Delta proposes early retirement plan to ALPA to counter 'pilot staffing overage'

Delta Air Lines has too many pilots. That is the gist of the reason why the carrier has proposed "a pilot retirement incentive program" to the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), which represents Delta's 12,000 pilots.

According to a letter from the chairman of the Delta unit of ALPA to the pilot membership, the proposed pilot retirement incentive program is "designed to address what management perceives to be a current pilot staffing overage." The letter to the pilots from Lee Moak, chairman of the Delta Master Executive Council (MEC) of ALPA, was reprinted in today's Atlanta Business Chronicle.

The letter says that the proposal was presented to the union's Negotiating Committee late last month.

Under the terms of the proposal, active pilots who have met certain age and length-of-service metrics would be eligible to participate in the program. Participating pilots would receive a severance payment, medical and dental benefits for a limited period of time and retiree travel benefits.

The Negotiating Committee plans to meet soon with Delta management to begin discussions regarding the proposal. The number of pilot jobs Delta is seeking to eliminate was not specified.

Separately, the Negotiating Committee also is engaged in discussions with management about details relating to Delta's recently announced closure of the 747-200 categories (both in Anchorage and Minneapolis) and the Anchorage base.

Earlier this year, Delta Air Lines offered a voluntary buyout program to reduce staff in conjunction with a capacity reduction. Delta pilots were not eligible for that program.

Air Pacific eliminates compulsory retirement age for cabin crew

Cabin crew at Fiji-based Air Pacific will no longer be forced to retire at age 45. The airline management and the Transport Workers Union "have settled the matter and the compulsory retirement age for staff at all levels will be removed from the collective agreements," according to an article on FijiVillage.com. Compulsory retirement age had been an issue of contention in a legal case the Transport Workers Union filed against Air Pacific.

Although the compulsory retirement age complaint has been settled, the Transport Workers Union still wants the Fiji Court of Appeal to address other matters of disagreement between the union and the airline, including issues such as working hours and crew complement. Finally, the union has asked the Appeals Court to rule as well on Air Pacific's practice of suspending cabin crew who are overweight or have blemishes. The Union contends that these practices are "unconstitutional" under the collective bargaining agreement.

All Cathay Pacific cabin crew may now work until age 55

Effective immediately, all flight attendants at Cathay Pacific Airways will be able to continue working at the airline until they reach the age of 55. Until now, cabin crew who began working for Cathay Pacific after 1993 faced mandatory retirement at age 45. Those hired before 1993 were allowed to work until they became 55. Under the new rule, the same retirement age will apply for all, regardless of hire date. The rule applies to both male and female cabin crew.

The change reflects recent negotiations between the Cathay Pacific Airways Flight Attendants' Union and the airline's management. The rule change will affect the 5,000 cabin crew currently based in Hong Kong, and also will be applied to the 1,500 or so new-hires that Cathay Pacific intends to add to its work force by the end of this year.

No. 1 pilot at US Airways retires

Before his retirement last week, Capt. Randy McNerlin had been the No. 1 pilot at US Airways. He had been No. 1 at America West; when that airline merged with US Airways he retained his top seniority position.

During his 24 year career at America West and then US Airways, McNerlin had flown more than 20,500 hours. According to an article in the Arizona Republic:

Pilot numbers at US Airways, which merged with America West in 2005, now extend to more than 3,000. But for 24 years and three weeks, McNerlin held onto the most senior number.

"There's something about P0001," said Elizabeth Graham, an 11-year US Airways pilot, as she waited in the jet way for McNerlin to come out of the plane. "It's just special for us."

In the Friday tribute, two Sky Harbor emergency trucks created a 300-foot water arch for McNerlin's Airbus A320 to taxi through after it landed early from Seattle. Fifteen US Airways employees huddled near Terminal 4's windows to watch his last landing and taxi.

Capt. McNerlin retired one day before his 60th birthday, in compliance with current FAA regulations that require mandatory retirement for airline pilots who reach their 60 years of age. Looks like he's not finished with flying, though. The Arizona Republic notes that McNerlin now plans to go to work for an India-based airline.

Congratulations to Capt. Randy McNerlin on a long and successful career in the U.S. airline industry, and best wishes for the next phase of his career as an ex-pat pilot.

[PhotoSource]

ALPA now supports 'Age 60' rule change

The Air line Pilots Association (ALPA) announced yesterday that its Executive Board had voted "to end the union's longstanding support for the FAA Age 60 mandatory retirement age for airline pilots." An ALPA press release about this change of position suggests that the union leadership realized the change was coming, and they want to have an active role in shaping details of the new rules. This is a complete turnaround for ALPA, which had previously supported mandatory retirement at age 60.

