Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Pilot Sues For Forced Retirement

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Pilot Sues For Forced Retirement

Old 9th Jul 2018, 23:38
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 65
Posts: 1
Is there not a contradiction in the requirement to have a younger pilot in the cockpit if a mature pilot is in command of the aircraft? Ageism works both ways.

At the age of 65, perhaps it is time to leave commercial transport flights and perhaps return to training and passing on those hard earned survival skills to a younger generation. A quick survey through the last couple of decades worth of AAIB reports indicates that older pilots are involved in considerably more incidents than younger ones. That may well be due to many taking up flying as a hobby in retirement, but there is a clear correlation between age and accident rates. Much the same pattern can be observed in vehicular accidents around the world too.

A blanket cut off age seems to be the easiest way of trying to keep flying as safe as possible for passengers. It may not be fair to individuals and particularly those endowed with better than normal health, but it is a system that has worked well for decades.

I learned more flying a few hours instruction with a mature retired commercial pilot than I did flying tens of hours with a 22 year old hours builder. They could both fly the aircraft and instruct, but the mature instructor knew how to demonstrate finesse on the controls and when and where to push the aircraft to its limits. It isn't always about avoiding mistakes that can get you killed, it's dealing with the consequences and maintaining control of the aircraft to ensure a safe outcome. That is what maturity and experience brings to instructing.
G0ULI is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 00:03
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,068
Just make one rule: if you wish to continue after 65 you have to re-join seniority list and pay grade from the bottom. And then we see how many takers are there...
CargoOne is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 02:26
  #23 (permalink)  
bzh
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: canada
Posts: 81
Retirement used to be a benefit, a privilege......where is this world going ? do those people realize there time is limited in this world, and they will not take the money out with them....
15 years to go but ready to retired...
bzh is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 06:03
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,082
The problem with risk based stats is that the stats are based on the general population, not the aircrew community.

Some of the general population are obese. Others ingest things they shouldn't. The list goes on.

Most of the aircrew community are in pretty good shape for their age.
currawong is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 09:00
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: in the barrel
Posts: 148
Is the man so tight on money that he needs to work beyond age 65, or is it just one of those guys who cannot let go?
There's plenty of other stuff to do in life.
AviatorDave is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 09:25
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Home
Posts: 63
I can't think of many 65 year old pilots who don't drink more than they should, don't have a pot belly, don't eat too much curry, etc...

Leaving it to, say, management to decide who gets the chop after 65 and who doesn't (based on performance) is going to be a horrible task. "Come on everybody, we're having a retirement party this week for the most recent pilot culled for no longer being able to fulfil his duties"! Therefore, leave the arbitrary retirement age as it is, is the best option for everyone. Even those who don't realise it, Wayne.

I'm only guessing, but those that need to work beyond 65 (or even 55, realistically) are probably those who played away on a night stop, knocked up some poor cabin crew lassie with questionable taste, and are now paying for an expensive divorce. The younger generation should not be paying for your foolishness!
richardthethird is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 09:25
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Overthawk, even if that's true (?), if that's the explanation (perhaps radgirl might wish to clarify him/herself) then it's an entirely erroneous comparison. Why on Earth would we compare today's figures with those of twenty or more years ago? Sorry for letting medical reality intrude but the statistics are undeniable. Rates of Heart attack and stroke events for the age band 65-75 are much higher; almost double in fact, than for the decade up to age 65. Nor does the "If I pass my medical" line entirely hold up since only around a third of such events can be predicted.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 10:05
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: OFCR
Age: 34
Posts: 404
While I might understand CP Wayne will to remain at the helm for few years more, as a 31 years old pilot I fear the possible outcome of his actions right now. I have no interest in working up to 65, flying 900+ hours per year thus retiring with approximately 35.000 hours. You want me to fly up to that age? Ok, but at a rate of MAXIMUM 500 hours a year.

How about an individual flying hours cap of, let's say, 20.000. Once you hit the mark you have to retire, enjoy living like a regular person, watch your offspring growing and so on. Enough with radiations, disrupted circadian cycles, insomnia etc etc...

Seriously Captain, use your energy for something else. Do not help the authorities to screw us even more.
Papa_Golf is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 10:48
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 308
Originally Posted by Papa_Golf View Post
While I might understand CP Wayne will to remain at the helm for few years more, as a 31 years old pilot I fear the possible outcome of his actions right now. I have no interest in working up to 65, flying 900+ hours per year thus retiring with approximately 35.000 hours. You want me to fly up to that age? Ok, but at a rate of MAXIMUM 500 hours a year.

How about an individual flying hours cap of, let's say, 20.000. Once you hit the mark you have to retire, enjoy living like a regular person, watch your offspring growing and so on. Enough with radiations, disrupted circadian cycles, insomnia etc etc...

Seriously Captain, use your energy for something else. Do not help the authorities to screw us even more.

