Viewing page 6 of 24

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Page 2

"V. If the physiological and psychological requirements of his profession are such that early retirement from flying is indicated, the pilot should be made aware of this as soon as possible, and the development of means and methods of making it possible for him to remain a respected and productive member of society, in a manner satisfactory to him as an individual, should be given a high priority by everyone in the industry."

There is no need to review the development of the Age 60 regulation. The Association vigorously opposed it in every area available including the courts. This was a major project for your General Counsel, Mr. Henry Weiss, which terminated when the Supreme Court refused to review on adverse decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals. I was directly involved during this period because I was then Chairman of our Aeromedical Committee and it was considered an aeromedical problem. My assignment included researching all available data and discussing the problem with recognized experts in order to help prepare our case. As I recall, this became a full time project for about three months and a major time project for approximately a year. This experience plus an active and continued interest in this problem during the intervening period has resulted in the development of the following opinions:

1. I believe that the Age 60 regulation is not in the best interest of the pilots, the air lines, the traveling public, or society as a whole. (Actually there is no conflict of interest in any of these parties in this area.)

2. I believe Age 60 retirement is considered (or assumed) to be a valid air safety and aeromedical problem by an overwhelming majority of the people who are recognized national and international experts including those who have ultimate authority in these areas. This does not mean that there is necessarily anything sacred about chronological age 60. It does mean that in the absence of objective data or proof we have very little unilateral chance of modification because these people generally believe that experience with the Age 60 rule has confirmed the wisdom of establishing it. This makes it particularly important to consider other ramifications of any program developed. 

3. I am not aware of any objective data which supports relaxation at this time although I believe we finally have adequate numbers to develope that data. Preliminary examination is definitely encouraging. 

4. Because the Age 60 regulation is almost universally recognized as an aeromedical problem recent Association attempts to achieve revision inevitably involved the FAA Department of Aviation Medicine. It therefore involved areas and relationships of direct concern to the Aeromedical Coordinating Committee because of its basic responsibility to the ALPA membership. This responsibility, of course, is much broader than just the Age 60 problem.

5. In order to clear up misunderstandings and insure awareness of common goals and possible conflict of interest which might adversely affect pilots, President Ruby recently called a joint meeting of the special Age 60 Committee and the Aeromedical Coordinating Committee. It is my believe that previous misunderstandings have been clarified and that members of both Committees have a clear understanding of problems and ramifications of the Association programs involved.