The news release specifies these as the priorities that ALPA now will advocate:

• Appropriate legislative language to prevent retroactive application of a change to the Age 60 Rule, to the effect that: "No person over 60, except active flight deck crewmembers, on the effective date may serve as a pilot (captain or first officer) for a Part 121 airline unless such person is newly hired as a pilot on or after such effective date without credit for prior seniority or prior longevity for benefits or other terms related to length of service prior to the date of rehire under any labor agreement or employment policies of the air carrier."
• Appropriate legislative language to ensure stronger liability protection for airlines and pilot unions in implementing a change to the rule, to the effect that: "Any action in conformance with this Act or with a regulation under this Act may not serve as a basis for liability or relief before any court or agency of the United States, or of any state or locality, nor may any action taken prior to the effective date of enactment on the basis of section 121.383(c) of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations as then in effect."
• Ensuring that, under a defined benefit retirement plan, a change to the Age 60 Rule will not reduce a participant’s or beneficiary’s accrued benefit nor reduce a benefit to which a participant or beneficiary would have been entitled without enactment of such a change to the Rule.
• Opposing any additional age-related diagnostic medical testing.
• Opposing any attempt by the FAA to obtain greater access to pilot medical records.
• Supporting FAA Air Surgeon Tilton’s recommendation to require a 1st Class Medical certification every six months for pilots over age 60.
• Opposing for domestic operation the implementation of the ICAO standard that at least one pilot in the cockpit be under age 60. Once sufficient data on pilots over age 60 becomes available, unless the necessity for this mitigation for the long term is clearly shown, advocate for removal of the ICAO over/under mitigation for all operations.
• Support the ability of a pilot to retire prior to the mandatory age without penalty.

ALPA's Executive Board also urged the union to continue to aggressively lobby for the adoption of the Akaka bill (which would provide full PBGC benefits to pilots who retire at age 60).

AirTran supports change of Age 60 rule for pilots

Low-fare carrier AirTran Airways has announced that the company supports the FAA's proposal to change the mandatory retirement age of commercial airline pilots from 60 to 65. Recently the National Pilots Association (NPA), the union representing AirTran's pilots, endorsed the proposed change in the law.

Here is an excerpt from a news release about AirTran's support of the mandatory retirement rule change:

"AirTran Airways understands that raising the mandatory retirement age for pilots is a positive decision that makes sense for the industry," said Bob Fornaro, president and chief operating officer of AirTran Airways. "Our airline employs well-trained and seasoned professional pilots, and we believe in the great benefits that years of hands-on experience can bring to the job at AirTran Airways."

"The NPA Board of Directors also supports raising the retirement age for pilots to 65, and we are excited that AirTran Airways agrees with the decision," said Capt. Allen Philpot, president of the National Pilots Association. "Provisions need to be put in place now to keep those pilots who satisfy FAA medical standards on the job beyond age 60. It is crucial to keep our most experienced pilots in place just like our international counterparts."

AirTran currently employs about 1,400 pilots. According to the NPA, AirTran is projecting that it will hire its 2,000th pilot in 2008.

ALPA's 'Blue Ribbon Panel on Pilot Retirement'

Last month, the FAA proposed to change the mandatory retirement age for airline pilots in the U.S. from 60 to 65. As a next step in the legal process, the FAA will publish a 'notice of proposed rulemaking' (NPRM) later this year to amend the so-called  Age60 Rule.

In early February, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) announced that they would form a 'Blue Ribbon Panel' to study the issue and formulate a response to the FAA proposal. A news release on the ALPA website names Capt. Chris Beebe as chairman of the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel on Pilot Retirement. Six other pilots were named to serve as members of the panel.

The ALPA news release states that the mission of the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel on Pilot Retirement is to study the long-range effects of potential changes to the FAA Age 60 Rule and to identify issues connected to possible changes to pilot mandatory retirement age. In particular, they will focus on:

• ensuring that ALPA plays a strong role in shaping the future of pilot retirement
• preserving the credibility and effectiveness of ALPA as a public advocate
• building consensus on the issues connected to possible changes to the mandatory retirement age among members of ALPA to the greatest degree possible

"This topic has the keen interest of every airline pilot in the United States," said ALPA's president, Capt. John Prater. "While ALPA's official policy supports the current rule, the fact that the FAA is proposing rulemaking requires serious deliberation.

