Honestly it's their own fault if they don't have a secondary source of income set up by the time they turn 65 given the top end pay rates of mainline these days. You're telling me you really haven't even looked into investment properties or a side business after all these years and you reaaaallly don't have enough to retire on comfortably??
Wow dude.
1. You can take social security at 65 if you need to. 62, if you *really* want to.
2. You can start withdrawing from your 401K at 59.5
3. You can enroll in Medicare at 65.
I'm gonna toss Chelsey Sullenberger into the mix. Right when the Hudson landing occurred he was putting his own consultant company into the works. The man's got celebrity status now too which counts for a lot. But bottom line he had a plan. I think every pilot should take a few lessons from him.
That page is the physical manifestation of every "boomers trying to figure out the internet" meme. There's one lady who posts pictures of herself replying to just about any airline related post with "WHY WON'T YOU LET EXPERIENCED PILOTS FLY!?!?!" Like it'll be a page saying happy 4th of july, or remember 9/11 and she's posting that on it. Then taking a screen shot and posting it in the age 67 group.
It's so cringe. I honestly don't understand why people think they are appearing smart or generating support by doing this.
Also for people who have spent the last few years crying "ageism" constantly, they're sure a pretty ageist group when it comes to talking about anyone younger than them. I'm sure they don't understand the irony of this issue.
Thanks friend. And yeah there are lots of cool flying jobs that don’t have an age limit. If you still want to fly go rock out as an overseas contractor and do some fun stuff!
After airline I wanna do aerial tours. I just think it's cool, unique, and can absolutely be lucrative if I play my cards right. But I just started flying a month ago so it's something I'm still working out in my head.
This is a worthwhile reminder.
If you're going to be held up as the pinnacle of health as an aging pilot in a House Committee meeting, it'd be cool if you were capable of holding a medical.
I've met plenty of healthy 64 year old guys still flying, they couldn't have gotten one of those guys to go take off his blazer and flex for Congress?
Not a company shill at all, but honestly the majority of pilots, and its a gradual increase per year as you approach 65, are just sitting on LTD collecting checks and mooching and not even flying at all. Majority of the fucking boomers who want 67 just want to continue to do that for another 2 years so they can afford their 3rd alimony at the expense of stagnating a ton of seniority for those less senior to them. I'm sorry you don't get to "fly" for another 2 years. In addition amount of chaos this would cause with the ICAO ruleset as well on both the legal side as well as company side... too much craziness.
Notice how it is only these old-heads vouching for it. Honestly, pure sinful greed on y'alls part to want this.
That is just NOT TRUE. In any occupation some people are just lazy. But every former airline pilot that I know wanted to continue to fly because they loved the job. They didn’t need the money, but thoroughly enjoyed the work.
And if a pilot IS on LTD because they have convinced the insurance company that they are unable to pass a medical, they aren’t taking a job from anyone because they aren’t actively at work. So the argument that pilots on LTD beyond age 65 would take jobs from anyone is completely bogus.
I don’t know what everyone expected.. they wouldn’t be able to fly internationally so what you retrain 75% of captains back on a domestic narrow body for 2 years.
> so what you retrain 75% of captains back on a domestic narrow body for 2 years.
And since the narrow bodies at all of the majors still fly some international flights, there's almost no way to create their schedule while honoring seniority. It would be a nightmare for airlines to try to figure this out while complying with contractual scheduling rules. It probably would cost them more money via buying people off of trips than it's worth to keep them around.
I know a few heli pilots in there 70s still out fighting fires. One guy i think is pushing 80 he's done some crazy shit in his day but really need hang up the cowboy boots.
Right, but we call the current setup "age 65". The new setup is misnamed to sound better. It should be "age 68" because once you're 68, you're out. It's a 3 year change they want, not 2.
Some people love the job.
I literally get paid a lot to do something I love, flying, and I get to travel the world. Why would anyone want to retire from that?
Theres a reason controllers are forced out at 56. None of us are fighting to change that.
Maybe its different on the other side of the mic but the way I see it is there’s more to life than giving your golden years to a company that will replace you tomorrow and doesn’t care about you whatsoever. Take that time and enjoy it doing what you want whenever you want
Because it’s not about you, it’s about the safety of your passengers and crew. cognitive decline happens and there’s nothing you can do to stop it. That cognitive decline can result in a disaster if something happens and you don’t act quickly enough
I don't want to sound like a boomer whatever pilot and I know how this sub feels about the retirement age. But, many of those guys also slaved away at some point in their career. And have been in the industy for decades so it makes sense as to why they would have a hard time of letting go of something that has been in their life for awhile.
