Hundreds of U. S. airline pilots are asking Congress to raise their mandatory retirement to 65, up from the present 60 years of age. They say the change won’t threaten safety and could ease problems associated with pension cuts. Sen, James Inhofe (R- Okla.) has sponsored legislation raising the limit, which the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) opposes. “There’s just no scientific consensus that would give us a basis for changing that age- 60 limit,” said an FAA official. The agency has argued that the decline in a pilot’s cognitive functions and the in-creased risk of illness over age 60 may affect safety.
Testifying before the House Aviation Subcommittee in March 2003, Paul Emens of the Air Line Pilots Against Age Discrimination (ALPAAD) said, “The world does not see this as a safety issue. Most of the world is moving to a retirement age of 65 for airline pilots. Japan and the Netherlands, to name but two, have done extensive studies which showed that raising an airline pilot’s age is not a risk. Countries such as Japan, Australia, those of the Joint Aviation Authority in Europe—all have raised their pilots’ retirement age. Some 45 nations now allow their airline pilots to fly past the age of 60. Some do so in United States airspace.” Testifying in March 2001 before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Nick Lacey, then the FAA’s director of flight standards, said, “Proponents of raising the retirement age cite action in 1999 by the Joint Aviation Authority (JAA) in Europe which relaxed the standard, allowing a pilot in command to work until age 65, so long as the co- pilot is under age 60.” “We are not aware of any comprehensive or definitive study that was the basis for the JAA action,” Lacey said.
Questions
1. Should all pilots have to retire at the age of 60?
2. How would you study this issue to raise the age to 65?