Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, Sulako, North Shore

Message
Author
TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 565
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#51 Post by TheStig » Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:20 pm

Once again, mandatory retirement no longer exists at Air Canada, why are we still talking about this?

Usually the team that wins the game doesn't complain about the officiating.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by TheStig on Fri Jun 21, 2013 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#52 Post by 777longhaul » Thu Jun 20, 2013 8:45 pm

The Stig

Yes forced retirement at 60 is gone, at AC, for pilots.

There are 200 pilots, who were forced retired, strictly due to their age, (60) who are still in court, over this issue. (Prior the the Federal Rule Change.) The rule was changed, as it was determined to be discriminatory, by the Federal Government.

You must not be at AC, as you would know about this issue?

This issue, is driven by acpa, refusing to file a grievance, for each pilot who was force retired. AC has backed them (acpa) .....so far.

acpa, is the only union at AC that has refused to file grievances for the pilots, the sole reason is, they want the get rid of the 200 pilots from the seniority list. The other unions, IAM, CUPE, CAW, etc. have filed grievances on behalf of their members, both active, (not yet retired) and in-active, (force retired.) The Federal Arbitrators, have reinstated all those wishing to continue working, regardless of age.

That is why there is still band width on this discriminatory court case.

The Federal Government rule change affected over 800,000 employees in Canada. AC was a drop in the bucket.
---------- ADS -----------
  

MackTheKnife
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:54 am
Location: The 'Wet Coast"

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#53 Post by MackTheKnife » Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:35 am

TheStig wrote:Once again, mandatory retirement no longer exists at Air Canada, why are we still taking about this?

Usually the team that wins the game doesn't complain about the officiating.

First of all, use of the word "team" when referring to ACPA is laughable at best. We are still talking about this because the real " TEAM" " that won the game for the rest of you to benefit from is still out in the cold getting the finger from ACPA at every turn.

As 777 says, ACPA is the only union in the company that deserted their members when all they asked for was their legal right for representation. Instead they chose to represent a chosen few with the most to gain.


MTK
---------- ADS -----------
  

snag
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 11:00 am

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#54 Post by snag » Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:46 am

Image
---------- ADS -----------
  

TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 565
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#55 Post by TheStig » Fri Jun 21, 2013 9:44 am

My thoughts exactly snag.
777longhaul wrote:The Stig

Yes forced retirement at 60 is gone, at AC, for pilots.

There are 200 pilots, who were forced retired, strictly due to their age, (60) who are still in court, over this issue. (Prior the the Federal Rule Change.) The rule was changed, as it was determined to be discriminatory, by the Federal Government.
Actually there have been thousands of pilots who were forced to retire at 60, some others at 55, and some at 65. They retired and permitted you to advance your career. This is the way it worked, the law changed now it isn't.
777longhaul wrote:You must not be at AC, as you would know about this issue?
I'm acutely aware of this issue, because it will have a huge effect on my career. The beauty of the seniority system at AC is the longer you spend in it, the more centric and isolated your view point becomes. The concerns of anyone junior to you become completely irrelevant. Every narrow body could be parked overnight and the top 1000 pilots wouldn't even notice.

Do you have any idea what changes were made to the pension and rules for retirement for Air Canada's pilots? This was not a win for the vast majority of the membership, but you probably don't have any clue why. The FP60 group won, pilots are allowed to continue flying at AC after their 60th birthday! Yay, right?...Nope, this is all sour grapes to you guys because the changes were made after you turned 60, what about the moral victory? Age discrimination is gone from Air Canada, why aren't you celebrating?
777longhaul wrote:That is why there is still band width on this discriminatory court case.
So long as you keep paying the lawyers, they'll keep appealing, but Air Canada never broke the law, the law changed and so did the contract.
---------- ADS -----------
  

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#56 Post by 777longhaul » Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:50 am

The Stig

AC and acpa did break the law, and have been for a very long time.

For age discrimination to work, (to be allowed) by Federal Law, (prior to the law being changed by the Federal Government, NOT the FP60 group) a Company, in this case AC, (and acpa to a lesser extent) had to FULLY qualify for a couple of issues.

Remeber, the law was finally changed by the Federal Government, after years and years of court battles. The only reason it was changed, was it was a prven beyond a shawdow of doubt, to be a totally, discriminatory law, and it covered the Federal Corporations, of which, AC happens to be part of. If....the law was not discriminatory, then it would NOT have been changed by the Fed, but it was, therefore, AC and acpa have to qualify for being able to force retire the pilots, and other employee's at AC. They have to qualify on two fronts.

The Federal Law, changed for,over 800 thousand employee's in Canada. You and those still employeed, are covered under that law.

# 1 Issue BFOR

BFOR, is one of two definitions, that would allow, AC and acpa, to discriminate against the pilots, and others employed at AC, but....they did not qualify. They (AC and acpa) failed the Meiorin Test (it is on the FP60 website, this is the link http://www.flypast60.com/Documents/Flowchart.pdf you can see the actual test that is used to determine if, a company, or union, can legally discriminate against ALL employees, (not just pilots) due to age, and all other forms of discrimination. This test is from the Supreme Court of Canada.

A company, and a union, (it is debatable that a union even qualifies for BFOR, as they are NOT an employer) must qualify for all 3 tests, any loss, on any of the 3 test, stops the ablility for legal age discrimination, or any other type of legal discrimination. Dead stop on that one.

# 2 Issue Normal Age of Retirement

This has been a back and forth issue. AC and acpa have won, and lost, (so did FP60) on this issue.

AC is the only airline in Canada that forced their pilots to retire at age 60. No other airline forces their pilots out at age 60, does that seem "normal" that AC is not breaking the law?

The Federal Department, that issues your licence, (pilot and medical) and everyother pilots licences in Canada, has NO age restriction period on a pilots licence.

It is so ridiculous, that Jazz, which is part of AC, has no age 60 rule, yet...AC says they are not breaking the law, and they are not discriminating against its employees, including the AC pilots.

AC was able to convince the CHRT in 2011, that West Jet, Air Transat, and others, (the top 5 major competitors) to AC were NOT comparable companines to AC, and Air Tindie, Air Labrator, etc. (if you even know who they are) (no disrespect to them) were legal, realistic comparators to AC.

It was a total back room deal, that AC was able to pull off, and it delayed this issue yet again. Dont forget, that it was contract time at acpa, in your career at AC, don't ever forget that issue. If....you are at AC, I strongly suggest you get involved with acpa, otherwise, you will get what ever acpa wants, at that time, and at that day, that best suits them. Get in there, and do something about it.

The last JR, (May 2013) at the Federal Court level, will decide if that CHRT ruling,was a legal, reasonable, and pratical definition, and ruling, on "The Normal Age of Retirement." Let's look at that again, AC with 3000 plus pilots, is a legal comparator to Air Tindie with 75 pilots, and West Jet, and Air Transat are not.

The issue of "Normal Age of Retirement" definition, is the hinge point in AC and acpa being able to discriminate against the pilots who wanted to stay past 60. acpa refused to file grievances for its active (paying monthly union dues) and in-active pilots, because they both know, (AC and acpa, especially acpa) that they would lose the grievances to the FP60 group. (The FP60 group is made up of ACTIVE and IN-ACTIVE pilots.) This is the sole reason we are still in court, spending your union dues, for the active pilots, and the pension money of the force retired pilots.

ALL other unions at AC have filed grievances for their members, and all that wanted to stay, and or come back have been granted that result via the Arbitrators. The only exception, acpa.

The money wasted by AC and acpa, could have been spent, on helping out the junior's and the others at AC that have been screwed over by many contract agreements over the years. acpa, has choosen, over many years of MEC changes, to ignore you, and all the others. acpa, lost out on the pension gains by the rule change, to the tune of over 300 million dollars. That is just one example, of many.

Most of the FP60 group, of 200 are now past 65, so don't worry, your movement up the ladder, will not be affected if at all. Depends on how the courts issue their decisions. NO one knows how it is going to go.