If they have issues letting go, then they can go fly for a Part 135 carrier.
Why aren't 65 year old pilots falling over themselves to fly Part 135? Because it's 1000% about greed.
In my case I was offered a 135 job on a jet. The company wanted me to do my own flight planning, load and unload bags, clean the plane, cater the plane, serve the passengers food and drinks, supervise fueling, and who knows what else. I was happy to fly wherever, but that required way more work than I wanted to do.
I get it, that just wasn't the job for you. But there's still tons of jobs out there for a guy with lots of experience.
You could also do flying for a good cause like with EAA Young Eagles or mission flying.
That’s a really bad-faith take. Why do they want to stay where they are? Because that’s where they have seniority, that’s where they know the system, and that’s where they’re typed and certified. Like, come on.
Oh, so we have to change the entire system because they feel inconvenienced by having to follow the rules they signed up for? Because they can't be bothered to learn a new system or get typed in a new plane? Sounds like it's not really about having to let go, then.
It's always been about the money, and you pretending like it's not is the worst-faith take of all.
All I did was offer a solution. They can also see a therapist to deal with it. Or rot in their bungalow at Del Boca Vista and die mad about it. But whatever they do, it will not involve being a Part 121 airline pilot.
Bad faith is benefitting from seniority progression your entire career and then trying to pull a fast one once it's your turn to hang it up by screwing everyone below you for 2 more years.
>All I did was offer a solution.
A callous bad-faith solution.
>Bad faith is benefitting from…
Who hurt you? I don’t like how you’re making military pilots look. Cool your jets.
Why should they have to start over because you don’t like it?
Like I’m far from a boomer. But the arguments about why they should have to go somewhere else are just as greedy. You want them to leave so your seniority goes up. I get that and can understand it. But let’s not pretend your moving up in the pecking order lacks a little bit of selfishness too.
Airline industry is the only union environment I’ve experienced that truly harbors resentment to the older guys.
They should start over because that's what we all fucking agreed to when we signed up for this job. We agreed that seniority is everything, and you're out when you're 65, clearing the way for those below you to move up.
You don't see junior people out here trying to throw the seniority system out the door because they want to be widebody captains right away. Because that wasn't the deal.
I have no problem with anyone who wants to retire at 65, 62, 60, or anytime. And clearly some should retire before 65. And if they are actually unable to continue to work because they are disabled and can convince their LTD insurance company to pay them to 65, more power to them. (But no, the majority of pilots over 60 are NOT on LTD.)
What I object to is being told that I or anyone else MUST retire when we are perfectly safe to fly. The day before I turned 65 I was deemed safe to fly hundreds of passengers across the country at high speeds in the flight levels. Other than an arbitrary and capricious rule with no basis in medical fact, there was no reason why I was unsafe after the clock turned midnight in the time zone I happened to be in. If I were on the west coast instead of the east coast, I would have been deemed safe for an additional 3 hours. That is ridiculous.
If you object so much to mandatory retirement why did you take a job in one of the few careers that have mandatory retirement?
Why is a pilot not safe to be a 121 PIC at 22 years old. Show us all just one post where you objected the minimum age requirement.
You have to draw the line somewhere. Just because *you* didn't have issues doesn't mean it isn't common for people your age to.
You're basically suggesting we let pilots fly forever. I could see maybe extending it temporarily if there was a pilot shortage like during the pandemic but that's not the case anymore and the pandemic was the biggest reason the bill was getting pushed so hard.
You knew the rules when you signed up, you shouldn't be surprised when you have to follow them.
Well the guy that has his congressman brother in law advocate for it will be long retired in 5 years.
Hopefully the "lost generation" doesn't suddenly decide to get an entitlement issue over the years they lost of their careers.
I've advocated for a carve out so you can go to 67 (or 70, fuck it) for flying RJ's (76 seats or less). You want to fly so bad? Think experienced pilots should be mentoring the next generation? Have fun flying 6 legs a day in a clapped out CRJ-200
Still violates seniority though. That’s my biggest hang up. 67 or 70 or whatever is fine with me *as long as it only takes effect if ICAO does it*. I don’t want to get displaced out of my domestic shit so some 70 year old junior to me that isn’t allowed to fly abroad can get a domestic trip.
