![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
-4- (5) This agreement is intended that if the Company exercises this option in any month, it will roll back the 81 hour flight time limitation to January 1, 1970. This action, taken in accord with the request by management and agreed to by this MEC will be on a completely voluntary basis and at the option of the individual pilot, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Company does not accept the terms of this resolution, no further discussions will be held on this subject. The resolution as amended passed 11 for and one opposed. AGENDA ITEM #2 - Age 60 Retirement Committee: Herb Levy backgrounded the history of the Age 60 Retirement Committee. He stated that the functions were to provide relief and protection. One of the means of accomplishing this would be to get the people retiring into jobs as flight instructors, check captains and as test pilots. The object, however, would be to keep them in flying jobs of some sort. Kern asked if the primary concern of the committee was to obtain jobs for the people over age 60 or to get the law repealed as originally intended. Tully brought out that an awful lot of Levy's discussion was based on personal assumptions that were in error. Helms asked Levy if he would take a case for anyone against EAL or ALPA. Levy answered that he would not, due to his part association with ALPA. He added that it looked as though the committee was trying to create an employment haven for these people. Corkran asked if the committee is taking the position that all people over age 60 will make good instructors and supervisory pilots. Levy said that the Company will retain the right of selection, Railsback disagreed with Levy and the Age 60 Committee's appraisal of the situation. Tully asked Levy just who calls the shots on the committee. He noted that the Chairman of the committee appeared at the last MEC meeting and freely stated that there was nothing new to report and that Gitt & Richardson keep coming back to the MEC and taking up a great deal of time without ever coming up with anything new. Tully further reminded everyone that at the last three meetings this was brought to their attention but they continue to run back and forth between the MEC and management with information that, to say the least, is misleading. Crane pointed out that it has been established that the Age 60 Committee was to work with the Executive Committee and make all of their reports to them and, further, that this MEC has stated and reaffirmed that it can offer no further assistance at this point. Corkran asked that a spade be called a spade and that everyone realize that the purpose of the committee was to attempt to find a means to change a piece of legislation, not to secure a berth for anyone on it or anyone else over the age of 60. He stated that he did not wish to hurt anyone's feelings and if Mr. Gitt could get a job with EAL that was fine, however, no one has the right to use a committee position for personal reasons. Helms asked Gitt and Richardson if they were able to get the age 60 regulation changed would they also attempt to change the similarly worded regulations pertaining to the restrictive ages of 16, 18 and 23 for private, commercial and ATR ratings. He felt that the Associations' time, money and effort were being poured down the drain in the needless cause, particularly in view of the fact that some people are referring to an age 45 retirement as an effect of the supersonic age which is now at out doorstep. He objected strenuously to the fact that anyone would contemplate a legal suit against EAL and ALPA in an attempt to secure flying jobs. He likened this to biting the hand that feeds them and suggested that they pursue it no