Is 60 Too Old?

By SALLY B. DONNELLY

Next Jan. 24, chief pilot Lanny McAndrew will be entrusted with a $57 million airplane, the lives of more than 100 passengers and the perfect safety record of his employer, JetBlue Airways. He will slide into the left seat of the A320 aircraft's cockpit, fly one of JetBlue's routes and return home to New York City. The following day McAndrew, 59, will no longer be qualified to be an airline pilot. "The government says overnight I'll become old and sick, so I better check into a hospital, right?" he asks mockingly.

McAndrew and thousands of other airline pilots are caught in one of the U.S. government's most controversial regulations: the so-called Age 60 rule, under which the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires commercial-airline pilots to relinquish the controls the moment they turn 60. The FAA, which issued the rule in 1959, says it was prompted by safety concerns about older pilots--concerns it says still apply.

Yet today, at a time when many people 60 or older are healthier and more robust than ever, the Age 60 rule has come under a new challenge. Ten pilots have filed a petition with the FAA, claiming that the agency's establishment of the rule had nothing to do with safety but instead was a back-room deal to rid major airlines of highly paid senior pilots. The 76-page appeal, which uses previously unreleased documents obtained by the petitioners, claims that the agency has dismissed or ignored research showing that older pilots are as safe as their younger colleagues. "This is the government version of ceo fraud," says Bert Yetman, president of the Professional Pilots Federation, a group that has been working since 1991 to change the rule and is backing the petition. "Only this time it is our government itself--the FAA--that is committing the fraud." The FAA disputes that, and an official says it remains open to new data. The agency is expected to respond to the petition next month.

Today's pilots are among the most closely watched and regulated professionals in any industry. They must pass a rigorous physical twice a year, undergo frequent safety checks and endure random drug and alcohol tests, and they are constantly monitored by other pilots, airline management and even flight-data recorders. As long ago as 1981, a National Institute on Aging study concluded that there was no medical basis for the FAA's age-60 limit. A 1993 report sponsored by the FAA itself found that older pilots performed as well as younger ones. Europe's aviation agency adjusted its standard in 1999 to allow pilots to work until age 65, joining many nations around the world.

The FAA has not applied its own rule consistently. For many years the agency did not enforce the age limit for pilots of foreign airlines, and even after it began to, in 1978, it issued waivers for several more years. Only in 1995 did the FAA extend the rule to U.S. pilots of smaller, commuter airlines. That move spurred Republican Senator Frank Murkowski of Alaska to sponsor legislation to lift the age to 63. It failed, but last month Murkowski reintroduced the bill, and the measure may be voted on by the Senate in a few weeks, though its prospects for passage are dim.

The pilots' petition will also probably fail. Both the airlines and the Airline Pilots Association support the Age 60 rule. "It's the 'bloody hand' syndrome," says an aviation expert. "No one wants to support a change and then see a 67-year-old pilot crash a plane full of people." If the petition is rejected, Yetman's group plans to file a lawsuit against the FAA immediately. Meantime, McAndrew will keep flying. But maybe he should start thinking about a second career. Aren't some Washington politicians thinking about raising the age for Social Security benefits to 67?