I see on AC aeronet, that there are still retirements going, and it would be a good idea if you looked at it to see how many are retireing each month since Dec 2012. That should ease, your personal concerns about your own personal advancement.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by 777longhaul on Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#57 Post by 777longhaul » Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:52 pm

chg
---------- ADS -----------
  

Ah_yeah
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:50 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#58 Post by Ah_yeah » Tue Jun 25, 2013 6:47 am

777longhaul wrote:The Stig

acpa, is the only union at AC that has refused to file grievances for the pilots
That should tell you something right there but clearly you guys don't get it.
---------- ADS -----------
  

43S/172E
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#59 Post by 43S/172E » Wed Jun 26, 2013 12:55 pm

Snag I love your humour well done!!

To MTK and 777 Long haul I did ask a much esteemed senior member of the CALPA who negotiated in several contracts in the 70's and 80's.

I will not engage in revisionist history but here are his recollections and I quote:

Don't know the exact date but can confirm that it was certainly
contractual. In fact CALPA's official policy read something like this:
The Association does not recognize a compulsory retirement age for
pilots unless it has been negotiated and ratified as part of the pilot's
collective agreement. My best guess would be that it came about in the
late 50's. ALPA in the U S had lobbied the FAA to regulate an official
retirement age of 60 and were successful about that time. U S efforts
through ALPA had this adopted as ICAO policy about the same time.
While I was involved at IFALPA we maintained our CALPA position re
compulsory retirement age and were able to align IFALPA policy to use
the same wording as CALPA had long maintained.

Sorry I don't have the exact wording but am working from memory.
---------- ADS -----------
  

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#60 Post by 777longhaul » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:17 pm

Age 60, When and how it came to be:

Please look at my posts on the previous page, dated June 13 and June 20th.

The USA and Canada had different creation dates, but it was the same bs game, as to why it was done, and how it was done.
---------- ADS -----------
  

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#61 Post by 777longhaul » Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:39 pm

777longhaul wrote:Some.... minor Info for the champions of age discrimination on this forum:

History of age 60 in USA:

History of age 60 in Canada: (at the bottom of this post)


James A. Fitts says his parents thought he was crazy when as a boy of 5 in 1940 he began drawing pictures of sleek airplanes with swept-back wings and no propellers. But Mr. Fitts was convinced that he would one day pilot such seemingly outlandish aircraft, and he was right.

After flying fighters and reconnaissance jets in the Air Force, he spent 26 years as a commercial airline pilot, logging 31,000 hours in the air. But his career ended abruptly two days before he turned 60 on June 18, 1995, when, like all commercial airline pilots, he was forced to retire.

''I miss it so much,'' said Mr. Fitts, who still sometimes co-pilots a private jet for a corporation close to his home near Des Moines. ''I just love hauling people around.''

At a time when Americans are living longer than ever, when Congress is raising the Social Security retirement age to 67 from 65, and when Senator John Glenn, 77, is about to go back to outer space, the Federal Aviation Administration is still forcing airline pilots to retire at age 60, in one of the last remaining examples of Government-sanctioned age discrimination.
The so-called age-60 rule, which applies only to commercial airline pilots, was put in place in 1959 to promote safety. But the rule was disputed from the beginning, attracting numerous legal challenges and studies that concluded the rule had no medical rationale.

Still, the F.A.A. has steadfastly maintained that despite the growing sophistication of flight simulators and other tests, there is no way to determine whether pilots over 60 might suddenly drop dead in the cockpit or suffer a ''subtle degradation'' of their mental faculties.

Tomorrow, in the latest bid to overturn the rule, the Supreme Court will announce whether it will hear the appeal of a group of pilots who contend that the regulation violates the Federal law barring age discrimination. But even if the court chooses not to take up the case -- a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals voted 2 to 1 last July to uphold the rule -- the older pilots have vowed to fight on.

''If Glenn can go into space at 77, why can't we fly to Cleveland at 60?'' said Bert Yetman, 65, the president of the Professional Pilots Federation, which has taken the lead in opposing the rule.

The answer, according to former F.A.A. officials, airline executives and sympathetic younger pilots, is not concerns about safety but politics. The Air Line Pilots Association, which represents most of the country's 80,000 commercial airline pilots, once led the fight against the age-60 rule. But now the union is its biggest champion.

Union officials say their members believe the rule enhances safety. But others say the union is more concerned that allowing older pilots to fly longer would make it more difficult for its younger members to move up the seniority ranks into the captain's seat.

''It's not a medical issue,'' said Donald D. Engen, the F.A.A. head in the mid-1980's. ''The younger guys want the older guys out because they want to be captain. Captains draw the bigger pay.''

Since 1987, mandatory retirement has been outlawed for all but a handful of jobs. Aside from the pilots, the exceptions -- including air traffic controllers and police and fire officers -- were permitted by Congress and aroused little controversy.

A demographic bulge of pilots who joined the airlines in the late 1960's and 70's is rapidly approaching 60, bringing more pilots than ever face to face with the rule. Many older pilots, especially those with lucrative pension plans, favor early retirement. They fear that raising the retirement age would threaten a special tax exemption that enables them to collect their full corporate retirement benefits without penalty at 60 rather than 65.

But many of the pilots fighting the age-60 rule worked at airlines that went bankrupt in the aftermath of the industry's deregulation 20 years ago. Because every airline operates on a seniority system, each time the pilots joined a new carrier they were forced to work their way up from lower-paying jobs in the second or third seat in the cockpit.

''It's kind of ironic that just when the slot machine starts to pay off, you have to pack it in and walk out of the door,'' said L. Brandon Smithe, 58, a captain at American Airlines who spent 18 years at Continental Airlines before it entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1983 in order to break its union contracts.

While pilots his age who spent their careers at American will retire with a lump sum of $2 million plus a pension, Mr. Smithe said he would only receive about a quarter of that.

Compared with the main pilots' union, the older pilots have little influence. The Air Line Pilots Association contributed nearly $900,000, mostly to Democrats, in the last campaign and $1.3 million in 1992 and 1993, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington research group.

Two years ago, when the Professional Pilots Association persuaded the House Appropriations Committee to authorize a new study of the rule by the National Transportation Safety Board, the Air Line Pilots Association got the full House to prohibit the safety board from spending any money on the examination.

David Hinson, the F.A.A. administrator from 1993 to 1996, said it was clear to him that his superiors at the Transportation Department were not eager to take on the rule. ''It was a subject that they did not want to put on the table,'' he said.

For their part, the major airlines are now indifferent to the rule; some would like to see experienced pilots fly longer while others do not want to upset a system that seems to work.

Supporters of the rule acknowledge that the choice of 60 is arbitrary. It originated in the 1950's, when three airlines, including American, tried to force their pilots to retire at that age, citing airline safety. After a labor arbitrator ruled against the airlines, C. R. Smith, then American's president, appealed privately to his friend, Elwood Quesada, a former Air Force general who was the F.A.A.'s first administrator.

General Quesada got the rule passed in December 1959, even though an internal memo from the agency's Civil Air Surgeon expressed concern that the agency had no ''scientific or factual justification.'' General Quesada retired a year later and joined the board of American Airlines.
''I don't think anybody has ever said that there is anything magical about an age-60 limit,'' said Dr. Jon Jordan, the Federal Air Surgeon. The point, he said, was that the risk of catastrophic illness or mental deterioration rose with age and that 60 was seen as the appropriate place to draw the line.

But the rationale for picking 60 has become less supportable over the years. Aviation authorities in Europe, Australia and elsewhere that once followed the F.A.A. have raised the mandatory retirement age for their airline pilots to 65. At least two F.A.A.-sponsored studies since 1981 have concluded that there is no evidence that accident rates increase as pilots get older. The most recent study, in 1993, concluded the F.A.A. could ''cautiously'' raise the age to 63.

The older pilots say they must still pass the semiannual physical exam required by the F.A.A. They are willing to undergo other tests, like the quarterly checkups on a flight simulator now required in Britain, where the retirement age was raised to 65 four years ago.

But after its last review of the rule in 1995, the agency not only decided to maintain 60 as the cutoff, it also extended the rule to commuter planes capable of carrying 10 or more passengers, saying it would raise the level of safety. Previously, pilots of commercial planes able to carry up to 30 passengers did not have a mandatory retirement age.