"Because the rule is likely to change with or without ALPA involvement, our union must use its considerable influence to help shape the final rule to protect our members' interests," Prater continued. "To influence the rule, we need to gather all of the facts about the subject, educate pilot leaders and members about the implications of the pending FAA NPRM, and receive direction from ALPA's governing bodies on how the union should proceed on this important issue."

ALPA forms panel to address 'Age 60 Rule' change

The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), the largest airline pilot union in the world, has issued a statement in response to the announcement by FAA administrator Marion Blakey that the agency will will propose to raise the mandatory retirement age for U.S. commercial pilots from 60 to 65. ALPA's statement says that the union will form a 'Blue Ribbon Panel on Pilot Retirement' to study the issue and develop a response to the FAA administrator's announcement. ALPA had opposed changing the so-called 'Age 60 Rule'.

Here's an excerpt from ALPA's news release on this topic:

"The fact that the FAA is set to put the Age 60 regulation into the rulemaking process is very significant," explained ALPA president, Capt. John Prater, after Administrator Marion Blakey’s announcement at a National Press Club luncheon today. "The FAA is careful to propose rulemaking only when it is convinced that a rule will need to change."

"ALPA policy is to support the rule as it is," Prater said, adding that since 1980 the union has opposed and continues to oppose legislation that would overturn the rule. "However, despite that policy, we cannot afford to ignore the significance of the FAA's announcement. That is why I have decided to form an ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel on Pilot Retirement, composed of representatives from the four of the association's standing committees most logically connected with the Age 60 Issue: Air Safety, Retirement and Insurance, Collective Bargaining, and Aeromedical."

The mission of the panel will be to study the effects of potential changes to the FAA Age 60 Rule and to develop recommendations on how ALPA can address the issue of pilot retirement with the goal of having a positive effect for ALPA members. The committee will uphold ALPA's 75 year-long commitment to ensuring the highest level of aviation safety. The FAA announcement and the formation of the ALPA Blue Ribbon Panel come in the wake of five years of tumult for the airline pilot profession. Furloughs, pay and benefit cuts, and a lack of job growth have put severe economic pressure on airline pilots of all ages and experience levels. The panel will present its recommendations to the ALPA Executive Board, composed of the leaders of ALPA's 40 pilot groups, at its May 2007 meeting.

"While it is impossible to predict what the final FAA rule will look like," Prater said, "ALPA will use its credibility and influence to protect pilot interests throughout the process."

ALPA represents some 60,000 pilots who fly for 40 U.S. and Canadian airlines.

FAA proposes to end the 'Age 60 Rule'

Today marks the beginning of the end of the debate about the 'Age 60 Rule' in the United States.

The New York Times and other news outlets are reporting that Marion Blakey, head of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), will address the issue in a speech she is scheduled to give today. She is expected to announce that the FAA will review its rule requiring airline pilots to retire at age 60, now that the International Civil Aviation Organization has raised the age to 65.

The so-called Age 60 Rule has been in force for well over 40 years in the United States. Under the current rule [Title 14 CFR, Chapter I, Part 121.383(c)], individuals who have reached their 60th birthday are prohibited from from piloting commercial aircraft operating under FAR Part 121 -- that is, commercial airliners.

Last year, a panel was formed to investigate and debate the issue of whether to change the mandatory retirement age for airline pilots in the United States to 65 instead of 60. At the end of November, 2006, the committee was disbanded after its members announced that they had failed to reach a consensus on the issue. The New York Times summarizes:

... [The committee's] members, including airlines, pilots’ unions and other specialists, simply laid out the pros and cons. But the group did recommend that if a change was made, it should be prospective, meaning that pilots who had already been forced to retire would not be allowed back.

Committee members who favored the change argued that there was no medical rationale for setting the retirement age at 60, and that a pilot shortage was coming and could be alleviated by letting pilots work longer. Those opposed said that setting a new age would replace one arbitrary limit with another and that no changes had been offered that would maintain current safety levels.

Some have cited safety reasons for keeping the mandatory retirement age at 60. However a number of health and safety experts have noted that age, in and of itself, is not a good predictor of whether a pilot can still safely fly an airplane. For example, the Aerospace Medical Association published a position paper on the Age 60 Rule, concluding that "there is insufficient medical evidence to support restriction of pilot certification based on age alone."

In fact, citing safety as the primary issue in this debate is a smokescreen. The real issues for those who argue both for and against rescinding the Age 60 Rule are economic. Junior pilots want the 'old guys' to retire so that the younger ones can move on up in the seniority system and earn more money. Older pilots want to continue earning a paycheck until they're eligible to collect their pensions -- what pensions they have left to look forward to after so many cuts at so many carriers. Older, more senior pilots earn higher salaries than their more junior counterparts, so they are more expensive for airlines to retain.

A turning point in the debate came last year when the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) amended its rule, raising the mandatory retirement age for commercial air transport pilots in multi-pilot crews to 65, with the provision that one of the pilots is less than 60 years of age. That rule took effect on November 23, 2006.

As of that date, foreign airline pilots older than 60 are allowed to fly into and out of the U.S. under the ICAO mandate, although U.S. pilots cannot. Since 1959 the FAA has required that all U.S. pilots stop flying Part 121 airliners at age 60. Most other nations eventually adopted the same age for mandatory retirement.

As a member of ICAO, the FAA must allow foreign pilots past age 60 to continue to work and fly in U.S. airspace. Twelve senators sent a letter to FAA Administrator Marion Blakey urging her agency to adopt the ICAO standard.

"We hope you appreciate that a finding [by the ARC] that leads to a rule allowing foreign pilots to work and fly in the U.S. to age 65 without affording U.S. pilots the same privilege will not sit well with the American people and most members of Congress," the senators wrote. [Aviation International News, Dec. 2006]

Since the new ICAO rule went into effect, we have had a situation in which pilots over the age of 60 flying aircraft operated by international carriers were allowed to fly in U.S. airspace, while their counterparts flying for U.S. carriers could not. Clearly, the time has come for the FAA to adopt the new ICAO standard.

-----------

How's this for timing: I was just about to publish the above post when the FAA's press release, titled FAA to Propose Pilot Retirement Age Change, appeared in my email. For the record, here's the text:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator Marion C. Blakey today announced that the FAA will propose to raise the mandatory retirement age for U.S. commercial pilots from 60 to 65. Speaking before pilots and aviation experts at the National Press Club, Blakey said that the agency plans to propose adopting the new International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standard that allows one pilot to be up to age 65 provided the other pilot is under age 60.

The FAA plans to issue a formal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) later this year and will publish a final rule after careful consideration of all public comments, as required by law.

“A pilot’s experience counts — it’s an added margin of safety,” said Blakey. “Foreign airlines have demonstrated that experienced pilots in good health can fly beyond age 60 without compromising safety.”

On September 27, 2006, Administrator Blakey established a group of airline, labor and medical experts to recommend whether the United States should adopt the new ICAO standard and determine what actions would be necessary if the FAA were to change its rule. The Age 60 Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) did not reach a consensus recommendation but did provide detailed insight and analysis that will be helpful as the FAA develops a rule.

Since 1959, the FAA has required that all U.S. pilots stop flying commercial airplanes at age 60. In November 2006, ICAO, the United Nations’ aviation organization, increased the upper age limit for pilots to age 65, provided that the other pilot is under age 60.

The November 29, 2006 Age 60 ARC report, appendices, and public comments are available online at http://dms.dot.gov, docket number 26139.

-------

UPDATE: If you'd like to read exactly what Marion Blakey said about the Age 60 Rule today, here's the link to the text of her speech to the National Press Club: Experience Counts - Marion Blakey, FAA

Retirement age raised for BA crews

From the International Herald Tribune we learn that the retirement age for British Airways (BA) flight crew members is being raised. At present, BA crewmembers face compulsory retirement at age 55. Under the new plan, pilots would be allowed to work until age 60, and cabin crew could continue until age 65.

This move is strictly economic, geared to cutting the airline's budget deficit, which is said to be in the neighborhood of £1 billion.

"This is a solution that will provide competitive, affordable pensions for the future," Willie Walsh, the chief executive, said. Walsh said the new arrangement "means working longer to get a similar annual pension but one that is more secure." He added, "This should address the pension problem at British Airways once and for all."

Labor unions at BA are not happy with this announcement:

The Transport & General Workers Union, which represents 20,000 employees at the airline, criticized the plan and said it should have been given more information. The proposal "is both unfair and unacceptable and does not represent a starting point for negotiations," Brendan Gold, a national officer with the union, said. "This may be legal, but is morally wrong. This change alone has the effect of reducing existing pension pots by £13,300 on average."

Ed Blissett, a member of GMB, another union at BA, said the union was seeking urgent meetings with the airline to discuss the plan.

Read the International Herald Tribune article here.

