Motives

By Steve Jacques

As I have become more involved in the Age 60 issue, and have had the opportunity to listen to more and more pilots input on the subject, it appears that the question of motive is raised frequently. Many of those opposed to any change are usually the first to ask; "why would anyone want to work beyond 60?" That is a very good question.

From my perspective, the answer is very clear. For the most part, those leading the charge are unable to retire at 60. "What's this! Those high paid senior pilots crying poverty! Why don't they take their 30 year pensions and retire with dignity!!" Well, it's not quite that simple. What follows in my unscientific model of the average pilot who is in the forefront of the Age 60-rule change movement.

AGE: Late 40's
MARITAL STATUS: Married, 3 children (2 currently in college)
YEARS IN AVIATION: 25+
YEARS WITH PRESENT AIRLINE: 3
CURRENT STATUS: F/O, B-757
NUMBER OF PREVIOUS AIRLINES: 3 (furloughed from one, others went bankrupt)
CURRENT FINANCAL STATUS: Marginal - Still paying off medical bills incurred while out of work with no insurance. Almost lost home to bank.
RETIREMENT PACKAGE: Nil
The statistics listed above do not describe any particular person, but do describe a core group of pilots who work for various airlines, and whose mission is to try to continue to work for those airlines because of previous unfortunate circumstances (I am not referring to a specific group such as the PPF). They do not want charity; they do not want sympathy… they want to provide as best they can for the welfare of their family and their later years (which aren't so far away).

This core group is not concerned with greed, nor with losing status because of forced retirement. They simply have not had the opportunity to put in 30 years with the same company in order to garner the seniority and the retirement package that others have. They are not looking to "rob" anyone else of a job, or a chance to upgrade. They feel that there are ideas already being tendered that will allow everyone on every side of the issue to be satisfied with an extended age FAR.

Are there others not in this core group who wish to work beyond 60? Yes. Do they already have enough to retire on comfortably? Probably. Will some of these people opt to work beyond 60 if the rule is changed? Most likely. But does it really matter? If protection is guaranteed to those who wish to retire at 60, and to those who want the quickest possible upgrade, does it matter? Do we mind, as a pilot group, if those who need to work longer can have the chance to do so? Would you want the same consideration in 20 years if your career doesn't quite go the way you planned?

These questions, and others put forth by individuals in our greater pilot community will define the debate as the months go on. I invite you to ask your own tough questions to yourself and others. But above all, I ask you to see the shades of gray between the black and white of the issue.

Please let me leave you with one final thought. Put yourself in the "unscientific model" specified above. If you have ever experienced moderate to severe financial trauma, this will probably be easy to you. Then "walk the walk" of that individual, and ask yourself if there can be a win/win solution to raising the retirement age.