Dr. Jordan said the F.A.A. could not extend the age limit because there were no data available on the performance of commercial airline pilots over 60.

But the F.A.A. has refused repeated requests to waive the rule for selected pilots in order to obtain such data because, Dr. Jordan said, the lack of data means there is no sure method to choose a test group of pilots that could safely fly past 60.

''The agency's complacent acceptance of this Catch-22 situation, particularly given that the result is the continuation of a government-imposed regime of age discrimination, seems to me to be the epitome of arbitrary action,'' Judge Patricia Wald wrote in her dissent to last year's Court of Appeals decision upholding the rule.

The pilots say that the main reason airplanes have two-member crews is so that if the pilot becomes incapacitated, the co-pilot can take over. They add that the experience gained from years in the cockpit makes older pilots actually safer.

''If you were wrongfully accused of murder, would you go out and find a first-time lawyer or get F. Lee Bailey?'' said David Cronin, 69, a former captain with United Airlines.

In 1989, Mr. Cronin drew on his experience to bring a crippled 747 to a safe landing in Hawaii in 1989 after one of the plane's cargo doors blew off, killing nine passengers. A month later, just before his 60th birthday, he was forced to retire.

Mr. Cronin and other opponents of the rule argue that the F.A.A. regularly allows younger pilots who have had heart attacks, psychological problems or difficulties with drugs and alcohol to return to the cockpit.

''I never had a day sick, never had an organ transplant, never had a drug or alcohol problem,'' said Mr. Yetman, the Professional Pilots Federation president, who flew for Southwest Airlines until he turned 60 in 1993. ''I just had an unfortunate birthday.''



History of age 60 in Canada:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=6a ... %2C4028935
---------- ADS -----------
  

ilovelamp
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:07 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#62 Post by ilovelamp » Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:03 pm

sure hope this case is thrown out.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7561
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#63 Post by Rockie » Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:32 pm

The fact that you call it a "case" and hope it's thrown out indicates you have no knowledge of the process, and certainly no knowledge of the issue. May I recommend you do some basic research...
---------- ADS -----------
  

ilovelamp
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:07 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#64 Post by ilovelamp » Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:23 pm

Lol, I actually do have a basic understanding of what's happening, for the past 3 years I've been hearing both sides of the story. Were all entitled to our opinions and I still pray that the 200 don't get a dime. For me personally, I know when I turn 60 you won't see me anywhere near an airplane. I'll enjoy my modest pension. Sure wish it was as good as the guys suing.

Ps. I read a study done by Boeing, it stated that those who fly till 60 live on average till 72 and those that fly till 65 live on average to 67. So I guess there's a bright side. The fp60 crowd will keep that DB pension healthy for me and my peers who plan to enjoy retirement.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
bluemic
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 12:07 pm
Location: A slightly large Pacific Island

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#65 Post by bluemic » Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:30 pm

ilovelamp wrote:.....For me personally, I know when I turn 60 you won't see me anywhere near an airplane. I'll enjoy my modest pension.


ilovelamp, be wary of making pronouncements like the one above. Things change. Situations do too. Definitive statements like yours can come back to haunt you. And even if we readers never discover whether or not you actually do go at 60, you'll look at yourself in the mirror and remember that you once said you would...
ilovelamp wrote:Ps. I read a study done by Boeing, it stated that those who fly till 60 live on average till 72 and those that fly till 65 live on average to 67. So I guess there's a bright side. The fp60 crowd will keep that DB pension healthy for me and my peers who plan to enjoy retirement.
From the Boeing Pay and Benefits newsletter of July 30th, 2004. Yes, 2004! This urban myth's been around a long time. (Google: "Boeing life expectancy vs retirement.)

"An incorrect, but alarming, chart that claims to show the life expectancy of Boeing retirees has been circulating on the Internet. According to this chart, Boeing employees who retire at 65 die much sooner than employees who retire at earlier ages. Even though this chart has been in existence for over twenty years, it is not based on fact. There is no correlation between age at retirement and life expectancy of Boeing retirees."
---------- ADS -----------
  

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7561
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#66 Post by Rockie » Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:46 pm

ilovelamp wrote:Lol, I actually do have a basic understanding of what's happening,
You mean like your understanding of the fictitious Boeing study you mentioned that was exposed years ago as a total hoax...that kind of understanding? I'll tell you what, the day you retire at age 60 I'll believe you kept that particular fire burning all those years. Until then....

