In 1959, the pilot mandatory retirement age was set at 60
years old. The reason for the rule was
to ensure safety. The age limit was changed in 2007 to 65 for the
same reasons. The consensus was that
once you hit your 65th birthday you were automatically unsafe to
fly. Is there a correlation between
birthdays and safety?
A pilot’s retirement age should not be set in stone. With over a century of human factors research
along with safety management systems and cognitive testing, a pilot’s
retirement date should be based on ability and not age. The reason this is important is that we have
a shortage of pilots that cannot be filled solely with new recruits. Additionally, airlines lose valuable talent
when a pilot retires. Why not integrate
these pilots into training or mentoring.
Another issue is that new major carrier
pilots are much older than ever. This is
in part to the swollen regional carrier ranks and a lack of the majors hiring
over the last decade. These pilots will
need to serve longer in order to secure a decent retirement. Benefits
of hiring older workers.
My prediction is that the market will force the major
carriers hand in this issue. A lack of
pilots will increase the value of the retiring pilot. I could see the medicals adding more cognitive
testing after age 60. The performance
rate of the test could dictate the hours the pilot could fly. I also see fuller schedules for full-time
pilots with the addition of part-time (60+) pilots.
I think that pilots have value that is not being recognized
because of the mandatory retirement age.
I am a management student so this does not have a direct bearing on my
career path. However, older employee
enhance any company or workplace. As a
manager, I would like to find a way to integrate these pilots into continuing with
the workforce.
No comments:
Post a Comment