Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

Lt. Daniel Kaffee wrote: Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:30 am Jerry doesn't seem to think this is an issue of dignity or human rights....who'da figured that...

I guess the FP60 will be striking Jerry off the witness list at the next CHRT hearing....
Ask Jerry what he thinks if he’s forced to retire before he wants to. Ask you what you think if you’re forced to do the same thing. I can easily imagine you and Jerry’s abrupt change of attitude once you’re the ones discriminated against.

I also wouldn’t brag about what you and Jerry think now. It’s not a flattering look.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1693
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Fanblade »

Rockie wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:30 am It’s not a flattering look.
Rockie,

You are turning into an ideologue. Life is far too complex to be able to apply an ideology without common sense and consideration of the collateral damage. But this is what fanatical ideologues do anyway. Anything pointed out that can’t fit in the ideologues limited view of right and wrong is discarded as inaccurate, intolerant, biased, fabricated.......etc etc etc.

What was expressed in that article was an opinion different than your own. An opinion with valid points. An opinion that deserves respect. The fact is the change in retirement age has had consequences for younger generations throughout all of our society and just because it doesn’t fit your ideology doesn’t mean you can just ignore it. That would be irrational. It would be intolerant. It would be willful bias. It would be behaving the exact way you claim you want stopped.

Forget your microscopic focus on AC. We are developing a lost generation of highly educated and under employed young adults in this country, because they have limited opportunities as the retirement age change reaches a new equilibrium. Yet these youth are being pumped out of university at a rate which once could accept them, but currently can not. That’s a fact. In fact that acceptance rate has been permanently altered for every generation that follows. In this ever changing technological environment it is extreamely difficult to remain relevant in ones field after 3-5 years of non participation. As a result young Canadians are being left out. Denied the same opportunities you and I enjoyed.

Then my peers ( yes I’m getting up there myself) have the gall to complain that thier 30 year old can’t support themselves yet. Duh!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

But in your ideology that’s fine because the youth don’t have rights under the charter. Any expectations they had for equality are reduced, derided and chided as intolerant “entitlement”. If they persist they get painted with an ageism brush.

An example. For medical students after two years of going unmatched in residency their career in medicine is over. By 2020 it is expected that over 100 medical students in this country, that year alone, will go unmatched.

Guess why? There is no where to go. Openings in specialties are drying up as there is no movement currently. Far worse than our industry in fact. We have been fortunate at AC as the retirement age change has been relatively small (5 years) and masked by growth. If the same changes had happened during the industry consolidation of the mid 2000’s as perponents of the change wanted? The results would have been catastrophic for those who were younger.

For illustrative purposes only. If our economy needed 1000 new box makers every year to replace those retiring in the box making industry when the average career was 40 years. Then the economy only needs 800 new box makers every year if the average career becomes 50 years. It’s simple math. It’s not just the fact no new box makers will be needed for 10 years as the average career transitions from 40-50 years. Even after rebalancing at the new retirement career of 50 years only 800 new box maker positions will come available every year to replace those retiring.

To my fellow peers who are younger. My apologies. Not for the age of retirement increasing. That was inevitable. We are living too long. It’s not realistic to expect one can work for 40 years, then retire for another 40. That math doesn’t add up. I applogize because my generation, the ones who were in charge of rule making, changed the rules in a way that benefitted only us.

Not all of us believe this is right or ethical.

Expunge agiesm yes. At the expense of others NO!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Fanblade on Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:01 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Sharklasers
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Sharklasers »

deleted
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Sharklasers on Thu Feb 07, 2019 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
daedalusx
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 612
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:51 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by daedalusx »

Boomers ... The only generation in the history of mankind that had it better than their parents...and their kids.
---------- ADS -----------
 
In twenty years time when your kids ask how you got into flying you want to be able to say "work and determination" not "I just kept taking money from your grandparents for type ratings until someone was stupid enough to give me a job"
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

Fanblade wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:18 am Rockie,

You are turning into an ideologue. Life is far too complex to be able to apply an ideology without common sense and consideration of the collateral damage. But this is what fanatical ideologues do anyway. Anything pointed out that can’t fit in the ideologues limited view of right and wrong is discarded as inaccurate, intolerant, biased, fabricated.......etc etc etc.
I've never heard human rights described as an ideology before. New one.

All you've said in this post is your interpretation which is not borne out by the facts. Youth unemployment is a complex issue effected by many factors that have nothing to do with forced retirement at any age as every study I've scanned through concludes. This study below explicitly debunks the theory that low youth employment is caused by people retiring later. As for doctors, there is lots of work for them in small communities throughout Canada, and even bigger ones that may seem undesirable to them. I've been without a family doctor for way too many of my years because there weren't any available where I've lived. You're barking up the wrong tree there.

