Not good news for us at the bottom - Page 2

Minnesota_Flyer · September 15th, 2004, 17:49

[ QUOTE ]
Saying that we should retire pilots just to make room for you is one of the most selfish things I've heard on this website, and I've heard some doozies.

No one says you can't retire earlier. It's an age limit, not a retirement limit. If a pilot has accumulated enough bollocks to retire earlier so be it. I retired at age 44.

Restricting someone from working based on their age is blatant DISCRIMINATION.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly! I don't intend to work (in any job) a second longer than I have to, but that's my choice. If people want to work past 60, and are physical able to do so, they should be entitled to make that choice. Setting an arbitrary age at which every pilot gets put out to pasture is just wrong.

MF

Minnesota_Flyer · September 15th, 2004, 17:50

[ QUOTE ]
Cops, Air Traffic controllers, and firemen are ok, JT?

If so, why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Those age limits aren't cool either.

Isn't it funny how the only employer that gets to discriminate based on age is the gov't??

MF

FlyChicaga · September 15th, 2004, 19:34

I wouldn't mind retiring at 50. Just give me a nice pension! Oh wait, those are GONE. Guess it's to age 60 I go... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif[/img]

GaTechKid · September 15th, 2004, 19:44

[ QUOTE ]
Cops, Air Traffic controllers, and firemen are ok, JT?

If so, why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there any sort of cognitive/memory test for controllers on a recurring basis?

An air traffic controller being able to physically do the job isn't what I would be worried about.

flyover · September 15th, 2004, 19:48

I'm with you JT. One of the things I have planned on was that there would be no mandatory retirement by the time I got there (10 years away). I still think that will be the case. You see SWA's pilot group behind changing it. I expect within the profession as a whole, sentiment will change.

Jason · September 15th, 2004, 21:23

AMEN!!!! My thoughts exactly!! Who in their right Da*$ mind would want to deal with the BS of this industry until they are 65 or 70?!?!? Even the thought of being a line pilot until I'm 70 makes me want to blow my brains out.

I'm all for changing the age limit but my vote is for 45!!!

Jason

kellwolf · September 15th, 2004, 22:39

I'm actually for getting rid of the 60 age limit. I would like to see some more medical exams kick in at that age, though. Kinda like when you turn 35 and you have to get an EKG. I'm also with MarineNav on the fed positions. I couldn't go into ATC even if I wanted to. I'm borderline past the max age limit for starting. I understand the reason the government has it there is "training costs" and "return on investment," but come on. If someone is qualified for the job, they should be given the opportunity to do the job. Otherwise, you'll have a 23 year old running ATC who just wants beer money. Give him 2 years, he'll realize the job isn't as glamorous as ERAU told him it was, and he leaves. Then you just lost your "return on inverstmen" and have to start over again.

Besides, the way management is running airlines into the ground, I'm not sure pilots would WANT to stick around past 60. Me? I'm investing as much as I can so I can do the Taylor-retirement and travel around the world. It'll have to be all my own choices since pensions will be a thing of the past by the time I hit that point.

Mr_Creepy · September 15th, 2004, 22:48

No none of it's ok.

I don't believe in arbitrary retirement ages.

MarineNav · September 16th, 2004, 00:22

Hello Kell,

Most Fed jobs are sweet. Do your 20 and get your pension. Seems to me they'd get a better return on their "investment" letting old farts like me take a job where I can only work 15 years and NOT draw a pension. AM i missing something?

Happy Landings,

JR

flyover · September 16th, 2004, 08:54

[ QUOTE ]
Besides, the way management is running airlines into the ground, I'm not sure pilots would WANT to stick around past 60. .............since pensions will be a thing of the past by the time I hit that point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your two points contradict each other. The reason more pilots will become "interested" in staying around past 60 is the collapse of the pension system.

ready2fly · September 16th, 2004, 11:48

[ QUOTE ]
I'm actually for getting rid of the 60 age limit. I would like to see some more medical exams kick in at that age, though. Kinda like when you turn 35 and you have to get an EKG.