I appreciate your views today at age 31 but you won’t be saying this at age 60+ when you realise you can’t afford to retire because your pension is nothing like you hoped it would be.
roundwego is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 10:51
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,281
It seems from reading the posts on this thread most of the people opposed to older pilots being able to carry on flying are the younger ones. I wonder why? I also wonder what their point of view will be in 25 to 30 years time when they're in this age group.
27/09 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 10:53
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
How does what you say on pensions, true or not, even come into it? Would we consider even for one second extending engine overhaul intervals or increase weather minima because an airline was short of money??
ShotOne is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 10:55
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 921
Before any increase in compulsory retirement age for pilots is brought in. The medical & flight checking procedures need to be addressed. During my career I saw far too many “check in the box” passes of colleagues who were past it or in reality unfit. Funny how the individuals never saw it in themselves but just ask the First Officers who they were carrying.
IcePack is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 10:59
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,423
richardthethird, wow what a piece of work you are! Oh, I see you're new here. Maybe you need to learn some manners!
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 11:09
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 32
Interesting to note that as a so-called professional group, already, remarkable personal attacks are emerging together with the odd humorous throw away line from the envious and immature. These distractions illustrating an alarming lack of ability to remain focused which is, in fact, a very basic requirement of the profession. Returning to the thread, of course Captain Bayley has a case. The cut-off is arbitrary and has no place. It was a ICAO move back in the early nineties ( I think). Local Regulatory Authorities were left to comply or stick with outdated policy. Most complied. I worked for a ME outfit who made a right mess of even understanding the new guideline. To be fair, they suffered a local labour law requirement for ALL expats to cease working at age 60. The company would have, as a first step, to change the local labour law in order to get the local CAA to comply with new ICAO ruling.

Me & other 59 year-olds watched with bated breath. We all reckoned that another 5 years, after age 60 would cream off a very nice experience. All neighbouring airlines went to 65 but my company just didn't get it and for a while, we went into one year contracts while the company continued to make it even more messy. In the end, they just sited local labour law & gave everyone the bullet.

Like Captain Bayley, I took up my case, got expensive lawyers involved but went head to head with some very dirty fighters & got booted out in, admittedly, one of the cleverest stitch ups of all time.

Of course there should be NO age-limit.Even more daft, MOLs and the like together with having to be crewed only with someone of a factored, lower age. The thought of the Captain being the last to board via a high loader gives a commercially impactful reason to think things through in a commercial world but I leave the follow-on one liners to those more inclined.

41c here chaps. Pass the JD & coke and I'm heading for my private pool for my bi-annual Base Check in the faithful Lidle's inflatable. You know, the one that looks like a BA B747. Maybe that's why Nigel keeps turning base, low over my villa in order to get a good look at us, forced out of our careers at very early ages. Good luck Wayne.
Gordomac is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 12:16
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: OFCR
Age: 34
Posts: 404
Originally Posted by 27/09 View Post
It seems from reading the posts on this thread most of the people opposed to older pilots being able to carry on flying are the younger ones. I wonder why? I also wonder what their point of view will be in 25 to 30 years time when they're in this age group.
Don’t know if you were referring to me but I want to make clear that I do not oppose older pilots keeping on flying tout court. In fact those are the ones I learn a lot from on a daily basis.

I love flying and I consider myself blessed to be able to get a good salary out of it. But I am not my job. In 25-30 I look forward to enjoy retirement.

65 sounds like a reasonable cut off age to me. There needs to be a defined rule: it cannot be left to Mr.AME to decide wether you can continue past 65.
Papa_Golf is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 12:23
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 308
Some aircrafts parts are scrapped when they are “timex”, others are “on condition”. As long as there are GOOD inspection routines (OPC, medicals etc) there is no reason why pilots shouldn’t be “on condition”.
roundwego is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 12:39
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Home
Posts: 63
But can you guarantee that the TRE is going to have the balls to say “actually, mate - you’re past it”. If not, the system is flawed. Just like now, we have weak captains that continue in the LHS because “they’re alright” or, I presume, that’s easier than the alternative. If the retirement age goes, then I would favour a relocation to the RHS for those over 65.

Personally, I can’t wait for retirement. So yes, I am at total odds as to why anyone would wish to continue into their late 60s.
richardthethird is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 12:43
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Around and about
Age: 100
Posts: 15
The legal team will claim in the High Court that the enforced retirement age is arbitrary and constitutes age discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
Mandatory retirement at 65 was abolished a few years ago BUT, this does not apply where an age limit has been set by the State e.g. fire service, judiciary, army, police, air traffic control, etc
Chipzilla is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 13:15
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
...or in cases like aviation where there is a demonstrable evidence-based objective reason for the limit.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2018, 14:25
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Northampton, England
Age: 62
Posts: 373
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
...or in cases like aviation where there is a demonstrable evidence-based objective reason for the limit.
Is there an objective justification for the age limit? Something that made sense as a precautionary measure years ago may no longer make sense if we've now better understanding of cardiology etc and have how to diagnose changes.

Two fatal accidents I can think of where pilot's cardiac incapacitation was contributory or causal; Captain Key on Trident Papa India and the pilot of the Navajo that crashed shortly after departing Leeds in December 1974. Both well under 60.

The latter was single pilot operated.
Airbanda is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.