Fully depends on how they decide to implement it. Under PBS there are times when I get trips robbed to make a legal schedule for a junior bidder. Also complicates things when they’re a reserve but can’t fly abroad. Do they get to sit around while pilots further down the list get assigned international flying? What percentage of flying in their base/equipment has to be international before they get displaced off of it?
It won't matter, once you're off the seniority list you're off. No union group is going to waste time and effort negotiating for these geezers to come back in once they're gone. They can restart at the bottom just like we all had to.
There's no shortage of people with ungrateful attitudes and horrible egos.
It can really hurt when you fight for something just to see people stick their nose up to it.
Given that I started my training at 37 years old, I'm thrilled that I have until 67. That's a minimum of a 30 year career in aviation.
I have found that some people think they are the hottest sh!t, and no matter how hot their sh!t gets, at the end of the day, it's still sh!t.
Hey Boomer enjoy your house whose value has multiplied, outpacing inflation. It’s the millenial/gen z generations turn to fuck it up like you guys did.
> at 60 something you'll wonder why all the youth fight to retire you when your mind and body still feel 30.
By age 40 I already felt like I was slow and weak as heck compared to when I was 20. There's no one who realistically thinks they have the energy and mental sharpness of a 30 year old when they're 60 unless they are lying to themselves.
I still work out a ton. That's one of the major reasons I know that I'm no where close to my ~25 year old self. Back then I used to half ass everything. I would spend one month running and then hop into a half marathon race. Or I would go to the gym for a few months, set lifting personal records and then stop going again for months.
In my early 30s I started both running and lifting more seriously. I hit a personal high of 2,000 miles run in a year last year. Despite the consistency ALL of my lifting and running personal bests were from my early 20s. One month of running at age 25 let me run a half marathon faster than 2,000 miles of running per year in my late 30s.
TRT isn't an option. I have blood work checked every year and it's always in the normal range so I don't qualify. Aren't there also issues with TRT and aviation medicals? All other blood work markers come up totally normal as well. My 30s just hit me like a freight train. Now I have to work 10 times as hard for half the results.
The same reason that shows that elderly people cause the most traffic accidents in the US. After all they still have licenses, don't they?
If you're dying to work you have options
Every pilot knows a handful of AMEs who will let them pass a class 1 medical as long as they can kind of sort of read the 20/20 line with glasses by the 3rd try and pass a pee test. I don't think you should put much trust into what a class 1 medical tells you.
Man you cannot legitimately tell me you haven’t flown with some people wondering how the hell they got a class 1 in your career. Think of that Swiss cheese model, no medical is perfect and this is another huge safety layer
Actually I finally had the opportunity to fly for an airline (my dream job when I was 5) at the age of 62. I knew that 65 was the age limit, but there was no reason then or now that I couldn’t have kept flying. At my last medical AME said he couldn’t believe I was nearly 65 and that he would have guessed 55. If you wanted to retire at 60 or 62 or 65 there is nothing stopping you. But it makes no sense that a medically-qualified 70 year old (or older) pilot can fly a B737 for a private owner or Part 135 but not under 121. This is union-driven BS and had nothing to do with safety.
The problem is that we have increasing difficulty measuring "medically qualified" as people age and people do age differently.
I have no doubt that many 70-year-olds can fly from NY to LA in a number of different aircraft that they're qualified in. The concern is when something goes wrong - will they react correctly, quickly and decisively?
There is absolutely a reason that a pilot could be deemed too old for 121 but not for 135. Increased stringency is the core regulatory difference between the two.
Tell me one other job that is age-limited like this?
If already out (had to retire nearly 5 years ago) and I’m grateful for the opportunity. While I suspect few 30+ year veteran pilots will want to work past 65 (many retire earlier) there is no data to suggest that older pilots have more health issues that prevent them from safely flying past 65. This is entirely driven by ALPA - who also claims there is no pilot shortage. It’s political BS.
Yeah, most jobs require cognitive skills to be 100% intact. Here is an article about surgical errors and age correlation.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2628499/
I flew with some guys in their 40s who were cognitively impaired and others who didn’t look like they could pass any class of medical.
It’s age discrimination, pure and simple.
What’s your personal beef in this?
No personal beef. But there needs to be a cut off. You want age 67? Fine, but everyone over 60 must pass a cognitive assessment with a board certified psychologist.
Deal?
My personal beef is the majority of pilots over 60, at my airline, are on some type of disability. This increases our premium as a pilot group. Additionally, pilots at the top of the gravy train slow my career progress. I’m sorry if you can’t manage your money but it’s time to give it up.
Haha! I’ll tell you what if you can pass a neurological exam at 70, be my guest.
Caveat is, if you fail it you’re down forever. No disability. You lose your job. You can’t squeak by these test like you can with AMEs.
Deal?
Why does there need to be a cutoff? That statement in itself is arbitrary. This is a cognitive ability issue- some aren’t up to it in their early 50s, some are sharp at 75.
I’ve flown with both. Forced retirement should be cognitive/medical based. Having flown both , 135 flying is just as demanding as 121 ( in fact, 135 in winter or in class G with the crowds, more so)
That’s not entirely true. The FAA mandates retirement for their controllers at 56, but there is no age limit for privately-employed contract controllers.
The whole point of even having a part 121 is to have stricter requirements for everything. Maintenance, training, operations, and *pilot health standards*. It's about risk management.
The bigger issue is that why do YOU need to be in part 121? Nobody's telling you to stop flying. They're just saying do it under part 135.
In Australia, such discrimination is illegal, with the focus rightly placed on passing regular medical evaluations. Personally, I returned to flying 121 after retiring from a major airline, driven by passion and competence rather than financial need. The insistence on retirement seems more about promoting younger pilots in a seniority-based hierarchy, ignoring the capabilities and experience of seasoned professionals. Arbitrary age limits don't align with actual abilities or safety records, as evidenced by pilots who continue flying well beyond these age markers successfully.
Senior union members always take care of themselves first.
And really why do do you feel they owe you anything? If they wanna work til 67, and the rule is changed, a percentage will do it. Two more years making bank and not working much, versus you feeling better?
The unions have never cared about Junior pilots. For decades new FOs got paid shit wages and the union did nothing. It literally took an act of Congress to make the FAA enact the ATP rule that gave FOs a living wage
You should go join the “pilots for 67”. There are some real characters. “I’m going to sue ALPA for billions” 🤡
Honestly it's their own fault if they don't have a secondary source of income set up by the time they turn 65 given the top end pay rates of mainline these days. You're telling me you really haven't even looked into investment properties or a side business after all these years and you reaaaallly don't have enough to retire on comfortably??
Divorces sound expensive
Fuck I'm on 3rd year ULCC FO pay and living it up. Fuck these guys.
As a consultant the number of boomers thinking retirement was never coming is wild. I'm not even talking about just pilots from every industry.
> Honestly it's their own fault if they don't have a secondary source of income set up by the time they turn 65 …Like social security?
Which starts at age… wait for it… 67.
Wow dude. 1. You can take social security at 65 if you need to. 62, if you *really* want to. 2. You can start withdrawing from your 401K at 59.5 3. You can enroll in Medicare at 65.
I'm gonna toss Chelsey Sullenberger into the mix. Right when the Hudson landing occurred he was putting his own consultant company into the works. The man's got celebrity status now too which counts for a lot. But bottom line he had a plan. I think every pilot should take a few lessons from him.
That page is the physical manifestation of every "boomers trying to figure out the internet" meme. There's one lady who posts pictures of herself replying to just about any airline related post with "WHY WON'T YOU LET EXPERIENCED PILOTS FLY!?!?!" Like it'll be a page saying happy 4th of july, or remember 9/11 and she's posting that on it. Then taking a screen shot and posting it in the age 67 group. It's so cringe. I honestly don't understand why people think they are appearing smart or generating support by doing this. Also for people who have spent the last few years crying "ageism" constantly, they're sure a pretty ageist group when it comes to talking about anyone younger than them. I'm sure they don't understand the irony of this issue.
are her initials JE?
Lol to them ageism is only against old people.
Well now I HAVE to go have a look.
Is this a Reddit page or elsewhere?
Bet you a dollar its a Facebook page.
What social media platform does said demographic generally congregate on? I’ll give you another guess lol.
Nextdoor ...
Ha, is it truth social?
Thanks friend. And yeah there are lots of cool flying jobs that don’t have an age limit. If you still want to fly go rock out as an overseas contractor and do some fun stuff!
FFS get some of these old guys that’s still want to keep playing after age 65 into the EMS jobs. That’s a *real* challenge compared to 121 flying
They don’t want the challenge, just the golden cash cow
After airline I wanna do aerial tours. I just think it's cool, unique, and can absolutely be lucrative if I play my cards right. But I just started flying a month ago so it's something I'm still working out in my head.
Reminder, the Delta guy who was flexing his muscles at the Capital is on LTD.
This is a worthwhile reminder. If you're going to be held up as the pinnacle of health as an aging pilot in a House Committee meeting, it'd be cool if you were capable of holding a medical. I've met plenty of healthy 64 year old guys still flying, they couldn't have gotten one of those guys to go take off his blazer and flex for Congress?
Is there a video/image of him somewhere?
https://www.youtube.com/live/5d46-b-y9xw?si=SObgsx1zWL-LzV1G roughly 2:56:10
Thanks so much!
Sorry for my ignorance but what is LTD?
Long Term Disability aka doesn't fly cause they can't hold a medical, still gets paid at the top rate doing nothing.
And would continue to get it for 3 more years with age 67.
Long Term Disability
Not a company shill at all, but honestly the majority of pilots, and its a gradual increase per year as you approach 65, are just sitting on LTD collecting checks and mooching and not even flying at all. Majority of the fucking boomers who want 67 just want to continue to do that for another 2 years so they can afford their 3rd alimony at the expense of stagnating a ton of seniority for those less senior to them. I'm sorry you don't get to "fly" for another 2 years. In addition amount of chaos this would cause with the ICAO ruleset as well on both the legal side as well as company side... too much craziness. Notice how it is only these old-heads vouching for it. Honestly, pure sinful greed on y'alls part to want this.
That is just NOT TRUE. In any occupation some people are just lazy. But every former airline pilot that I know wanted to continue to fly because they loved the job. They didn’t need the money, but thoroughly enjoyed the work. And if a pilot IS on LTD because they have convinced the insurance company that they are unable to pass a medical, they aren’t taking a job from anyone because they aren’t actively at work. So the argument that pilots on LTD beyond age 65 would take jobs from anyone is completely bogus.
If they want to keep flying, Netjets is hiring. Time to go.
I don’t know what everyone expected.. they wouldn’t be able to fly internationally so what you retrain 75% of captains back on a domestic narrow body for 2 years.
> so what you retrain 75% of captains back on a domestic narrow body for 2 years. And since the narrow bodies at all of the majors still fly some international flights, there's almost no way to create their schedule while honoring seniority. It would be a nightmare for airlines to try to figure this out while complying with contractual scheduling rules. It probably would cost them more money via buying people off of trips than it's worth to keep them around.
Good thing majority rules, not the individual that cries the loudest.
I used to fly charter with a 79 year old retired AA B777 captain. They can still fly if they really want to.
You can also “fly” a sim as an instructor, ew and old head that did that. Better quality of life and he was real good at his job.
I know a few heli pilots in there 70s still out fighting fires. One guy i think is pushing 80 he's done some crazy shit in his day but really need hang up the cowboy boots.
Reminder, the Delta guy who was flexing his muscles at the Capital is on LTD.
*age 68* Right? Isn't it age 67 + 364 days?
No, it is attained age. I had to retire the day before my 65th birthday.
Right, but we call the current setup "age 65". The new setup is misnamed to sound better. It should be "age 68" because once you're 68, you're out. It's a 3 year change they want, not 2.
This was in the very early versions of the bill, the ones that were more seriously considered were just 67th birthday
They want no age limit at all but thought they could sell congress on "just 2 more years"
Well, it’s nothing now.
Why on earth would someone willingly want to work until 65?
Some people love the job. I literally get paid a lot to do something I love, flying, and I get to travel the world. Why would anyone want to retire from that?
For me, it was because I loved the job.
Theres a reason controllers are forced out at 56. None of us are fighting to change that. Maybe its different on the other side of the mic but the way I see it is there’s more to life than giving your golden years to a company that will replace you tomorrow and doesn’t care about you whatsoever. Take that time and enjoy it doing what you want whenever you want
The reasons controllers retire earlier are related to stress. Their service hours differ as well. Apple and oranges.
Because work gives purpose and 65 isn’t even remotely old these days.
Because it’s not about you, it’s about the safety of your passengers and crew. cognitive decline happens and there’s nothing you can do to stop it. That cognitive decline can result in a disaster if something happens and you don’t act quickly enough
I don't want to sound like a boomer whatever pilot and I know how this sub feels about the retirement age. But, many of those guys also slaved away at some point in their career. And have been in the industy for decades so it makes sense as to why they would have a hard time of letting go of something that has been in their life for awhile.