[/ QUOTE ]
Damn, Kell... they already come damn near to elbow deep up your pooper in some cases... what other tests would you suggest?? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

"Okay, Pops. Stand on your head. Touch your nads with your toes. Grab your inestines in one hand and brain stem with the other. Spin........ okay good. Now....whoops - sorry. I see you have a wart. You fail." [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Minnesota_Flyer · September 16th, 2004, 15:21

[ QUOTE ]
Damn, Kell... they already come damn near to elbow deep up your pooper in some cases... what other tests would you suggest??

[/ QUOTE ]

Testing for blind spots and cognitive function in folks over, say, 50 wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm not doctor, though, I'm sure FAA could come up with something fun.

MF

kellwolf · September 16th, 2004, 15:48

[ QUOTE ]
Your two points contradict each other. The reason more pilots will become "interested" in staying around past 60 is the collapse of the pension system.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking of the first point in a non-economic sense. If I'm 55-60 and having to fly 18 hour days and spend over half the month away from home, then you can bet I'm looking for another job. That 401K will roll over into wherever I go. If there's no pension, I've got nothing to lose.

flyover · September 16th, 2004, 19:42

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your two points contradict each other. The reason more pilots will become "interested" in staying around past 60 is the collapse of the pension system.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking of the first point in a non-economic sense. If I'm 55-60 and having to fly 18 hour days and spend over half the month away from home, then you can bet I'm looking for another job. That 401K will roll over into wherever I go. If there's no pension, I've got nothing to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I understood that. But when you are approaching 60 and aren't prepared financially to retire and can't even come close to replacing your income in another job, your present job looks pretty good.

September 15th, 2004, 17:49	#26
Minnesota_Flyer Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul Posts: 1,895	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] Saying that we should retire pilots just to make room for you is one of the most selfish things I've heard on this website, and I've heard some doozies. No one says you can't retire earlier. It's an age limit, not a retirement limit. If a pilot has accumulated enough bollocks to retire earlier so be it. I retired at age 44. Restricting someone from working based on their age is blatant DISCRIMINATION. [/ QUOTE ] Exactly! I don't intend to work (in any job) a second longer than I have to, but that's my choice. If people want to work past 60, and are physical able to do so, they should be entitled to make that choice. Setting an arbitrary age at which every pilot gets put out to pasture is just wrong. MF

September 15th, 2004, 17:50	#27
Minnesota_Flyer Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul Posts: 1,895	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] Cops, Air Traffic controllers, and firemen are ok, JT? If so, why? [/ QUOTE ] Those age limits aren't cool either. Isn't it funny how the only employer that gets to discriminate based on age is the gov't?? MF

September 15th, 2004, 19:34	#28
FlyChicaga Old Skool Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 4,747	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom I wouldn't mind retiring at 50. Just give me a nice pension! Oh wait, those are GONE. Guess it's to age 60 I go... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif[/img]

September 15th, 2004, 19:44	#29
GaTechKid Old Skool Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Frigid NWA Hub Posts: 1,881	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] Cops, Air Traffic controllers, and firemen are ok, JT? If so, why? [/ QUOTE ] Is there any sort of cognitive/memory test for controllers on a recurring basis? An air traffic controller being able to physically do the job isn't what I would be worried about.

September 15th, 2004, 19:48	#30
flyover Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,389	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom I'm with you JT. One of the things I have planned on was that there would be no mandatory retirement by the time I got there (10 years away). I still think that will be the case. You see SWA's pilot group behind changing it. I expect within the profession as a whole, sentiment will change.

