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.

WORD John_Smith,

Actually a shame we're even discussing 65+ we shouldn't have been discussing 60+ either...... One of the reasons our t/r's are going to hell in a handbasket!
Go fishing, play with your grand kids or fly a glider and be a real pilot. Stop pissing in your own nest!!

John Smith,

Before you lose all credibility on this forum you will have to share with us the name of your employer.

€150k per year after tax & in excess of 20% company defined pension contributions....

Maybe if you started flying in the 60s for a legacy (and have in fact retired before DC pensions were reduced at almost every airline), but that deal is long gone from modern aviation.

I await to be proven wrong, and then will send them my CV!

For those questioning John Smith maybe you aren't as well informed as you think you are. I was a CTC cadet of the same era as him and we were indeed offered unsecured loans. As for his employer, well that's, ahem, "ezy" to guess in my opinion.....

And broadly speaking I agree with his sentiments. If people want to keep flying beyond 65 and can hold down a medical and maintain licence proficiency then good luck to them, each to their own. However I can't think of anything worse after a 40 year plus airline career of continuing into my 70s with the work life balance going the way it is.

The big beef with the 65ers who wish to continue in the established airlines (BA being a prime example) is they will continue to sit at the top of a seniority list cherry picking as they please while everyone else underneath has to sit and stagnate while the goal posts keep changing in the senior chaps favour. In smaller airlines/non-airline flying I can imagine the motivation is an enjoyment of a niche side of professional flying an airline jockey might never see.

But in general I'm with John Smith. Airline flying is becoming increasingly dull, regimented and automated. If will only become more so. If you find yourself admiring the way AP1 flys that that cracking RNAV or get a kick out of working out dispatch landing distances 4 times a day because the regulatory body says we have to then good for you, but I really do think those who carry on are ruining a well deserved retirement. All a matter of opinion of course...

Anyway, an incendiary topic this most certainly is, so I stand by for incoming.

I'm sure everyone can see, BMRR, the difference between your post and john__smith's. You make the same point seem so much more balanced, reasonable and worth consideration. I don't think you need worry about "incoming". Some debate, perhaps...

It really is not what JS says. Some of it is quite right and yes unsecured loans were easily available 8-10 years ago. NatWest matched HSBC offer if you asked.

No, it is the way he says it. The arrogance and rudeness is incredible. Opinion is fine and is personal but every thread he contributes to ends the same way - in a tirade of bitter and angry comments.

You were lucky. You could have come out of Oxford and taken a path to XL. Maybe after 5 years you could have found yourself redundant for the 3rd time and then spent years in a sandpit. You do say luck is involved. Never a truer word spoke. So bloody well lay off those whose coin landed on the other side.

JS - you have made your position so clear so many times. Time now for you to toddle off to your better place with your superior brain and leave us half brains alone. We are sick now of being lectured by you. You might just find that your attitude will cause you problems further down the line.

Reading this thread makes me realise that after nearly forty years being paid to fly aeroplanes it is almost time to call it a day. No sugar daddy, no loans, no second wife or third for that matter, no boat, no light aircraft but thankfully no mortgage and no ulcer. Do I want to have my life dicated to my rostering and crewing much longer - no, do I need a fortune to retire - no, will I need to work at B&Q - no, is it time to let a younger pilot get his or her promotion - yes, is life too short - yes, have I been too to many funerals of younger pilots than myself - yes.

Look at the stats guys.......

Bit More - you make the point of that side of the argument so much better, without the bragging or insults. I would, as I have said on this or a related thread, give up working tomorrow if I could afford it. I agree about the downward trend of working conditions and am trying to improve my lot. Once my kids are self-reliant, then my options will open up considerably, but between now and then, I have to consider the worst option of needing to continue in a reasonable highly paid job, of which only one am I qualified for. I do expect to be able to do it part time, on a job share with someone else in a similar position - no way would I work full time for a loco at that age. If things work out right, I'll be able to go part time at 55 and have a semi retirement at that point and cruise on a bit later; I think taking the foot of the accelerator earlier and delaying full retirement too will be a better combination than a sprint to a finish at 65 - look at how many retirees turn their toes up within the first couple of years of slowing down! I'd like to get a more relaxed life while I'm young enough to enjoy it and still have something to do and a useful income beyond 65...

That's an easy question. Many pilots retain their love and enthusiasm for piloting an aeroplane until the day they die of old age. The greatest thrill of my life was as a 21 year old with 220 hours flinging a Mustang around the sky between towering Cu doing a tail chase on another Mustang. How can that experience not live with you? I still long for those days. I flew an ultra light a few weeks ago and still got a thrill at doing a neat crosswind landing.

In Europe I was pushed out of airline flying 23 years ago because of the age 60 rule but still look up in envy an watch the Boeings and Airbus coming down the ILS at the airport near my house. Other pilot retirees I know are perfectly happy to spend their lives pulling garden weeds and complaining of rickety knees. Horses for courses.

