Windows LiveWindows Live™
 
 
Psychomagician's profileDana's spaceBlogGuestbookNetwork Tools Help

Blog
    November 16

    Age 60 developments

    The conference version of H.R. 3407 (for FY2008 appropriations for Treasury, Transportation, and HUD) will overturn the FAA's Age 60 rule (14 CFR 121.383(e))by legislative fiat. Section 116 amends 49 USC 447 by adding a new subsection 44729 titled "Age Standards for Pilots." There are x main parts to the legislation:
    • Pilots may serve in multicrew covered operations (e.g., Part 121) until reach age 65, consistent with the ICAO standard (one over 60, one under 60);
    • If ICAO changes, and allows a pilot over 60 to serve as PIC without regard to co-pilot age (e.g., both over 60), then the US standard will conform;
    • The change is not retroactive and an action taken in compliance with 49 USC 44729 "may not serve as a basis for liability or relief in a proceeding, brought under any employment law or regulation, before any court or agency of the United States or of any State or localty;"
    • Collective bargaining agreements will have to be amended through negotiation (because the change impacts seniority, pay, and probably a whole host of issues);
    • A medical exam will be required every 6 months (which is interesting, as the FAA has an NPRM on the street to increase the interval for 1st class exams to 1 year from the current 6 months, so the NPRM may have to be modified);
    • Line evaluations of pilots age 60 and over will be required every 6 months, and for PICs, a simulator evaluation will not suffice; and finally,
    • The GAO will have to make a report 2 years after the effective date of the new law.
    The line evaluation every 6 months for PICs age 60 and over will impose costs on the airlines, according to some industry and government staffers familiar with the line check process.
     
    Unfortunately, the bill may be vetoed on other issues ("excessive spending").
     
    The Age 60 Rule has long been contentious, and the data are equivocal in terms of potential impact on safety. Studies showing no effect and studies showing an effect all have flaws and caveats. Ideally, between the medical examination and the line check, an individualized decision could be made about each pilot's fitness. There are probably some who should have stopped flying at 55 and others who could continue flying at 70. I think the thing to watch is insurance premiums. If the insurance companies up the cost of premiums if older pilots elect to continue flying, that suggests actuarial concern.
     
    But first the conference version has to clear both houses, and then be signed by the Prez. So I'm not holding my breath right now.
    11:10 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Travel