Good news for pilots - retirement age

Vaughn Simon wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
Then take it up with your union. The FAA's only consideration in this
matter should be safety, not who gets what seat and when.

That's the cutest thing I've ever heard.

-Robert

Vaughn Simon wrote:



Then take it up with your union. The FAA's only consideration in this
matter should be safety, not who gets what seat and when.


That has never been the reason for the age 60 rule.

Robert M. Gary writes:

But again, contrary to your subject line, *NOT* good for pilots (with
the possible exception of the few who are actually 59.5). Allowing
pilots to fly longer WILL NOT create more jobs. It will simply mean
that younger pilots won't have the access to the left seat they had
been lead to believe. If a guy can retire at 60, let him retire, let
someone else have a chance on the yoke. I'll be waiting for the first
youtube video of a first officer helping an ancient captain up the
ramp.

Sixty years old is not ancient by any measure. A person can fly for
decades beyond that as long as he remains in good health. And many
people remain in good health through to a much greater age.

Flying should be open to anyone who doesn't have a serious health
problem that interferes with it. Commercial airliners are not fighter
planes, and experience is more important than quick reflexes in these
types of aircraft.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article .com,
says...


But again, contrary to your subject line, *NOT* good for pilots (with
the possible exception of the few who are actually 59.5). Allowing
pilots to fly longer WILL NOT create more jobs.


Really quite the socialist view, yours.
You would be right in step in Europe - you should propose a new law that
would not allow airline pilots to log more than 20h a month - double the
airline's operating costs and see how many new jobs you create. With thinking
like that you could have a political career in France!

I was referring to enhancement of the lives and careers of pilots - I think
if you ask practicing pilots, even young ones, most would feel that the 60 rule
is unwelcome.

GF

Greg Farris wrote:
In article .com,
says...
I was referring to enhancement of the lives and careers of pilots - I think
if you ask practicing pilots, even young ones, most would feel that the 60 rule
is unwelcome.

If that were true, the union wouldn't have fought over this internally
for decades. Remember, only 1/2 the members are old.
-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:
Greg Farris wrote:
In article .com,
says...
I was referring to enhancement of the lives and careers of pilots - I think
if you ask practicing pilots, even young ones, most would feel that the 60 rule
is unwelcome.

If that were true, the union wouldn't have fought over this internally
for decades. Remember, only 1/2 the members are old.

According to the news, slightly over half the pilots oppose the age
change. All the union reps on the FAA advisory committee oppose the
rule change. And apparently the pilots who do desire the increase in
age, don't _want_ to keep working, but _have_ to keep working because
of pension decreases.

All the financial, union and political stuff just obscures the fact
that it's not really a physical issue these days.

Regards, Kev

In article .com,
says...


I'll be waiting for the first
youtube video of a first officer helping an ancient captain up the
ramp.



Maybe I can slow your free-fall off the deep end here by reminding you the
current proposal is only about extending the age to 65!!

GF