65 Age limit abolished
 

The age of 65 is abolished in UK and no one can make a person leave or be fired from a job regardless it is against the law to do this as it is discrimnating against that person Only the ICAO have not been updated
No boss can fire you for your age and if they want you to stay no establishment can fire you
I have a letter from the UK Office of Pensions etc outlining this if anyone wants it
These ignorant CAA people want you out because they think you are as fat as they are and about to have a heart attack when some older People are more fit to work than the young
If you are a Pilot and hold a First class medical you should never be penalised because of your age and if we all stayed together we can at least fly till we want to retire at our own convenience or when we can no longer hold a medical that way Airlines can use the older pilots to train the ones coming up at least they might have a chance of using their skills better as the young can learn so much from the older Pilots

Ridiculous

If you've been an Airline pilot most of your life and you can't retire before 65 , then you will not really have much of a retirement.

That brings the UK in line with what Australia has had for over 25 years.
Be aware though that you could only fly domestically in the UK, not to or over France for instance. This limits the type of aircraft you may be rostered on.
In OZ you have to retire from longhaul and bid onto the 737 or another domestic type to continue flying over 65. (If you can pass the training:E)
Some continue , most buy a boat/farm/aircraft etc.:ok:

Same as the set up in New Zealand, no long haul over 65 but fly domestic until you lose your medical or fail the check flights. Quite a few over 70's flying A320. Oldest turns 75 this year.

Be aware though that you could only fly domestically in the UK, not to or over France for instance.

I've no interest in flying beyond 65, but I ask a question of the legality of this statement. I remember the argument over the 60 age limit some years ago. France and other EU countries tried to impose the 60 limit when others used 65. This led to overfly problems. That was resolved and EU came 65. The argument was based on a perceived safety issue. That was JAR. Now it's EASA, and law not recommendations. Now, the EU has an age discrimination policy for all countries. I think the safety issue for +65's is still perceived, not proven. Thus, is it legal for any country to impose a 65 limit? If there is no proven data to uphold thus policy is it not therefore non-compliance of EU law, unless there are dispensations for certain industries.

Any sovereign nation can write whatever it likes into its legal code. Anyone wishing to do business there must obey the law of that land. If, for example, the US decided retirement age was 47 for pilots and that no pilot over that age could operate in their airspace, then any company that wished to fly to the US would have to ensure that it's pilots met that criterion for that route.

We may not like that other countries have laws we don't like but we still have to obey them whilst in that country.

So to ask if it is legal for any country to impose an age for pilot retirement, is a bit confused. A sovereign state determines its own laws and therefore determines what is legal within its borders.

The only exemptions to that are international laws, which are essentially treaties between countries, if broken then sanctions or other more forceful measures would have to be taken by a coalition of other countries to force the recalcitrant nation to heel. Which simply won't happen over the retirement age for a few well paid pilots.

Well, not exactly. In the EU, as you should be aware, the legislative ability of national parliaments is limited by the various EU treaties, which make EU law superior to national legislation in many respects.

Indeed, but should any individual nation decide to change it's mind and ignore the EU, then the EU would have to try to enforce it somehow. EU law is only superior to national law while national governments voluntarily accept the superiority of the EU law.

Either way this is a side issue to the legality of the age laws.

Part FCL, especially FCL.065 b) makes it currently impossible to fly as a pilot beyond age 65 in europe in commercial air transport. It doesn't make it impossible to earn a living though as outside commercial air transport one can use the privileges of the FCL license unlimited. That legislation cannot be changed with local law at this time short of leaving the EU, which of course is always possible. But even for countries not within the EU it is binding if they want to participate in the european market, like switzerland for example.

Even more restricting is the rule however that you may only fly from 60 to 64 in a multicrew flightdeck, which is especially bad for those colleagues who are flying in exactly that environment, like for example all those rescue helicopter pilots who will be out of a job when the opt-out period is over.

John Smith: Some people just love flying. That doesn't seem to occur to you. Were you one of those people who chose flying for rational rather than emotional reasons? No wonder you're glad to be out of it.

And yet again, John Smith demonstrates how the result of mum and dad paying for his training means he has no ability to understand the predicament of others in lets financially comfortable positions due to other commitments or burdens, or who's pension plans have been wiped out by inept managers, corrupt banks and the Labour party's tenure in government.

Current wife, ex wife or possibly wives, bit on the side :E, childrens private school fees, then cars for them (plus insurance), then gap year living costs, then "I can't save enough for a deposit", plus that 5 bedroom "executive home" in the exclusive cul-de-sac with contemporary interior that would make that Grand Designs bloke have an orgasm...it doesn't pay for itself you know, nor that "little place in France", the boat at the coast, the golf club membership etc etc...it all adds up apparently! :}

But not everyone flies for an airline..... so a six figure salary might well have at least one decimal place in it.

John, this place is for professional pilots. You appear misplaced. A thumping unsecured loan , er, how did you achieve that ? Pension pot growing by 50k a year, er, how do you achieve that ? You must either have a huge amount invested at today's low interest rates in low attitude to risk preferences or small to medium capital in high risk preference. Gosh, and saving 50k a year out of salary, er , how are you achieving that ? Your attitude to those professionals who really do love airline flying is astonishing but then, with only half a brain, it is equally astonishing that they are still passing mandatory medicals. Mate, head off to your new profession. You got into this top class profession by paying for it yourself and not being subjected to any form of proper selection. It really shows.

Smith, few people get your employer contributions, and many get none. And with your voluntary contributions, it would seem you don't have the costs of supporting a family, or at least paying for decent schooling. You live in a care free and unusually well paid microcosm with little idea of the reality faced by most pilots, so please stop pontificating on every thread that we are all overpaid and underworked. You are either a manager or a very egotistical fast-track youngster that is compelled to show off how well they have done. Neither impresses me. Quite possibly neither, but strangely unaccompanied by a family for a mature pilot - can't imagine why...

Try asking a retired or near retirement Monarch, Astreus or BMI pilot how their pension is looking, and then try pulling your head out a bit.

I can see why any party is going to target airline pilots and their super salaries.