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/w ... 8_wise.pdf

"In this volume, we direct attention to the oft-claimed proposition that
incentives to induce older persons to retire—inherent in the provisions of social
security systems—were prompted by youth unemployment. And that if the
incentives to retire were removed, and older persons stayed longer in the labor
force, the job opportunities of youth would be reduced. We find no evidence to
support this boxed economy proposition. We find no evidence that increasing
the labor force participation of older persons reduces the job opportunities of
young persons.
Indeed the evidence suggests that greater labor force
participation of older persons is associated with greater youth employment and
with reduced youth unemployment. "
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Old fella
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2394
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Old fella »

daedalusx wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:27 pm Boomers ... The only generation in the history of mankind that had it better than their parents...and their kids.
The boomer generation...... well can somebody explain to me how I had it better than my kids. I mean I grew up in that generation so have some inside knowledge dare I say.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

Old fella wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:02 pm
daedalusx wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:27 pm Boomers ... The only generation in the history of mankind that had it better than their parents...and their kids.
The boomer generation...... well can somebody explain to me how I had it better than my kids. I mean I grew up in that generation so have some inside knowledge dare I say.
At the speed young pilots are finding their way into major airline cockpits and moving upwards these days it's impossible to square the wailing about delayed opportunities due to later retirement.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Old fella
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2394
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Old fella »

Rockie wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:24 pm
Old fella wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:02 pm
daedalusx wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:27 pm Boomers ... The only generation in the history of mankind that had it better than their parents...and their kids.
The boomer generation...... well can somebody explain to me how I had it better than my kids. I mean I grew up in that generation so have some inside knowledge dare I say.
At the speed young pilots are finding their way into major airline cockpits and moving upwards these days it's impossible to square the wailing about delayed opportunities due to later retirement.
Got that right Rockie. I know of an individual who I worked with( he had a B.Sc and an ATR) joined AC in 1979 as a B727 SO and I am sure he told me it took him 6 yrs before he saw the right seat in a DC-9. The early 80’s wasn’t a very prosperous time in aviation.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Ah_yeah
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:50 pm

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Ah_yeah »

It's called a cycle people. Just like some of the 65 year olds retiring now with 46 years of service. Being hired at 19 isn't happening...even in this new golden age of aviation where new hires still can't afford to live in the main crew bases. Whatever, fly till ya die and don't forget to wear your pilot hat in the car too.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

It’s a long career to drag that bitterness with you the whole way. Cheer up though, it’ll probably go away around the time you’re 60.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Raymond Hall
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 647
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:45 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Raymond Hall »

The labour market is not a "zero-sum" game.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1693
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Fanblade »

Rockie wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:53 pm
Fanblade wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:18 am Rockie,

You are turning into an ideologue. Life is far too complex to be able to apply an ideology without common sense and consideration of the collateral damage. But this is what fanatical ideologues do anyway. Anything pointed out that can’t fit in the ideologues limited view of right and wrong is discarded as inaccurate, intolerant, biased, fabricated.......etc etc etc.


I've never heard human rights described as an ideology before. New one.
The subject matter is never an ideology. It is the individual who turns the subject into an ideology when they want to apply thier belief without due regard for consequences, common sense, collateral damage or harm. Even in the face that an ideology has real issues an ideologue will stay the course. The cause is always more important than those who suffer as a result.


https://s5551274472d96b4e.jimcontent.co ... flabor.pdf

Using Italian data for the period 2005 to 2016, we have estimated the causal effect of a local increase in the pool of senior workers who are too young to retire on the local employment and unemployment of four age groups, the very young, the young, the prime aged and the seniors. In all these estimates, we do not condition on current output. We have found that – in our preferred specification – raising the local pool PTpt by one thousand additional senior
individuals reduces youth employment by 188 individuals and increases senior employment by 214 individuals. These estimates indicate that to each additional 10 senior workers locked into employment correspond 9 young individuals out of work, a large negative effect.


The biggest problem with the study we both posted ( other than they completely contradict each other) is that it looks at youth employment only. There is no data at all trying to assertain if delayed retirement is a factor in youth under employment. If a young engineer is serving at the Keg? He is employed and delayed retirement had no impact. Or so the study would have us believe.

I did not say the end of mandatory retirement was leading to youth unemployment. I said it was leading to youth under employment. My exact words were. We are developing a lost generation of highly educated and under employed young adults in this country, because they have limited opportunities as the retirement age change reaches a new equilibrium. Yet these youth are being pumped out of university at a rate which once could accept them, but currently can not.

You see there is some very cynical economics at play here with studies such as these.

Let’s say Fanblade chooses not to leave the labor market. My kids are gone, I have no debt left including mortgage and I am at the peak of my professions pay. Myself and people like me have a lot of discretionary income to spend into the economy. That spending drives employment in areas I like to spend. There are now more servers at restuarants. More pro shop workers and so on. Employment is up.