September 15th, 2004, 21:23	#31
Jason Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 975	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom AMEN!!!! My thoughts exactly!! Who in their right Da*$ mind would want to deal with the BS of this industry until they are 65 or 70?!?!? Even the thought of being a line pilot until I'm 70 makes me want to blow my brains out. I'm all for changing the age limit but my vote is for 45!!! Jason

September 15th, 2004, 22:39	#32
kellwolf Old Skool Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 13,208	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom I'm actually for getting rid of the 60 age limit. I would like to see some more medical exams kick in at that age, though. Kinda like when you turn 35 and you have to get an EKG. I'm also with MarineNav on the fed positions. I couldn't go into ATC even if I wanted to. I'm borderline past the max age limit for starting. I understand the reason the government has it there is "training costs" and "return on investment," but come on. If someone is qualified for the job, they should be given the opportunity to do the job. Otherwise, you'll have a 23 year old running ATC who just wants beer money. Give him 2 years, he'll realize the job isn't as glamorous as ERAU told him it was, and he leaves. Then you just lost your "return on inverstmen" and have to start over again. Besides, the way management is running airlines into the ground, I'm not sure pilots would WANT to stick around past 60. Me? I'm investing as much as I can so I can do the Taylor-retirement and travel around the world. It'll have to be all my own choices since pensions will be a thing of the past by the time I hit that point.

September 15th, 2004, 22:48	#33
Mr_Creepy Old Skool Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the O-zone Posts: 5,807	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom No none of it's ok. I don't believe in arbitrary retirement ages.

September 16th, 2004, 00:22	#34
MarineNav Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Santa Clara, CA Posts: 301	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom Hello Kell, Most Fed jobs are sweet. Do your 20 and get your pension. Seems to me they'd get a better return on their "investment" letting old farts like me take a job where I can only work 15 years and NOT draw a pension. AM i missing something? Happy Landings, JR

September 16th, 2004, 08:54	#35
flyover Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,389	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] Besides, the way management is running airlines into the ground, I'm not sure pilots would WANT to stick around past 60. .............since pensions will be a thing of the past by the time I hit that point. [/ QUOTE ] Your two points contradict each other. The reason more pilots will become "interested" in staying around past 60 is the collapse of the pension system.

September 16th, 2004, 11:48	#36
ready2fly Old Skool Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: DFW Posts: 7,079	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] I'm actually for getting rid of the 60 age limit. I would like to see some more medical exams kick in at that age, though. Kinda like when you turn 35 and you have to get an EKG. [/ QUOTE ] Damn, Kell... they already come damn near to elbow deep up your pooper in some cases... what other tests would you suggest?? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] "Okay, Pops. Stand on your head. Touch your nads with your toes. Grab your inestines in one hand and brain stem with the other. Spin........ okay good. Now....whoops - sorry. I see you have a wart. You fail." [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

September 16th, 2004, 15:21	#37
Minnesota_Flyer Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul Posts: 1,895	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] Damn, Kell... they already come damn near to elbow deep up your pooper in some cases... what other tests would you suggest?? [/ QUOTE ] Testing for blind spots and cognitive function in folks over, say, 50 wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm not doctor, though, I'm sure FAA could come up with something fun. MF

September 16th, 2004, 15:48	#38
kellwolf Old Skool Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 13,208	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] Your two points contradict each other. The reason more pilots will become "interested" in staying around past 60 is the collapse of the pension system. [/ QUOTE ] I was thinking of the first point in a non-economic sense. If I'm 55-60 and having to fly 18 hour days and spend over half the month away from home, then you can bet I'm looking for another job. That 401K will roll over into wherever I go. If there's no pension, I've got nothing to lose.

September 16th, 2004, 19:42	#39
flyover Old Skool Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,389	Re: Not good news for us at the bottom [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Your two points contradict each other. The reason more pilots will become "interested" in staying around past 60 is the collapse of the pension system. [/ QUOTE ] I was thinking of the first point in a non-economic sense. If I'm 55-60 and having to fly 18 hour days and spend over half the month away from home, then you can bet I'm looking for another job. That 401K will roll over into wherever I go. If there's no pension, I've got nothing to lose. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I understood that. But when you are approaching 60 and aren't prepared financially to retire and can't even come close to replacing your income in another job, your present job looks pretty good.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode