April 15, 2024
Dear Representative:
On behalf of our affiliated unions, which represent hundreds of thousands of aviation workers, the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) urges you to join Congressman Chuy Garcia (D-IL) in a letter to House leadership (below) to ask that no change to the statutory pilot retirement age for commercial airline pilots is included in the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill as the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure negotiates the final version of the legislation.
The FAA Reauthorization is of utmost importance for transportation labor. The policy stakes of a change to the statutory retirement age include endangering collective bargaining agreements at more than 30 airlines that cover the vast majority of the U.S. airline industry – an industry with strong union density. This issue would affect the future of airline labor contracts, substantial union-side legal liability, and have massive knock-on effects for the airline industry and customers. Labor believes any change to the pilot retirement age is unacceptable.
As the nation’s largest transportation labor federation, TTD represents hundreds of thousands of workers who build, operate, and maintain our transportation network across the United States. We thank Members for considering workers’ perspectives in this matter and urge you to join Congressman Chuy Garcia in signing this letter. The deadline to sign this letter is Thursday, April 18. Please contact Megan Seymour (Megan.Seymour@mail.house.gov) to sign on.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact TTD’s Legislative Representative, Lianne Endo, at liannee@ttd.org.
Sincerely,
Greg Regan, President
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
**************************************************************************************************************************
Letter to House Leadership on Pilot Retirement Age
Supported by: Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT), Transportation Trades Department (TTD)
Dear Colleagues:
As the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure negotiates a final version of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill, please join me in urging House leadership against the inclusion of any provision related to the pilot retirement age in a final version of the bill. An increase in the pilot retirement age would have consequences across the aviation industry, including placing airlines in noncompliance with the international safety standard, requiring hard fought collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) to be reopened, creating flight operation difficulties and training complications, and reducing pilot utilization.
Significant changes to U.S. aviation policy, especially ones that have consequential implications to both international aviation safety standards and airline operations, should not be enacted against the wishes of our own regulatory bodies. As both chambers work together to reach an agreement on differences between their respective bills, we urge you to support the Senate position on pilot retirement age and reject any provision related to the pilot retirement age.
If you have any questions, please contact Megan Seymour in Rep. García’s office at Megan.Seymour@mail.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Jesús G. “Chuy” García
—————————————————————-
Dear Minority Leader Jeffries, Whip Clark, and Chair Aguilar,
As Congress finalizes negotiations on the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), we urge against the inclusion of any provision related to the pilot retirement age, including any statutory change. We implore you to consider the adverse impacts of raising the pilot retirement age. This action would have consequences across the aviation industry, including placing airlines in noncompliance with the international safety standard, requiring hard fought collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) to be reopened, creating flight operation difficulties and training complications, and reducing pilot utilization.
During the House floor consideration of H.R. 3935, the Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act, a bipartisan group of 40 Members (20 Democrats and 20 Republicans) cosponsored an amendment to remove the statutory change to the pilot retirement age included during the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee markup. Despite the strong bipartisan support for the amendment, it was unfortunately not made in order. Open debate and an opportunity to address this unpopular and controversial provision was prohibited, and we believe the effort would have succeeded if normal processes prevailed.
As you know, ensuring the safety of passengers and aviation workers is a shared priority. Over the past 20 years, U.S. commercial aviation fatalities have decreased by 95 percent because of a concentrated effort to detect risks and mitigate them.[1] The current international pilot age limit of 65, set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is based on safety standards that have been extensively deliberated and agreed upon globally.
In addition to the safety concerns with increasing the retirement age, this change would place the U.S. in noncompliance with the international standard. Pilots aged 65 and older would be eligible to bid on international flights but unable to fly internationally due to lack of compliance with ICAO standards, creating disruptions in flight operations that could further delay flights. The long-term CBAs, which pilots and management fought hard to secure over the last several years, allow pilots to bid on and be paid for flights based on seniority alone. A change to the retirement age will create a dynamic unanticipated by labor or management, which would allow pilots to bid on and be paid for flights they cannot perform under the terms of the contract. These matters are, in many cases, irresolvable without renegotiating pilot CBAs, and consumers would ultimately bear the cost of the resulting disruptions.
If the retirement age was increased, it would likely require the restructuring of the seniority and bidding systems in pilot CBAs. New contractual arrangements that restrict pilots from bidding on routes would likely deal with complicated matters related to seniority compensation, age discrimination, and restructuring of the pay system that has prevailed since the 1930s. Given that pilot contracts under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) do not expire, it would be extremely challenging to resolve contract disputes—a lesson we all have learned from recent freight rail bargaining. It is in the best interest of pilots, and the public, to protect the strong pilot wages and benefits won under the current CBAs.
Significant changes to U.S. aviation policy, especially ones that have consequential implications to both international aviation safety standards and airline operations, should not be enacted against the wishes of our own regulatory bodies. As both chambers work together to reach an agreement on differences between their respective bills, we urge you to support the Senate position on pilot retirement age and reject any provision related to the pilot retirement age.
[[CLOSING]]
[[SIGNATURES]]
CC: Ranking Member Rick Larsen
Ranking Member Steve Cohen