USA Today Ad from APA

PHL

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,658
57
I read with some shock and awe that the APA would print a 1/4 page ad in today's USA Today basically telling the traveling public that, under current work rules, passengers could be flying with fatigued pilots. The implication, of course, is that this reduces safety. They even peppered in some NTSB accident snippets and examples.

I was also surprised to read that the union OPPOSES the raising of the mandatory retirement age from 60 to 65. That's something I thought most pilots wanted, considering the last 7 years of cutbacks, furloughs, pension losses, etc. But maybe the membership of 60,000 really does want to hang it up at age 60.

Way to go APA.
 
The pilots sure seem to be hell-bent on making sure everyone sees them as crazy. APA has been of the record for awhile as being against changing Age 60 rules, but this can't be what the majority of line pilot's had in mind during elections last summer.

IMHO, these pubic campaigns are not fair to the "normal" line pilot and not fair to other employee groups.
 
APA didn't lose their pensions, thus aren't really concerned with all the other pilots of different airlines that lost their's. If I was them, I wouldn't want to change the age rule either.
 
APA didn't lose their pensions, thus aren't really concerned with all the other pilots of different airlines that lost their's. If I was them, I wouldn't want to change the age rule either.
Now see, I'd view it that APA would want these senior pilots flying longer because their dues are proportionately larger than the junior folks.
 
Now see, I'd view it that APA would want these senior pilots flying longer because their dues are proportionately larger than the junior folks.


No, I don't think you "see" it. The pay for any AA pilot stops rising at the 12 year point. Since 3/4 of the pilot group has been flying over 12 years, having every Captain replaced tomorrow wouldn't change a thing regarding what AA pays for their Captains, or the dues APA collects.
 
Ok. But if a lot of 12+ year pilots hit retirement at 60 and a bunch of <12 year pilots fill in the gap it still seems like there would be less overall dues that won't be collected in those remaining 5 years they could have gotten them with the age increase. Plus, this all may be moot. The age 65 rule is gaining a lot of momentum in DC now anyway.
 
Ok. But if a lot of 12+ year pilots hit retirement at 60 and a bunch of <12 year pilots fill in the gap it still seems like there would be less overall dues that won't be collected in those remaining 5 years they could have gotten them with the age increase. Plus, this all may be moot. The age 65 rule is gaining a lot of momentum in DC now anyway.


The pay difference between a 5 year Captain and a 12 year Captain on the same aircraft is around 5% at AA. APA union dues are about 1.5%. 7000+ AA pilots are over or near the 12 year point.
 
According to AirlinePilotCentral, the most junior captain was hired more than 16 years ago. Just five years from now, every single AA pilot on the property will have at least 12 years in, unless AA exhausts the recall list of 2,400 before that time. At the current pace of recalls (30 per month), there will be still be many on furlough five years from now.
 
APA didn't lose their pensions, thus aren't really concerned with all the other pilots of different airlines that lost their's. If I was them, I wouldn't want to change the age rule either.


I can't blame them either. The First Officers are all singing the right seat blues now. Could you imagine if they raise the age to 65? Many of our widebody captains now are in their late 40's and early 50's. The rest of our people average out in their mid to late 40's. They will all be 55 before they get to make even narrowbody captain. The other factor is that AA will try to negotiate the loss of the big money pension which is only in place because mandatory retirement age is 65. It's a lose-lose for AA pilots. It will probably pass, though, because most other airlines are in favor of it.