![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
Law Offices of HERBERT A. LEVY SUITE 1250 FEDERAL BAR BUILDING 1815 H STREET, N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006 --- 737-6919 AREA CODE 202 March 21, 1968 Captain Harry Orlady 321 South Park Road LaGrange, Illinois Re: Matter of compulsory retirement of airline pilots at age 60; pending FAA proceedings. Dear Harry: Thanks for copying me on your March 19 letter to Gerry Goss. I have given it a careful reading, and have decided to express my reaction by means of this note, in the interest of the further consideration and review which seems indicated. In its present form, the petition which we filed with FAA makes no claim or assertion that medical science provides a better basis today than in 1959 for predicting the sudden incapacitation of any individual, nor will the state of medical knowledge in that area be a necessary element in proving our case, should we have and opportunity to do so. Indeed, the principal purpose for revising the petition, it seemed to me, was to omit the assertion that we can produce new medical evidence of any kind, and I believe that the revised petition reflects the achievement of that purpose. As a consequence, the petition is now based upon two main propositions; they are the following: 1. As a result of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the national policy respecting discrimination in employment based upon age has introduced a substantial new factor which was not present in 1959. That factor, coupled with the generally acknowledged proposition that the choice of age 60 as the cutoff point is arbitrary, now requires that FAA come forward with evidence upon a record in support of its rule, to replace its naked conclusion, based solely upon its asserted "expertise," that safe air transportation can be assured only if the age 60 cutoff is applied to all airline pilots; and 2. In view of intervening crew complement developments, of technological and design changes and of other relevant changes described in the petition, all relating to operational concepts, it can no longer be argued successfully by FAA that disaster will be the necessary and inevitable result in every case of sudden incapacitation of an airline pilot. Thus, we will argue, there is no demonstrable operational need for blanket and inflexible application of the age 60 cutoff to all airline pilots. The operational setting for the rule