But really, why wait? If your job is so unpleasant that you're putting an unnecessary cap on it now why not find something you like while you're still relatively young?
---------- ADS -----------
  

ilovelamp
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:07 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#67 Post by ilovelamp » Sun Dec 14, 2014 12:54 pm

Is it a hoax? All those emails I get about retired pilots dropping like Flys at a relatively young age is enough evidence for me to know what's what and those guys retired at 60! Imagine 65! This job is incredibly unhealthy, especially overseas.

Who says I'm unhappy? I love my job, just not enough to give up my health, family and friends. Nothing is more important than that.

However, a lot of guys don't have the privilidge of having a healthy social/family life like I do, therefore continue to work just to have some forced layover friendships, so I'm biased and can not empathize properly.

Rockie, were all entitled to our opinion and that's why this is going through the judicial system. I just know what outcome I want.

Happy flying.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7561
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#68 Post by Rockie » Mon Dec 15, 2014 7:39 am

Yes it's a hoax discredited by none other than Boeing themselves. Google it.

The outcome you want now may not be the outcome you want later for a whole host of reasons, and may be beyond your reach for a whole bunch more. Your sense of superior family and social privilege over people who decide to work longer is misplaced and slightly condescending as well. You don't know yours are any better than theirs.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Old fella
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1700
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#69 Post by Old fella » Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:57 am

ilovelamp wrote:Is it a hoax? All those emails I get about retired pilots dropping like Flys at a relatively young age is enough evidence for me to know what's what and those guys retired at 60! Imagine 65! This job is incredibly unhealthy, especially overseas.

Who says I'm unhappy? I love my job, just not enough to give up my health, family and friends. Nothing is more important than that.

However, a lot of guys don't have the privilidge of having a healthy social/family life like I do, therefore continue to work just to have some forced layover friendships, so I'm biased and can not empathize properly.

Rockie, were all entitled to our opinion and that's why this is going through the judicial system. I just know what outcome I want.

Happy flying.

I am 64 yrs old and yes, people my age are indeed dropping off like flies. I see it every day(obits), as we get up in that age bracket we have a tendancy to take notice. No I can't/won't comment on percentage of airline pilots who end up underneath the daisies or if there is an unhealthy angle due long distance flying at an older age as I am not an airline pilot, never was. One thing I can add however(in my experience), the vast majority in the 60 age percentile will/like to to give it all up if they can see themselves clear to do in a reasonable degree of comfort regardless of their social/family life or lack thereof. In my years I know of only three people who wanted/continued to work because they loved their jobs or in one sad case - thought his employer couldn't do without him. Again sadly, he passed on two years after he finally left with a fully paid up DB pension.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ilovelamp
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 11:07 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#70 Post by ilovelamp » Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:51 pm

Rockie wrote:Yes it's a hoax discredited by none other than Boeing themselves. Google it.

The outcome you want now may not be the outcome you want later for a whole host of reasons, and may be beyond your reach for a whole bunch more. Your sense of superior family and social privilege over people who decide to work longer is misplaced and slightly condescending as well. You don't know yours are any better than theirs.
You learn a lot about our senior colleagues stuck in a cockpit for hours on end, a very high percentage have had several divorces. That to me doesn't sound like a healthy family/social life. I'm gonna go out on a whim and say my senses are correct.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Norwegianwood
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:16 pm

Re: Happy Birthday, You're Fired!!

#71 Post by Norwegianwood » Mon Dec 15, 2014 8:10 pm

ilovelamp wrote:I'm gonna go out on a whim and say my senses are correct.
As Joe Friday said in Dragnet........

"Gimme the facts Ma'am, just the facts"

Do some homework iLL and come back with something better than whims and senses.

You might just have some credibility when you finally do, till then, Good night and Good luck!

NW

edited for a small i.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”