retirement age to 65 until January 1, 2010?
Are you saying that despite the law in France being passed by the Senate on November 18th, that the law will not come into effect to raise the mandatory retirement age to 65 until January 1, 2010?
France is notoriously slow in implementing international law / agreements. While one of the driving forces behind the EU, France also pays the highest amount of fines for non-compliance with EU-directives. Max age for an airline pilot was only raised to the european/icao standard a few weeks ago, and until about 6 months ago France did not even allow pilots over 60 from foreign carriers to fly in their airspace...
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sai Kungah
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cathay Pacific: about 2500 pilots, the vast majority are still on a mandatory 55.
For anyone who joined the group this year, their contract states 65. That is also the same for any direct entry freighter dudes.
With the company having successfully reduced pay and conditions over the last 10-15 years, the more senior pilots are approaching 55 with not enough to retire on (forget what you may have heard about our packages - fiscal and physical!) so they want to go to 65.
The younger guys (who are perhaps more focused on more earthly delights) think they are going to be smarter with their money than the old farts were, and would rather their command upgrades were not delayed by extending everyone to 65.
Fight looming....
For anyone who joined the group this year, their contract states 65. That is also the same for any direct entry freighter dudes.
With the company having successfully reduced pay and conditions over the last 10-15 years, the more senior pilots are approaching 55 with not enough to retire on (forget what you may have heard about our packages - fiscal and physical!) so they want to go to 65.
The younger guys (who are perhaps more focused on more earthly delights) think they are going to be smarter with their money than the old farts were, and would rather their command upgrades were not delayed by extending everyone to 65.
Fight looming....
New Zealand. Followed Aus. example and no mandatory removal of licence by the CAA due to age, however I have no idea what NZ companies, e.g. Air New Zealand, might impose, which of course is a slightly different issue being contractual by Company, not mandatory by State legislation.
However, the medical requirements get harder !
At age 74 I still maintain a CPL for voluntary work with the Coastguard Air Patrol, but before retirement I'd not been employed by a NZ company, and not previously held a NZ licence, so whereas I might have been allowed to continue flying with a NZ company, no one would start me at my 'advanced' age when I obtained my NZ licence at age 63.
Hope this helps.
However, the medical requirements get harder !
At age 74 I still maintain a CPL for voluntary work with the Coastguard Air Patrol, but before retirement I'd not been employed by a NZ company, and not previously held a NZ licence, so whereas I might have been allowed to continue flying with a NZ company, no one would start me at my 'advanced' age when I obtained my NZ licence at age 63.
Hope this helps.