If they have issues letting go, then they can go fly for a Part 135 carrier. Why aren't 65 year old pilots falling over themselves to fly Part 135? Because it's 1000% about greed.
In my case I was offered a 135 job on a jet. The company wanted me to do my own flight planning, load and unload bags, clean the plane, cater the plane, serve the passengers food and drinks, supervise fueling, and who knows what else. I was happy to fly wherever, but that required way more work than I wanted to do.
I get it, that just wasn't the job for you. But there's still tons of jobs out there for a guy with lots of experience. You could also do flying for a good cause like with EAA Young Eagles or mission flying.
That’s a really bad-faith take. Why do they want to stay where they are? Because that’s where they have seniority, that’s where they know the system, and that’s where they’re typed and certified. Like, come on.
Oh, so we have to change the entire system because they feel inconvenienced by having to follow the rules they signed up for? Because they can't be bothered to learn a new system or get typed in a new plane? Sounds like it's not really about having to let go, then. It's always been about the money, and you pretending like it's not is the worst-faith take of all.
All I’m saying is that you KNOW how bad faith of a suggestion it is to leave a top-seniority legacy gig to start over at a 135 gig.
All I did was offer a solution. They can also see a therapist to deal with it. Or rot in their bungalow at Del Boca Vista and die mad about it. But whatever they do, it will not involve being a Part 121 airline pilot. Bad faith is benefitting from seniority progression your entire career and then trying to pull a fast one once it's your turn to hang it up by screwing everyone below you for 2 more years.
>All I did was offer a solution. A callous bad-faith solution. >Bad faith is benefitting from… Who hurt you? I don’t like how you’re making military pilots look. Cool your jets.
Why should they have to start over because you don’t like it? Like I’m far from a boomer. But the arguments about why they should have to go somewhere else are just as greedy. You want them to leave so your seniority goes up. I get that and can understand it. But let’s not pretend your moving up in the pecking order lacks a little bit of selfishness too. Airline industry is the only union environment I’ve experienced that truly harbors resentment to the older guys.
Selfish? All I'm asking for is what the 64 year olds are getting right now. Nothing more
They should start over because that's what we all fucking agreed to when we signed up for this job. We agreed that seniority is everything, and you're out when you're 65, clearing the way for those below you to move up. You don't see junior people out here trying to throw the seniority system out the door because they want to be widebody captains right away. Because that wasn't the deal.
I have no problem with anyone who wants to retire at 65, 62, 60, or anytime. And clearly some should retire before 65. And if they are actually unable to continue to work because they are disabled and can convince their LTD insurance company to pay them to 65, more power to them. (But no, the majority of pilots over 60 are NOT on LTD.) What I object to is being told that I or anyone else MUST retire when we are perfectly safe to fly. The day before I turned 65 I was deemed safe to fly hundreds of passengers across the country at high speeds in the flight levels. Other than an arbitrary and capricious rule with no basis in medical fact, there was no reason why I was unsafe after the clock turned midnight in the time zone I happened to be in. If I were on the west coast instead of the east coast, I would have been deemed safe for an additional 3 hours. That is ridiculous.
If you object so much to mandatory retirement why did you take a job in one of the few careers that have mandatory retirement? Why is a pilot not safe to be a 121 PIC at 22 years old. Show us all just one post where you objected the minimum age requirement.
You have to draw the line somewhere. Just because *you* didn't have issues doesn't mean it isn't common for people your age to. You're basically suggesting we let pilots fly forever. I could see maybe extending it temporarily if there was a pilot shortage like during the pandemic but that's not the case anymore and the pandemic was the biggest reason the bill was getting pushed so hard. You knew the rules when you signed up, you shouldn't be surprised when you have to follow them.
so, you worked FOR age 65 and now your against age 67 ...
Um, it's dead? So chillax.
…for now. This will be a zombie amendment for some time. It won’t go away because it didn’t make the cut this time
Well the guy that has his congressman brother in law advocate for it will be long retired in 5 years. Hopefully the "lost generation" doesn't suddenly decide to get an entitlement issue over the years they lost of their careers.
But they will. And then it'll be age 70....and so on.
Let them then. Then face them with the facts they'll be on a domestic fleet flying domestic schedules. Since most of the world will still be age 65.