Whilst I agree with Centaurus about the pleasure of flying, I am not sure that regulatory authorities should take that into account when drawing up legislation to determine what age a commercial pilot should retire. Like it or not, as we age we slow down and unless we, as a group, accept more stringent medicals throughout our careers which would doubtless cause more of us to retire than it does now, I doubt any legislator would be likely to support such an extension to the retirement age. Regulators tend to view things through the lens of the tabloid blame game, which is why we have some rather silly rules on jump seats etc.

Land flap.. what the !!!! are you talking about? Are you serious? You are top class? Ah ah ah..make me laugh !! Enthusiast idiots like you, that mostly got their license at tax payer expenses are the real ruin of this job. How does a doctor gets his degree? By paying its college...don't he ? The day civil aviation will get completely rid of that negative influence, only that day it will become a real profession.

Hi john_smith, you question how people can miss manage their finances. Well it's easy really, spend much of your career on small airlines that don't pay much and fail, then get divorced because of the anti social hours, blow a fortune bringing up kids and then have your pension fund fail as BMI and Monarch pilots did and it's really easy !

Furb, you are talking out of your backside. I can't speak for the rest of the EU, but in the UK you can't even get a tax break on the training costs, let alone get state subsidy. Doctors, lawyers, IT, business, financial experts and all the other high income professions get trained at universities which have state funding, so their course costs are much, much less than ours, and usually paid for by student loans that have special low interest rates and are underwritten by the tax payer, and only to be paid back if earnings exceed a threshold with the unpaid balance written off at tax payers' loss after 30 years.

Please don't interpret this as an attack on those professions - doctors especially, who have to work horrific hours for the first several years of their career. I'm merely pointing out Furb's assertion of pilots being state funded as being utter lies.

Only 2 out of the 5 Airlines I have worked for had Company Pension schemes.
Both of which have been decimated. So some of us have no choice but to work until we can actually afford to retire. And when that day comes I shall enjoy as much of it as I can.

To try and return the thread to the opening post.

In the EU there is now no compulsory retirement age. However in this profession only we have a regulation in place that makes it impossible to earn a living from that profession beyond 65. This is surely not correct and open to challenged in the courts at some point. Additionally in the UK at least it's now government policy to keep older workers in the workplace and to that end its now not possible for me to claim my state pension until 67. Something is clearly wrong here. Everyone (else) has the right to work if they wish but not us.

Furb; "By paying its college......don't he " ! Er yes, excellent articulation ! Troll alert, Troll alert ! But I must counter. Yes, I was sponsored, although I did repay 1/3rd of training costs through reduced salary over five years. The other 2/3rd was by the sponsoring airline and the Uk CAA (Ministry of Aviation as it was then called ). Selection was a five day affair.' Pay to flyers' are convinced by the providers that the former are worthy of a place at the school because they need to put bums on otherwise empty seats. The' pay to flyers' are so easily taken in that they then, according to Smithy, (ooooh no, did I patronise my mate by calling him Smithy ?...............Ooooh no, just called him "Mate " ! Oh dear !); yes, according to Smithy, get unsecured loans. Good grief. Look, Furb, Air Transport flying is a top class profession and it has been dumbed down by the pay to flyers. I never suggested that I was top class (even though I clearly am) but that the profession itself is indeed top class and should admit only those who pass extremely rigorous selection criteria rather than the size of their wallets. Those who wish to extend beyond age 60-65-67 to unrestricted (age) let them slide the cream on top of the cake and continue, for most of them, to enjoy a profession they clearly love. Oh and finally, a school chum was SELECTED for Guys Hospital 5 year Doctor Training and it cost him nothing, back in the early 70's. Get back to sponsored professional training for ANY profession and we will educate back up to impeccable standards.

Probably mentioned before, however, the thread crept so much from the origin! .anyway, considering the majority of us are flying with EASA licences, one would assume all the member states would have to agree to exercising the privileges after the age of 65.. now, given it takes years to agree a single subject, perhaps it would be delusional to assume any changes can be implemented within the next 10 years. For me 60 is more than enough, rather than earn more money I would choose to save money by working in Tesco!

Medical and Technical
 

the unic limitation that a pilot should have to be allowed to fly is:Subject do Medical and Technical :ok::D

Reading this thread makes me realise that after nearly forty years being paid to fly aeroplanes it is almost time to call it a day. No sugar daddy, no loans, no second wife or third for that matter, no boat, no light aircraft but thankfully no mortgage and no ulcer. Do I want to have my life dicated to my rostering and crewing much longer - no, do I need a fortune to retire - no, will I need to work at B&Q - no, is it time to let a younger pilot get his or her promotion - yes, is life too short - yes, have I been too to many funerals of younger pilots than myself - yes.

Look at the stats guys.......




I'm with you Beamer. 40 years was enough for me . I got out (voluntarily) at 61. Quality of life over standard of living every time. I built a house, did a year as Captain of my golf club and to be honest standard of living has not dropped appreciably either. I cannot for the life of me imagine 40 years of Ryanair or Easyjet. I was lucky that the Queen paid for my training and I spent 20 years having essentially fun before going into the airlines. Can't do that anymore methinks.

Cider

I suspect we may have similar backgrounds !

Enjoy the golf.............:ok: