House

• H.R.1125 (The Freedom to Fly Act) introduced by Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.) is the House equivalent to S.65 (see below). Even though it has garnered significant co-sponsorship, it contains some of the same shortcomings as S.65, and ALPA is not supporting this approach. H.R.1125 has not been subject to any hearings or votes, nor has it been incorporated into any other House legislation.

• The FAA reauthorization bill has been passed by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. It contains language from Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) that addresses the concerns expressed in the ALPA Executive Board resolution on any change to the rule. ALPA supports Chairman Oberstar’s language and approach to amending the upper age limit.

Senate

• S.65, introduced by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) earlier in the year, was incorporated as an amendment to the 2008 Senate Transportation Appropriations bill by the Senate Appropriations Committee on July 26. ALPA is not supporting this approach because it does not address the concerns raised in the ALPA Executive Board resolution. However, on September 11, during floor consideration of the 2008 Transportation Appropriations bill, the full U.S. Senate adopted by unanimous consent an amendment by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska).

This amendment replicates the Oberstar language in the House FAA reauthorization bill that is designed to raise the upper age limit to 65. Additionally, it would clarify non-retroactivity, provide sufficient liability protection, prohibit unilateral changes to labor agreements and benefit plans, eliminate the over/under split for domestic operations, and make the rule change effective upon enactment of the 2008 Transportation Appropriations bill. On September 12, the Senate passed this bill by a vote of 88-7. The House version of the Transportation Appropriations bill, which was passed in July, has no language regarding mandatory pilot retirement age.

• The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee incorporated S.65 into the Senate FAA reauthorization bill on May 16. ALPA will be making an effort to substitute the House Oberstar language for S.65 when the full Senate considers this legislation sometime this fall. At some point, the House and Senate versions of the FAA reauthorization bill will have to be reconciled (as will the House and Senate versions of their Transportation Appropriations bills). Again, ALPA does not support the approach taken by S.65.

Outlook

As of this writing, ALPA can make no predictions except that, with the Senate going on record in support of the Oberstar language, the Association hopes to continue making good progress toward final legislation that meets the requirements of the ALPA Executive Board resolution. ALPA will provide another update when the Congress moves forward on deciding how it will resolve the pilot mandatory retirement rule issue.

Regarding the possibility of an FAA NPRM to address its mandatory retirement rule, the FAA continues to work at drafting a proposed change in the regulation; but the public release of a draft rule is not expected until sometime in the first quarter of 2008.

Members can check for updates and other information on all legislation that affects pilots’ interests by logging into Crewroom.alpa.org and clicking on the “Legislation and Politics” link on the left.

Comments and questions regarding the mandatory pilot retirement age issue should be addressed to age60communications@alpa.org.