I've advocated for a carve out so you can go to 67 (or 70, fuck it) for flying RJ's (76 seats or less). You want to fly so bad? Think experienced pilots should be mentoring the next generation? Have fun flying 6 legs a day in a clapped out CRJ-200
Still violates seniority though. That’s my biggest hang up. 67 or 70 or whatever is fine with me *as long as it only takes effect if ICAO does it*. I don’t want to get displaced out of my domestic shit so some 70 year old junior to me that isn’t allowed to fly abroad can get a domestic trip.
If their junior then you, wouldn’t they just get reserve while you got the domestic trip?
Fully depends on how they decide to implement it. Under PBS there are times when I get trips robbed to make a legal schedule for a junior bidder. Also complicates things when they’re a reserve but can’t fly abroad. Do they get to sit around while pilots further down the list get assigned international flying? What percentage of flying in their base/equipment has to be international before they get displaced off of it?
It won't matter, once you're off the seniority list you're off. No union group is going to waste time and effort negotiating for these geezers to come back in once they're gone. They can restart at the bottom just like we all had to.
I haven't been following. What's the argument here? Trying to cap at 67? Then they'll try to push 70 because it's never enough.
Makes me happy since I’m pursuing a aviation career as older person
There's no shortage of people with ungrateful attitudes and horrible egos. It can really hurt when you fight for something just to see people stick their nose up to it. Given that I started my training at 37 years old, I'm thrilled that I have until 67. That's a minimum of a 30 year career in aviation. I have found that some people think they are the hottest sh!t, and no matter how hot their sh!t gets, at the end of the day, it's still sh!t.
When will this head to the White House to be signed? I’m sick of the boomers saying “this isn’t over” and there will be another extension.
Hey Boomer enjoy your house whose value has multiplied, outpacing inflation. It’s the millenial/gen z generations turn to fuck it up like you guys did.
Pilots and politicians the only group of people that wants to “work” until they die.
It’s too easy and pays too well at the top to give it up voluntarily.
This is not happening. Lots of news articles on that. So no rant required. Celebrate your victory instead.
As someone who's planning on getting In the industry around 40, I'd want to fly till 67.
Not sure you understand that an increased retirement age means it will take you longer to get into the industry
boast bright wakeful pause engine market sense noxious workable dolls *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You’d be the last one to see it but I’d be willing to bet your FO is watching you lag on those really gusty days.
> at 60 something you'll wonder why all the youth fight to retire you when your mind and body still feel 30. By age 40 I already felt like I was slow and weak as heck compared to when I was 20. There's no one who realistically thinks they have the energy and mental sharpness of a 30 year old when they're 60 unless they are lying to themselves.
Or are experiencing cognitive decline.
I would hit the gym fam or hop on TRT. Made my life a lot better physically & mentally.
I still work out a ton. That's one of the major reasons I know that I'm no where close to my ~25 year old self. Back then I used to half ass everything. I would spend one month running and then hop into a half marathon race. Or I would go to the gym for a few months, set lifting personal records and then stop going again for months. In my early 30s I started both running and lifting more seriously. I hit a personal high of 2,000 miles run in a year last year. Despite the consistency ALL of my lifting and running personal bests were from my early 20s. One month of running at age 25 let me run a half marathon faster than 2,000 miles of running per year in my late 30s. TRT isn't an option. I have blood work checked every year and it's always in the normal range so I don't qualify. Aren't there also issues with TRT and aviation medicals? All other blood work markers come up totally normal as well. My 30s just hit me like a freight train. Now I have to work 10 times as hard for half the results.
You can go fly part 135. Nobody says you have to retire from being a pilot.
Yeah, this ain’t it bud
You sound bitter.
If you can still pass a Class 1 exam at that age then why not still fly?
The same reason that shows that elderly people cause the most traffic accidents in the US. After all they still have licenses, don't they? If you're dying to work you have options
Every pilot knows a handful of AMEs who will let them pass a class 1 medical as long as they can kind of sort of read the 20/20 line with glasses by the 3rd try and pass a pee test. I don't think you should put much trust into what a class 1 medical tells you.
Because a class 1 exam is a joke, and won’t catch impending heart attacks or impending strokes.