Now let’s say I chose the opposite instead. I leave the labor force and my job is taken by someone younger and at a very different point in thier life. They have a big mortgage and 2.5 kids. What is the impact on the economy versus me working? As a retiree I now have less disposable income so I start eating out less. The young person who now has my job isn’t going out for dinner to replace me either. His disposable income after obligations is not nearly as high as mine was. He can’t afford my previous lifestyle.

It could be stated that fanblade not retiring would actually propel job growth greater than fanblade retiring. The problem is that is only a surface look. Under the surface the jobs I am helping to create are low paying service sector jobs. Moreover the economic push is probably just temporary and may have drag consequences once I finally retire and the young person gets my job. The later they get my job the more catchup they will have to play resulting in an extended period of curbed spending.

It’s probably false in the long run but I could state that me continuing to work created youth jobs. But it would be very cynical of me to proclaim that I was helping the youth or had no detrimental impact on the youth through under employment rates.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

Youth unemployment, under employment , or full employment is effected by many economic and demographic factors. Senior employment is but one of them, which itself is effected by many of the same factors and a whole bunch of different ones. There are in fact decisions being made today in Washington out of sheer ignorance and political corruption that will have youth employment consequences in this country that dwarf the extended retirement age issue.

Changing demographics and extended life expectancy demands elimination of forced retirement never mind the human rights aspect of it. And the human rights ruling was a slam dunk in this country. It’s been that way for a long time provincially protecting the vast majority of workers, and it was inevitable the federal government would be forced to protect federal workers from the same discrimination.

Ignoring those facts is what I would call ideological blindness (and a few other unflattering things).
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Rockie on Mon Jun 25, 2018 4:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

.
---------- ADS -----------
 
yycflyguy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:18 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by yycflyguy »

Fanblade wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:18 am
Rockie wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:30 am It’s not a flattering look.
Rockie,

You are turning into an ideologue. Life is far too complex to be able to apply an ideology without common sense and consideration of the collateral damage. But this is what fanatical ideologues do anyway. Anything pointed out that can’t fit in the ideologues limited view of right and wrong is discarded as inaccurate, intolerant, biased, fabricated.......etc etc etc.

What was expressed in that article was an opinion different than your own. An opinion with valid points. An opinion that deserves respect. The fact is the change in retirement age has had consequences for younger generations throughout all of our society and just because it doesn’t fit your ideology doesn’t mean you can just ignore it. That would be irrational. It would be intolerant. It would be willful bias. It would be behaving the exact way you claim you want stopped.

Forget your microscopic focus on AC. We are developing a lost generation of highly educated and under employed young adults in this country, because they have limited opportunities as the retirement age change reaches a new equilibrium. Yet these youth are being pumped out of university at a rate which once could accept them, but currently can not. That’s a fact. In fact that acceptance rate has been permanently altered for every generation that follows. In this ever changing technological environment it is extreamely difficult to remain relevant in ones field after 3-5 years of non participation. As a result young Canadians are being left out. Denied the same opportunities you and I enjoyed.

Then my peers ( yes I’m getting up there myself) have the gall to complain that thier 30 year old can’t support themselves yet. Duh!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

But in your ideology that’s fine because the youth don’t have rights under the charter. Any expectations they had for equality are reduced, derided and chided as intolerant “entitlement”. If they persist they get painted with an ageism brush.

An example. For medical students after two years of going unmatched in residency their career in medicine is over. By 2020 it is expected that over 100 medical students in this country, that year alone, will go unmatched.

Guess why? There is no where to go. Openings in specialties are drying up as there is no movement currently. Far worse than our industry in fact. We have been fortunate at AC as the retirement age change has been relatively small (5 years) and masked by growth. If the same changes had happened during the industry consolidation of the mid 2000’s as perponents of the change wanted? The results would have been catastrophic for those who were younger.

For illustrative purposes only. If our economy needed 1000 new box makers every year to replace those retiring in the box making industry when the average career was 40 years. Then the economy only needs 800 new box makers every year if the average career becomes 50 years. It’s simple math. It’s not just the fact no new box makers will be needed for 10 years as the average career transitions from 40-50 years. Even after rebalancing at the new retirement career of 50 years only 800 new box maker positions will come available every year to replace those retiring.

To my fellow peers who are younger. My apologies. Not for the age of retirement increasing. That was inevitable. We are living too long. It’s not realistic to expect one can work for 40 years, then retire for another 40. That math doesn’t add up. I applogize because my generation, the ones who were in charge of rule making, changed the rules in a way that benefitted only us.

Not all of us believe this is right or ethical.

