Pilot Sues For Forced Retirement
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nemrytter : Agreed. Again, Wayne's case is a simple challenge to the Regulatory Authority on the absurdity of the current, quite arbitrary age cut-off for PROFESSIONAL PILOTS. Many have tried to clarify the point with the simple illustration, I might have used, almost, the exact same words too ; why, having done the job, signed the Tech log, gone home, was Wayne prevented from doing the exact same thing after midnight the very next day, just because, Happy Birthday, he was 65 ? Because some statistic, somewhere, showed he was, as of the very next day , more likely to croak , at the controls. Show us the evidence !
If the Regulatory Authority has the facts, has the 1% data, has the statistical evidence, for PROFESSIONAL PILOTS, let's see it.
IN the old days. I was selected to become a TRE/IRE. I expressed, half-heartedly, a concern about what to do if it was ME who was asked a tricky question. I was told to blind with science, numbers & stats. Usually works !
According to the Daily Fail & it's persistant reporting on some statistical survey which changes boundaries every day, some Bod in London is getting knifed every six hours.................
yeah, and he is getting really cheesed off with it.
If the Regulatory Authority has the facts, has the 1% data, has the statistical evidence, for PROFESSIONAL PILOTS, let's see it.
IN the old days. I was selected to become a TRE/IRE. I expressed, half-heartedly, a concern about what to do if it was ME who was asked a tricky question. I was told to blind with science, numbers & stats. Usually works !
According to the Daily Fail & it's persistant reporting on some statistical survey which changes boundaries every day, some Bod in London is getting knifed every six hours.................
yeah, and he is getting really cheesed off with it.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was told to blind with science, numbers & stats. Usually works !
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: horsham
Age: 71
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beard
where was my sarcasm? I do mean it reading your views does make me smile.
Deeply Concerned
The REGULATOR defines acceptable risk as 1%. This is used to determine if a pilot has a limitation on his/ her licence there must be a less than 1% risk of incapacitation. There are further caviet which define critical phases of flight which amount to the take off and landing phases.
Where thère are 2 pilots the chances of both becoming incapacitated at the same time become astronomically low. The last data that ICAO accepted as valid was used in 2006 to raise the limit from 60 to 65. Dr Tony Evans supplied that data and it was based on 2004 data. It predicted that the 1% threshold was breached at age 70.
Group Capt Timperley gave a presentation at the Royal Aeronautical Society in Dec last year and his date predicted the 1% risk threshold not being breached until 80.
Like you the statistics are beyond me but I do understand that with enhanced medicals as applied by the Australians and other regulators pilots are allowed to earn a living beyond 65 in ten countries.
I also know that the CAA has not produced any evidence to support the 65 year limit. I am simply asking the Court to rule on whether or not they have meet their Statutary obligations under the Discrimination legislation.
which is why when I read Beards post I have to smile.
Wayne
where was my sarcasm? I do mean it reading your views does make me smile.
Deeply Concerned
The REGULATOR defines acceptable risk as 1%. This is used to determine if a pilot has a limitation on his/ her licence there must be a less than 1% risk of incapacitation. There are further caviet which define critical phases of flight which amount to the take off and landing phases.
Where thère are 2 pilots the chances of both becoming incapacitated at the same time become astronomically low. The last data that ICAO accepted as valid was used in 2006 to raise the limit from 60 to 65. Dr Tony Evans supplied that data and it was based on 2004 data. It predicted that the 1% threshold was breached at age 70.
Group Capt Timperley gave a presentation at the Royal Aeronautical Society in Dec last year and his date predicted the 1% risk threshold not being breached until 80.
Like you the statistics are beyond me but I do understand that with enhanced medicals as applied by the Australians and other regulators pilots are allowed to earn a living beyond 65 in ten countries.
I also know that the CAA has not produced any evidence to support the 65 year limit. I am simply asking the Court to rule on whether or not they have meet their Statutary obligations under the Discrimination legislation.
which is why when I read Beards post I have to smile.
Wayne
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last data that ICAO accepted as valid was used in 2006 to raise the limit from 60 to 65. Dr Tony Evans supplied that data and it was based on 2004 data. It predicted that the 1% threshold was breached at age 70.
Group Capt Timperley gave a presentation at the Royal Aeronautical Society in Dec last year and his date predicted the 1% risk threshold not being breached until 80.
Wayne
Group Capt Timperley gave a presentation at the Royal Aeronautical Society in Dec last year and his date predicted the 1% risk threshold not being breached until 80.
Wayne
As of 2016, a female baby born in the UK would on average be expected to live until 82.9, while a boy would be predicted to live until 79.2.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: horsham
Age: 71
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I guess you are more likely to die than be incapacitated because the incapacition event only is assessed for a few minutes each flight and dying will occur at any time over 24 hours 365 days a year. It is inevitable. Becoming incapacitated is only critical during take off and landing and how often do we do that each year?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: horsham
Age: 71
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fantom
Good advice. I wasn't worried by "attacks" but where pilots ask questions I am happy to reply.
I do also find it amusing where people repeatedly ask for scientific facts when it is all available on the internet. It reminds be of 'Allo 'Allo where the French police officer has communication issues 🤣
Good advice. I wasn't worried by "attacks" but where pilots ask questions I am happy to reply.
I do also find it amusing where people repeatedly ask for scientific facts when it is all available on the internet. It reminds be of 'Allo 'Allo where the French police officer has communication issues 🤣
This is funny! You are more likely to die than being incapacitated?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45096074
Whatever Wayne's motives might be, and they surely cannot be financial, I suspect that a ruling in his favour will not change the UK aviation scene that much and some form of appeal from the CAA would surely be inevltable putting the whole issue on hold for a further period of time.
The majority of pilots of my acquaintance have ceased commercial flying before getting to the age of 65. That being said, for every final salary fatcat ( that sounds harsh but its not meant to be ! ) there may well be a pilot who has been through the divorce process, raised a second family or perhaps been made redundant upon multiple occasions or seen their pensions shredded as in Monarch. Even in the latter sets of circumstances the prospect of working, even if part-time, may well be unpalatable for many. I do know pilots who would have continued after their 'enforced' retirement age but their numbers are dwarfed by those who got out at the first viable opportunity.
Would a change in the rules to a higher upper age limit of say 68 or 70 have a huge impact on times to command ? Personally I doubt it for the simple reason that, in my opinion at least, the take-up rate would not be very high. Complications with regulations imposed by other nation states could mean that the effective use of a higher age limit from the British Courts would be limited. Would pilots, already over 65, be rushing to find jobs having been away from flying for some time, again, I doubt it and the question of who would employ them and in what capacity would be an interesting one to answer.
If Wayne's campaign is unsuccessful, there will still be opportunities for non-flying roles such as simulator instructors ( the age of some around LGW never ceased to amaze me ! ) whilst the world of light-aircraft and simple pleasure flying awaits for those who need a regular fix.
Having already taken the decision to retire early ( no final-salary or Ferrari ) I have no particular axe to grind on this one but it may be that this is an opportune time to take on the CAA which some people tell me is in a state of permanent chaos
The majority of pilots of my acquaintance have ceased commercial flying before getting to the age of 65. That being said, for every final salary fatcat ( that sounds harsh but its not meant to be ! ) there may well be a pilot who has been through the divorce process, raised a second family or perhaps been made redundant upon multiple occasions or seen their pensions shredded as in Monarch. Even in the latter sets of circumstances the prospect of working, even if part-time, may well be unpalatable for many. I do know pilots who would have continued after their 'enforced' retirement age but their numbers are dwarfed by those who got out at the first viable opportunity.
Would a change in the rules to a higher upper age limit of say 68 or 70 have a huge impact on times to command ? Personally I doubt it for the simple reason that, in my opinion at least, the take-up rate would not be very high. Complications with regulations imposed by other nation states could mean that the effective use of a higher age limit from the British Courts would be limited. Would pilots, already over 65, be rushing to find jobs having been away from flying for some time, again, I doubt it and the question of who would employ them and in what capacity would be an interesting one to answer.
If Wayne's campaign is unsuccessful, there will still be opportunities for non-flying roles such as simulator instructors ( the age of some around LGW never ceased to amaze me ! ) whilst the world of light-aircraft and simple pleasure flying awaits for those who need a regular fix.
Having already taken the decision to retire early ( no final-salary or Ferrari ) I have no particular axe to grind on this one but it may be that this is an opportune time to take on the CAA which some people tell me is in a state of permanent chaos
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: horsham
Age: 71
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nightstop,
It will not fail to reach its target. But the more successful it is the better our prospects become.
As for comments on an Appeal. It isn't in the public interest to defend this challange. Going to Court mearly offers an opportunity to expose the fact that the CAA had not performed one of its public duties. Appealing against a decision in our favour just offers up an increased prospect of someone loosing their job.
It will not fail to reach its target. But the more successful it is the better our prospects become.
As for comments on an Appeal. It isn't in the public interest to defend this challange. Going to Court mearly offers an opportunity to expose the fact that the CAA had not performed one of its public duties. Appealing against a decision in our favour just offers up an increased prospect of someone loosing their job.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: sky
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right to choose
Hi all,
I am from Brazil and as long as you pass your medical and your pc you are ok to fly( domestic routes of course).
There are some 71 year old captains flying at GOL AIRLINES and also at LATAM( 69,I believe).
I thing there should be no restrictions regarding age , I also thing it`s a matter of choice and no one should have the right to make that decision but yourself.
Some guys have lost their provident fund due to previous companies bankrupcy( VARIG,VASP and TRANSBRASIL) and have no other option and some others just want to keep on flying.
My two cents.
Fly safe.
I am from Brazil and as long as you pass your medical and your pc you are ok to fly( domestic routes of course).
There are some 71 year old captains flying at GOL AIRLINES and also at LATAM( 69,I believe).
I thing there should be no restrictions regarding age , I also thing it`s a matter of choice and no one should have the right to make that decision but yourself.
Some guys have lost their provident fund due to previous companies bankrupcy( VARIG,VASP and TRANSBRASIL) and have no other option and some others just want to keep on flying.
My two cents.
Fly safe.
Last edited by Fbwdude; 4th Sep 2018 at 18:20.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also support you Wayne. A totally arbitrary cut off age is simply wrong.
I could accept age being part of a matrix of factors that would decide when a pilot has to stop but not age alone. The 2 main issues are competence and health so a matrix that starts at age 60 where the pilot has 150 point then looses 5 per year till he is 65 the 10 points per year till 70 then 15 per year till the end while also loosing points for sub average scores on training and a disproportionate number for totally failing a second check could with similar deductions for being in a risk category health wise i.e over weight, unhealthy life style, unable to run 5 km etc would attract similar deductions. This matrix would mean that some underperforming and unhealthy pilots would be retired before 65 and those who work hard to maintain their standards and are functioning well enough to do so and making the effort ( possibly having the good luck) to stay fit and active could work on till 75 ish (almost certainly part time).
From what ive seen in my career most pilots don't go chasing hosties and are faithful to their partner so don't deserve the financial hit they take when marriage breaks down, its often precisely because the pilot is away working trying to provide for his wife and family that the partner chooses to leave because the pilot is not at home enough, cant commit to social occasions like other professions or when he is home he is tired from the early starts and long days
For the young pilots coming through thinking the older guys are" bed blocking", not all the old pilots have had an easy career and many do still need to work. In my younger days it was not uncommon to meet pilots who had been laid off 5 times in 10 years and spent much of that time commuting to a different airport every year and earning next to nothing.Even being trained by BA was not a golden ticket and many pilots were redeployed to other jobs with a very slow start to their career and waited decades for command. Many of the young pilots today might be glad of working a few more years past 65 when their time comes once they see what life has dealt them. Certainly the younger pilots will have poorer pensions than the few lucky guys who made it through their career on a final salary scheme, given the cost of buying a house many pilots will still be paying their mortgages off in their 70's
A job is not just a way of earning money, nor is it necessarily about "status" its a great buzz to fly modern aeroplanes, visiting interesting places and working with intelligent and capable people...... all those thing i will miss when i eventually retire. I have good hobbies, keep really fit,have a great circle of friends but finishing my working life will leave a big hole that will be hard to fill and having lost my pension through no fault of my own (these things do still happen just ask and Monarch, BMI of many other pilots), I do need to keep earning past 65.
bb
I could accept age being part of a matrix of factors that would decide when a pilot has to stop but not age alone. The 2 main issues are competence and health so a matrix that starts at age 60 where the pilot has 150 point then looses 5 per year till he is 65 the 10 points per year till 70 then 15 per year till the end while also loosing points for sub average scores on training and a disproportionate number for totally failing a second check could with similar deductions for being in a risk category health wise i.e over weight, unhealthy life style, unable to run 5 km etc would attract similar deductions. This matrix would mean that some underperforming and unhealthy pilots would be retired before 65 and those who work hard to maintain their standards and are functioning well enough to do so and making the effort ( possibly having the good luck) to stay fit and active could work on till 75 ish (almost certainly part time).
From what ive seen in my career most pilots don't go chasing hosties and are faithful to their partner so don't deserve the financial hit they take when marriage breaks down, its often precisely because the pilot is away working trying to provide for his wife and family that the partner chooses to leave because the pilot is not at home enough, cant commit to social occasions like other professions or when he is home he is tired from the early starts and long days
For the young pilots coming through thinking the older guys are" bed blocking", not all the old pilots have had an easy career and many do still need to work. In my younger days it was not uncommon to meet pilots who had been laid off 5 times in 10 years and spent much of that time commuting to a different airport every year and earning next to nothing.Even being trained by BA was not a golden ticket and many pilots were redeployed to other jobs with a very slow start to their career and waited decades for command. Many of the young pilots today might be glad of working a few more years past 65 when their time comes once they see what life has dealt them. Certainly the younger pilots will have poorer pensions than the few lucky guys who made it through their career on a final salary scheme, given the cost of buying a house many pilots will still be paying their mortgages off in their 70's
A job is not just a way of earning money, nor is it necessarily about "status" its a great buzz to fly modern aeroplanes, visiting interesting places and working with intelligent and capable people...... all those thing i will miss when i eventually retire. I have good hobbies, keep really fit,have a great circle of friends but finishing my working life will leave a big hole that will be hard to fill and having lost my pension through no fault of my own (these things do still happen just ask and Monarch, BMI of many other pilots), I do need to keep earning past 65.
bb
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: `
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shotone
A 777 with one engine out is probably safer than a Vickers Vimy with two
Who remembers FEDEX 705. An interview with one of the pilots who had to take anti seizure tablets and so couldn't fly said he missed the profession. He missed the camaraderie of his fellow pilots and the flying. He mentioned nothing about thinking of wanting to retire when he was 31 like some new poster. In a nutshell, he loved his profession and wanted to keep doing it but was stopped by one selfish bastard.
Then there was the guy who did pipeline or power line patrols in a J3 or PA18. 52,000 hours and 3 days after retirement, he died. Did he die from a medical condition or was his passion stolen from him because he reached 70?
If you love what you are doing then why not keep on doing it until medically unable. In this thread we have what appear to be middle age pilots who can't wait to pull the plug. Then why not do it now and toddle of and do something that you do like. You may just live longer and be a lot happier than you appear to indicate in your posts.
I wish Captain Bayley all the best in his endeavour to keep aloft.