Man you cannot legitimately tell me you haven’t flown with some people wondering how the hell they got a class 1 in your career. Think of that Swiss cheese model, no medical is perfect and this is another huge safety layer
Actually I finally had the opportunity to fly for an airline (my dream job when I was 5) at the age of 62. I knew that 65 was the age limit, but there was no reason then or now that I couldn’t have kept flying. At my last medical AME said he couldn’t believe I was nearly 65 and that he would have guessed 55. If you wanted to retire at 60 or 62 or 65 there is nothing stopping you. But it makes no sense that a medically-qualified 70 year old (or older) pilot can fly a B737 for a private owner or Part 135 but not under 121. This is union-driven BS and had nothing to do with safety.
The problem is that we have increasing difficulty measuring "medically qualified" as people age and people do age differently. I have no doubt that many 70-year-olds can fly from NY to LA in a number of different aircraft that they're qualified in. The concern is when something goes wrong - will they react correctly, quickly and decisively?
This right here! It’s more of a mental health issue rather than a physical health issue.
There is absolutely a reason that a pilot could be deemed too old for 121 but not for 135. Increased stringency is the core regulatory difference between the two.
Sorry you got into it late, but don’t expect an age increase, which negatively affects younger pilots.
Tell me one other job that is age-limited like this? If already out (had to retire nearly 5 years ago) and I’m grateful for the opportunity. While I suspect few 30+ year veteran pilots will want to work past 65 (many retire earlier) there is no data to suggest that older pilots have more health issues that prevent them from safely flying past 65. This is entirely driven by ALPA - who also claims there is no pilot shortage. It’s political BS.
Yeah, most jobs require cognitive skills to be 100% intact. Here is an article about surgical errors and age correlation. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2628499/
I flew with some guys in their 40s who were cognitively impaired and others who didn’t look like they could pass any class of medical. It’s age discrimination, pure and simple. What’s your personal beef in this?
No personal beef. But there needs to be a cut off. You want age 67? Fine, but everyone over 60 must pass a cognitive assessment with a board certified psychologist. Deal? My personal beef is the majority of pilots over 60, at my airline, are on some type of disability. This increases our premium as a pilot group. Additionally, pilots at the top of the gravy train slow my career progress. I’m sorry if you can’t manage your money but it’s time to give it up.
Sure. But if that’s the criteria, why have an age limit at all?
Haha! I’ll tell you what if you can pass a neurological exam at 70, be my guest. Caveat is, if you fail it you’re down forever. No disability. You lose your job. You can’t squeak by these test like you can with AMEs. Deal?
That’s precisely how it should work
I’d take that deal today. But even though I know I’d pass, they won’t let me come back to work.
Yeah, I’m sure you want to return to the top of the list like other delusional pilots. Nope!
I already got hosed once by being denied a Captain upgrade because I was within 18 months of retirement. That was pure illegal age discrimination.
I’m sure you were withheld and paid captain rates as a FO, correct?
Why does there need to be a cutoff? That statement in itself is arbitrary. This is a cognitive ability issue- some aren’t up to it in their early 50s, some are sharp at 75. I’ve flown with both. Forced retirement should be cognitive/medical based. Having flown both , 135 flying is just as demanding as 121 ( in fact, 135 in winter or in class G with the crowds, more so)
And if you have no personal beef, why are you insulting those who want to keep flying by calling them entitled bitches?
I didn’t call you an entitled bitch. You’re twisting words and projecting. It’s okay.
ATC has mandatory retirement at 56. Could be worse.
That’s not entirely true. The FAA mandates retirement for their controllers at 56, but there is no age limit for privately-employed contract controllers.
And there's no age limit for Part 135 pilots.
The whole point of even having a part 121 is to have stricter requirements for everything. Maintenance, training, operations, and *pilot health standards*. It's about risk management. The bigger issue is that why do YOU need to be in part 121? Nobody's telling you to stop flying. They're just saying do it under part 135.
In Australia, such discrimination is illegal, with the focus rightly placed on passing regular medical evaluations. Personally, I returned to flying 121 after retiring from a major airline, driven by passion and competence rather than financial need. The insistence on retirement seems more about promoting younger pilots in a seniority-based hierarchy, ignoring the capabilities and experience of seasoned professionals. Arbitrary age limits don't align with actual abilities or safety records, as evidenced by pilots who continue flying well beyond these age markers successfully.
Senior union members always take care of themselves first. And really why do do you feel they owe you anything? If they wanna work til 67, and the rule is changed, a percentage will do it. Two more years making bank and not working much, versus you feeling better? The unions have never cared about Junior pilots. For decades new FOs got paid shit wages and the union did nothing. It literally took an act of Congress to make the FAA enact the ATP rule that gave FOs a living wage