More articles about the plan, and the unions' reaction to it:

BA's pension plan rejected - The Times

BA unions warn of action over plans to raise retirement age - The Independent

Unions attack BA plan to make staff work longer for lower pensions - The Guardian

Nothing but grey skies for senior pilots

An article published first in the New York Times, and now republished in the International Herald Tribune, paints a picture of the dreary mood in the cockpits of mainline U.S. carriers, particularly among more senior pilots whose pay and pensions have been cut drastically in the past few years.

The article, Nothing but gray skies..., quotes several senior captains about their discouragement and disillusionment.

"My philosophy right now is, I just go to work," said a US Airways captain who, before his company's troubles, always loved to fly. He recently flew a 6 a.m. flight from Newark, New Jersey, to Miami, then piloted a plane from Miami to Los Angeles the next evening, then a flight back to Newark, accumulating 15 paid hours for three days.

These days, due to "corporate belt-tightening" at many of the mainline carriers, airline pilots fly more hours but earn less money.

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration limits commercial pilots on domestic flights - measured from pushing back at one gate to arrival at another - to eight hours a day, 30 hours in seven days, 100 hours a month and 1,000 hours a year. The airlines do not exceed those limits, but many now schedule much closer to them.

The FAA rules do not address the amount of time between flights, so a pilot could be in uniform 12 hours or more to accumulate the day's hours. There is a requirement for eight hours' rest time every 24 hours, however. And pilots acutely feel the difference between getting in a month's work in 14 days, compared with 18 days.

"They kind of bleed us out," the US Airways captain said, on condition he not be identified for fear of losing his job. Pilots for major carriers said they expected to be fired if they were publicly candid about the new conditions of their jobs.

The article goes on to say that senior airline pilots in dozens of interviews spoke of feeling depressed about their precarious financial situation and job insecurity.

A veteran United Airlines captain, who laments that when he retires in a few years his pension will be about one- fourth what he expected, said he had to shut it out of his mind to prevent the distraction from affecting his work.

After a recent takeoff from California for the long flight across the Pacific, that was all his first officer wanted to talk about. But the captain said he snapped back: "You know what, can we not talk about United Airlines? All it does is cause me frustration and anger, and there's nothing I can do about it. It churns my stomach."

One can only wonder at what point these pilots' anxiety and low morale might affect their job performance.

"The pilots are not a happy group right now," said Paul Fischbeck, a professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. Fischbeck, who flew in the navy and has colleagues who went on to fly for the airlines, said the change in financial circumstances and job security were good reasons to be unhappy.

But Fischbeck and others pointed out that the industry culture is such that they must face the hardship on their own. Other workers with health plans might seek professional counseling. With pilots licensed by the FAA, however, "as soon as you sign up for it, it's on your record, and you're toast."

A US Airways pilot echoed that sentiment: "If it gets reported to the FAA, you can forget it, you're not coming back to work, until you go through a lot. The system requires us to deal with it ourselves. That makes it very difficult to go through what we just went through."

Nevertheless, the airlines are in one of their safest periods ever, statistically, with about one fatal accident for every fifteen million flights.

Airline executives say they do not know how to measure the effects on morale. At US Airways, a spokesman, Carlo Bertolini, said, "No one's going to deny that US Airways employees have been through a tough time, with layoffs, changes in work rules and steps lowering costs. A lot of these sacrifices came from employees."

But, he said, "we all have a stake in the safety of the airline. We're definitely confident that all employees always have safety at the top of their mind."

Pilots say the same but add that the change in schedules often means more fatigue.

"You can feel yourself getting to a point where you're beginning to make more little mistakes," said a senior captain at US Airways. "Most of the mistakes are caught very quickly, and most are very minor errors," he said. But, "at that level of fatigue, after weeks or months of this without a break, it's easy to make a major mistake."

Senior pilots who were flying in the days when their job carried both high prestige, large paychecks and generous retirement plans have experienced the most disappointment and dissatisfaction in recent times, but flying careers are still sought after.

Young people still dream of flying, and people who fly small planes still aspire to fly bigger ones. Legions of laid-off pilots hope to be hired back, even at reduced pay levels.

"They must love it," said Arnold Barnett, a professor of management science at MIT's Sloan School of Business, who said that airline pilots were reacting with more fortitude than other professionals might in the same circumstances. "I cannot fathom how faculty would react if MIT abolished tenure, increased teaching loads and cut salaries by 35 percent because 'market conditions' had changed," he said.

When I ask why they continue to fly, the pilots I talk to always tell me the same thing: It's in your blood.