US Senate Panel Rejects Raising Pilot Retirement Age to 67

by Anthony Losanno

Advertiser Disclosure: The Bulkhead Seat earns an affiliate commission for anyone approved through the links below. This compensation may impact how and where links appear on this site. We work to provide the best publicly available offers to our readers. We frequently update them, but this site does not include all available offers.

A US Senate committee voted today not to raise the retirement age for commercial pilots from 65 to 67. While there is a pilot shortage in the United States, but prominent figures in the aviation industry have spoken out against it.

Captain Sully Sullenberger who gained fame for his incredible landing in the Hudson River back in 2009 (more here), is against raising the age. He cites safety and operational issues with raising the retirement age. The President of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), Jason Ambrosi, agreed:

Raising the pilot retirement age is a solution in search of a problem. Labor doesn’t want it, airlines are not calling for it, and the FAA says it shouldn’t happen. I’m not sure why we should be arguing about this.”

Reuters is reporting that the US House of Representatives voted 351-69 on a bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that would increase the mandatory pilot retirement age to 67 back in July. The Senate Commerce Committee voted 14-13 to reject the retirement age hike after the FAA said earlier this week it would prefer additional research was conducted before Congress made any changes.

The Senate Commerce Committee also voted in favor of raising the number of safety inspectors and air traffic controllers as a current shortage of 3,000 currently exists. The Senate Commerce Committee’s Chairperson, Maria Cantwell, said:

We put more FAA safety inspectors on factory floors and more air traffic controllers into towers. We have a huge responsibility to make sure the FAA is doing its job to keep passengers safe.”

Anthony’s Take: I don’t have a strong opinion on 65 versus 67. I don’t see an issue as long as a pilot is capable of operating an aircraft with both physical and mental acuity.

(Featured Image Credit: Kenny Eliason.)

User Generated Content Disclosure: The Bulkhead Seat encourages constructive discussions, comments, and questions. Responses are not provided by or commissioned by any bank advertisers. These responses have not been reviewed, approved, or endorsed by the bank advertiser. It is not the responsibility of the bank advertiser to respond to comments.


derek February 9, 2024 - 8:52 am

Anthony wrote “…don’t see an issue as long as a pilot is capable of operating an aircraft with both physical and mental acuity.”

In theory, very true. In practice, impossible to measure short of significant dementia. Look at President Biden. The special counsel is not going to prosecute him for keeping classified documents in his garage citing he has poor memory. During an interview, Biden forgot what years he was VP, forgot what year his son died, and forgot that a general who sided with him against Obama during an Afghanistan discussion. Yesterday, Biden called in reporters for a press conference to deny he had poor memory. He then allowed reporters to ask questions about other issues. A reporter asked about Gaza and Biden said the PRESIDENT OF MEXICO wanted to open the Gaza border to aid.

Dementia is hard to document unless it is significant.

K Helldoge February 9, 2024 - 9:19 am


Thanks for your idiotic input in order to push your trumptard agenda. Since neither math nor critical thinking is your forte, Biden is 81, not 67. Further, that is not what the article is about.

Take your meds.


Leave a Comment

Related Articles