Age 60 Rule

[Trader]

AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL

94TH REGULAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING

September 14-15, 2004

SUBJECT

Age 60 Education Campaign

SOURCE

MEA MEC

DELEGATE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

WHEREAS the current financial crisis in the airline industry has

caused tens of thousands of ALPA pilots to experience a dramatic

and permanent reduction in their career earnings through

furloughs, pay cuts, displacements, and reduced promotion and job

opportunities, and

WHEREAS a significant proportion of ALPA's membership has also

experienced an erosion in their projected retirement earnings

through a variety of factors, including the dramatic and

permanent reduction in their career earnings; lower-than-expected

investment returns due to declines in the equity markets, and

increasing pressure on defined benefit plans, including

reductions in benefits, the freezing of future benefit accruals,

or the termination of some of these plans, and

WHEREAS many ALPA pilot groups have not been able to successfully

bargain for defined benefit plans, and

WHEREAS the negotiating environment is not favorable to

addressing these issues in the near future, and

WHEREAS the cost of retiree medical insurance has increased

dramatically over the years, and

WHEREAS airline pilots in the U.S. are required to retire at age

60, and

WHEREAS ALPA policy is to endorse mandatory retirement at age 60,

and

WHEREAS there is a significant gap between the mandatory

retirement age for pilots in the U.S. and the age at which many

pilots are eligible to receive Social Security and Medicare

benefits, and

WHEREAS the Executive Board recently reaffirmed its desire to

obtain necessary changes to the U.S. Medicare and Social Security

laws to make retired airline pilots eligible for Medicare and

full Social Security benefits upon reaching age 60, and

WHEREAS the current White House Administration has not been

amenable to addressing these issues, and

WHEREAS an increasing number of ALPA pilots are concerned that

they may be compelled to work either in other professions or as

pilots outside the U.S. beyond the current U.S. mandatory

retirement age due to a reduction in their career earnings,

retirement earnings, and/or to bridge their income and medical

benefits to Medicare and Social Security, and

WHEREAS an increasing number of ALPA pilots have expressed a

desire to have the mandatory retirement age in the U.S. increased

to enable them to continue to work as a pilots in the U.S to

increase their career earnings, retirement earnings, and/or to

bridge their income and medical benefits to Medicare and Social

Security, and

WHEREAS the Age 60 Rule is a safety rule established by the

Federal Aviation Administration in 1959, and

WHEREAS a change in the Age 60 rule would require a change to

applicable FAA regulations based upon aviation safety, and not

pilot income or benefits, criteria, and

WHEREAS discussions among rank and file U.S. ALPA members

regarding changing the mandatory age raise issues related to the

impact on career earnings, retirement earnings, defined benefit

plan provisions and funding, pilot medical certification

standards, and air safety, and

WHEREAS it is appropriate that Association policy on safety

issues be consistent with the best available scientific

information, and

WHEREAS the establishment of Association policy is driven by the

interests of the rank and file membership, and

WHEREAS arguments both in favor and against maintaining the

current Association policy preserving age 60 as the mandatory

retirement age must be focused on facts rather than emotion or

speculation,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the President is hereby directed to

initiate a thorough communications effort to educate the U.S.

ALPA membership regarding the rationale for the existence of the

Age 60 Rule and the possible implications of increasing the

mandatory retirement age, including the impact on career

earnings, retirement earnings, defined benefit plan provisions

and funding, pilot medical certification standards, and air

safety, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this communications effort shall

include a poll of the U.S. ALPA membership regarding mandatory

retirement age issues, including their views regarding ALPA's Age

60 policy, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the President is also directed to

report on the status of this initiative to the May 2005 Executive

Board.

[ccairspace]

Some history on the Age 60 Rule that helps to expalin why the US pilots have an uphill battle.

K

Age_60_Rule.doc

[Moon The Loon]

It will be interesting to observe whether some companies will attempt to exploit this ALPA study by pitting F/O against Capt.

As a point of interest, there are only a few countries around the world that stick to the ICAO standard of mandatory retirement at age 60. France is one country in Europe where, unlike the USA, it is even prohibited from overflying the country if the PIC is => age 60.

[Vsplat]

Good attachment. One caveat. That is indeed an excerpt from one view of this matter. It does not tell the entire story.

The age 60 rule was reviewed by ICAO in the early to mid nineties following a bid from a member state to have it lifted. Canada supported the move, as we have no such restriction, however our pilots are effectively shut down from commercial trans-border command positions at 60. (Remember that ICAO does not restrict the right seat, only the left, and only for commercial traffic).

Since ICAO holds age 60 as a standard for commercial command, it doesn't matter what the individual preferences of its members states are. If an operator deviates from ICAO, even with the permission of its home country, permission must be sought from every state over which the deviating flight will operate to do so apart from ICAO. Most countries are loathe to do so, especially those whose state airlines fly competing routes with said operator.

I don't have access at the moment to that study, which was presented to ICAO. If memory serves, Argentina took the lead. Apart from the interesting comparison of the relative effects of reflex versus judgement, on interesting statistic on averge age of death arose. For trans-oceanic pilots at the time, the worldwide number was, I believe, 60.8 years. Speculation on the cause ranged from lifestyle (which at the time included too much smoking, drinking and inactivity) to cosmic radiation, to continual circadian shocks leading to an abmormally high rate of arterial plaque build-up. Of course, the number itself was pretty much an optics nightmare...

I'm sorry I can't reproduce the report at the moment. I'll see if I can dig it up (now, if I can only remember where I filed it. Dang this aging.....)

Vs

[AAS]

Do cargo operators fall under the ICAO age 60 rule?

[Moon The Loon]

Since ICAO holds age 60 as a standard for commercial command,

Most countries are loathe to do so, especially those whose state airlines fly competing routes with said operator.

Speculation on the cause ... to cosmic radiation,

Yo VSplat

Yes ICAO has used this age limit as a standard for a long time. Recall however on 10 September 2001 the legislation that had been passed by Congress increasing the age limit for mandatory retirement from command to age 63. The legislation was shelved on 12 Sept. So like MOST other countries who have taken exception to the ICAO standard, the USA was about to follow. Where the FAA goes, the JAA would eventually follow, as would have the ICAO standard.

Those states who still enforce the rule enforce it not for safety or health reasons but by pressure from pilot associations such as ALPA. France has a very unique pilot seniority system that actually sounds quite attractive in the close study but would shatter most North Americans faith in pilot unions!

The last point (I tried to quote it in the context of my following comment) has been begging study for years. But with all those who have tried to organize an effective study (ALPA was working on one prior to 911), there is still no data supporting deterioration of pilot health due to this particular cause. All the others you mentioned? Well, oh YEAH!

[ccairspace]

...unlike the USA, it is even prohibited from overflying the country if the PIC is => age 60.

MTL,

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that you cannot be PIC of an air transport and overfly any US airspace.

Remember that ICAO does not restrict the right seat, only the left, and only for commercial traffic.

Vsplat,

Absolutely, and if the FAA would adopt that guideline, rather than apply it to both L and R seats, there probably wouldn't the degree of problem that exists. And then over 60's could slide to starboard for a few years before retirement, if they so choose.

Do you know when ICAO adopted the age 60 rule? Was in 1944 (Chicago Conv.) or after 1959?

Do cargo operators fall under the ICAO age 60 rule?

I have a niggling feeling that it doesn't, but the FAA Age 60 Rule does, so any air cargo flight that flies over or into the US will be affected.

And that really is the problem. So much lucrative air traffic flies over or into that airspace that FAA policy significantly influences foreign internal aviation policy.

K

[Moon The Loon]

MTL,

I don't think so.  I'm pretty sure that you cannot be PIC of an air transport and overfly any US airspace.

You can, actually. C3 did it for years overflying to Mexico. If you have to land though, then you're grounded!

Which to me re-emphasizes my belief ('cuz that's all it is, really) that the Age 60 rule is strictly political and not a safety issue.

[ccairspace]

...the Age 60 rule is strictly political and not a safety issue.

Absolutely agree. If a pilot is medically fit he/she should be permitted to fly until they either no longer wish to or functionally are unable to (ie: can't manage check rides and recurrencies etc.). The cognitive checks that are inherent in recurrent training, when done regularly and thoroughly, will tell more about the functional capacity of a pilot than what their age is. It's also really important that co-pilots look out for each other in that respect as well.

K