Expunge agiesm yes. At the expense of others NO!
:up: Excellent post
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

Fanblade wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:18 am But in your ideology that’s fine because the youth don’t have rights under the charter. Any expectations they had for equality are reduced, derided and chided as intolerant “entitlement”. If they persist they get painted with an ageism brush.
I'm not ideological...I'm realistic.

Those "youth" have been granted the same protection against ageism as everybody else, suggesting they've been somehow excluded or denied any kind of "rights" is complete nonsense. Young people age...right? Of course realizing that would require long term thinking, as in beyond today. The Lt. Kaffee's of this issue are motivated by nothing more than "I want that guy's job", and if that guy doesn't leave voluntarily they're willing to push him out whatever the law says. Failing that - which they have - they seek to punish them by witholding medical benefits. That too will be defeated. The Lt. Kaffee's cannot adapt along with the rest of the world because they cannot see the inevitable even when it's laid out in front of them in pictures. But adapt they must, even if they do it long after everybody else.

Speak to the Lt. Kaffee's about ideology...
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1693
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Fanblade »

Rockie wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:31 am
Fanblade wrote: Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:18 am But in your ideology that’s fine because the youth don’t have rights under the charter. Any expectations they had for equality are reduced, derided and chided as intolerant “entitlement”. If they persist they get painted with an ageism brush.
I'm not ideological...I'm realistic.

Those "youth" have been granted the same protection against ageism as everybody else, suggesting they've been somehow excluded or denied any kind of "rights" is complete nonsense.
Are you sure about that? You appear to saying youth don’t have “rights” enshrined in the charter therefor don’t have any rights at all. You appear to be saying that you and I are special. The youth are not.

You are focused solely on ageism from the context of older age. That focus is narrowed to older age and work. Narrowed even further to focus only on continued work. That is a very microscopic view point.

Ask yourself. Are you really an agiesm warrior? Or are you a warrior of a very narrowly focused desire to work longer. If you truly believe you are an agiesm warrior where is your balance on all forms of agiesm at every age demographic?

Your position appears to be that one specific type of agiesm must end. Yet if ending it creates harm or even another form of agiesm elsewhere so be it.

That’s the narrow focus of an ideologue at work.

I agree with you that mathematically, retirement ages have no choice but to become older. We are simply living too long. I agree with you that agiesm needs to be expunged. But I completely disagree with your narrow focus on one type of agiesm and your proposal to fix it by perpetrating ageism elsewhere. That smells like simple opportunism.

Again. I find it very hypocritical of my generation to change the rules in such a way that benefited only our generation at the expense of the young. We did so wrapped in the nobel cause of agiesm whilst perpetuating agiesm elsewhere. But in our hypocrisy because WE didn’t bestow any agiesm rights to the young that’s okay.

Expunge agiesm yes. At the expense of others no. Doing so turns something nobel into ugly opportunism.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

Fanblade wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:13 am Are you sure about that? You appear to saying youth don’t have “rights” enshrined in the charter therefor don’t have any rights at all. You appear to be saying that you and I are special. The youth are not.
I'll repeat it yet again, youth age. Do you realize the implications of that Fanblade? Do you realize that all people in Canada benefit from the guaranteed freedoms enshrined in the constitution even if they don't understand them?
Fanblade wrote: Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:13 am Your position appears to be that one specific type of agiesm must end. Yet if ending it creates harm or even another form of agiesm elsewhere so be it.
What other form of ageism are you talking about? The first pilot hired since the federal law changed in 2012 is now seniority # 28XX. Those pilots now hold captain positions on 3 types and FO positions on all but the 777. Tell me again how young pilots have suffered since 2012? What are their "rights" being violated?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1693
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Fanblade »

Canada’s young adult underemployment reached 40% in 2015. That is 4 in 10 university grads. The highest it has ever been. This fact has been on the BoC radar for about 3 years now. It’s a problem if it persists. If it’s a blip not so much.

Although like any complex situation there are always more than one variable at play. One of those variables was however an end of mandatory retirement.

Is there any interest to see if a correlation between the two exist?

Is there opposition to see if a correlation exists?

Do you you think checking is relevant or irrelevant? IOW if causation is shown does it even matter?

If causation is shown is this a case of expunging agiesm in one demographic but perpetrating it on another?

If it turns out there is a correlation between the two (very politically incorrect to say) what if anything should be done about it?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Disability Benefits For Pilots Over Age 60

Post by Rockie »

You can persuade me to your way of thinking Fanblade, and here’s exactly how to do it.

1. Show how young people (or anybody) have the right to the job they want, when they want it.

2. Show how once having obtained that rightful job young people (or anybody) have the right to career progression that meets with their satisfaction.

3. Show how young people (or anybody) are being denied the rights in 1 or 2 specifically because of their age.

4. Show how a persons rights as proven in 1 & 2 supercede that same persons right to not be discriminated against later in life specifically due to their age.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”