Pensioner pilots ‘shafted’
A group of senior Air New Zealand pilots who failed Airbus training are considering legal action. Tony Wall reports.
It was an inglorious end to John’s* decades-long flying career. He was already over-age when the International Civil Aviation Organisation ruled in late 2014 that pilots 65 and over could not serve in any capacity on international flights, so had no choice but to give up his career copiloting Boeing 777s on long-haul routes.
He took up an offer from Air New Zealand to retrain on the Airbus A320, captaining domestic and trans-Tasman flights. New Zealand and Australia have no mandatory retirement age and human rights legislation prohibits discrimination on the grounds of age. But the company had recently reduced its A320 training course content and scope, and it soon became apparent there would be no extensions for those who were struggling with the workings of the Airbus, which is completely different to a Boeing.
‘‘Because I had flown Boeings all my life, there’s quite a lot of relearning to be done. We all knew that, we knew it was going to be tough and we put the hard yards in,’’ John said.
‘‘I was told by Air NZ that we would get a standard course. We got 10 simulator duties, whereas the course before us got 15.
‘‘The daily [instructor] write-ups were such, I thought ‘shit, they’re going to shaft me on this’, and they did. They refused to give me any further training.
‘‘There was no other option but to resign. It’s one hell of a way to end a career.’’
It’s understood that of 12 pilots aged over 65 who sat the course in late 2014 and early last year, only two passed. ‘‘It was used as a culling exercise,’’ John said, adding that he believed he and his older colleagues were set up to fail so that younger pilots could be brought through the ranks.
‘‘To be tipped out because of dirty politics, it’s pretty hard to take.’’
Material obtained from the Civil Aviation Authority under the Official Information Act shows that those who failed the training chose to retire, were on long-term sick leave or lost their medical clearances. Both Air NZ and the CAA refused to provide figures on overall pass rates.
The CAA said the numbers were provided in confidence.
The national carrier has 1430 pilots across its jet and regional fleets, about 14 of whom are over 65.
The airline did not respond to the allegations of discrimination. David Morgan, chief of flight operations and safety, said in a statement: ‘‘Our A320 pilot training/conversion programme is world-class, rigorous in its detail and approved by the CAA.’’
Many of the officers who failed had flown for Air NZ for decades and were decorated ex-Air Force pilots.
‘‘To say we find ourselves shamed by the experience is an understatement,’’ John said.
It’s an issue that is confronting industries worldwide as baby boomers reach retirement age and companies struggle to get older employees to retire without discriminating against them.
It’s argued by some in aviation that pilots’ performance declines with age, but the Aerospace Medical Association says there is insufficient evidence to support any age limit.
Some countries are raising the mandatory retirement age in response to a drastic pilot shortage – the US raised the limit from 60 to 65 in 2009 and in 2015 Japan allowed pilots to keep flying until they turn 68.
It’s not the first time Air NZ has found itself accused of ageism. In a landmark case in 2009, the Supreme Court upheld the appeal of David McAlister, who claimed the airline had discriminated against him by saying at 60 he was too old to be a pilot-in-command.
In 2011, it was reported that eight pilots were suing the airline for millions, claiming they retired or were demoted between 2003 and 2006 without being told that international rules were changing, which would have allowed them to continue until 65.
The case settled out of court in 2013.
John said he and his colleagues were now considering a lawsuit and experts predict many more.
Employment lawyer Jim Roberts, who represented the pilots in the 2011 case, said he expected more people would take action under human rights legislation rather than in the Employment Relations Authority as remedies seemed to be about 10 times greater.
‘‘If you can establish something that looks like discrimination it’s pretty much treated as discrimination and it puts the onus on the other party to prove that it’s not.’’ Our A320 pilot training/ conversion programme is world class, rigorous in its detail and approved by the CAA.
Morgan said the safety and security of passengers was paramount ‘‘and we make no apology for maintaining high standards in our pilot training programme’’.
The insinuation being that anyone who fails isn’t up to scratch. But others say it’s the training that’s not good enough.
An ‘‘Aviation Related Concern’’ complaint sent to the CAA last year – filed anonymously to ‘‘avoid retribution’’ – was damning of the ‘‘poor ground training of the Air NZ Airbus A320 type rating ground course’’.
It said the failure rate of older pilots was evidence of the low quality of the training.
‘‘Considering all these pilots were very experienced and deemed competent pilots on the Air NZ Boeing fleets, for so many to not succeed is clear evidence that there are serious training quality issues,’’ the complaint said.
It listed a number of ‘‘deficiencies’’ around manuals, teaching methodology and instructor skills and said the course footprint had been reduced by about 30 per cent from its original form, reducing it to a ‘‘box ticking exercise’’.
This resulted in a ‘‘significant number of pilots being released [to fly passengers] without a full technical understanding or familiarity of the A320 operation and procedures,’’ the complaint said. ‘‘This deficiency has the potential of crews mishandling non-normal procedures and is a threat to flight safety.’’
But the CAA dismissed the complaint. A spokesman said an investigation found ‘‘no valid safety concerns’’ and the A320 courses were of a similar or greater length to those overseas.
If a slightly higher failure rate was apparent, the spokesman said, ‘‘it would seemingly indicate that the operator was maintaining standards’’.
But an Air NZ pilot in his 50s believes the A320 training is insufficient, requiring only about 20 hours of actual flying compared to around 100 hours for his initial command training.
‘‘Boeing and Airbus are completely poles part in technology, their logic. You’ve got to go right back to basics and relearn all over again.
‘‘For a guy who has flown a Boeing for 30-plus years, there’s certain habits formed and it’s difficult to pick up the new logic.’’
The pilot believed Air NZ had used the training as a way of ‘‘weeding out’’ older staff.
‘‘Some instructors are brilliant, one in particular is absolutely diabolical. All they have to do is bring out the bad cop and you’re sure to have issues.
‘‘These guys aren’t being given the chance to make the grade, they’re not being given the training. It’s a culling for sure.’’
But not all pilots have sympathy for their older colleagues. One told Fairfax in 2011 the refusal of pilots in their 60s to quit was hampering the career prospects of younger pilots and causing headaches for Air NZ.
He claimed they didn’t want to retire because their jobs were so lucrative – captains of 747s and 777s earning between $200,000 and $300,000 a year.
‘‘The company can’t make a redundancy package attractive enough to encourage older pilots to leave. It’s all about the money. They’re creaming it,’’ he said.
Tim Robinson, president of the Airline Pilots Association, said pilot promotions were based on seniority.
‘‘The younger guys are always at the bottom of the list and have to work their way up, so there’s always that little bit of jealousy.’’
Robinson said older pilots who’d always flown Boeings might find Airbus training difficult, but generally they were offered more training where needed.
The union had litigated on behalf of senior pilots in the past, he said, to ensure their rights were upheld as international age restrictions changed. But sources say the union has been reluctant to get involved in claims because of the conflict of interest with its younger members.
‘‘For younger pilots to get command, they’ve pretty much got to wait for someone to die. They want those roles, those captains positions, and they know if they can’t be forcibly retired they will have to wait even longer,’’one said.
Irene King, former head of the Aviation Industry Association, said US data showed some pilots older than 65 were having performance issues, so she wasn’t surprised that several failed the A320 training.
‘‘My experience is that [Air NZ] have simulator instructors putting them through pretty rigorous routines and they have a pretty standard level of performance and you either come up to the standard or you don’t.’’
But John believes it’s not an even playing field.
During observational flights on Airbus aircraft, he noticed that pilots who’d already completed their training had a similar error rate to him.
He said there was no reason he couldn’t have continued flying for a few more years.
‘‘There are enough checks and balances with medicals, simulators, aircraft refreshers, we are looked at more or less nine times a year,’’ he said.
‘‘The trainers said my airmanship – the ability to keep the aircraft and its crew safe – was beyond reproach.‘‘
He said he didn’t expect much public support.
‘‘The public will say ’oh they’re too old to fly now’ but nothing could be further from the truth.’’
Most pilots realised when they were no longer fit to fly and quit before that happened, as no-one wanted to endanger lives.
‘‘I think I was up to it, and I know a lot of other people were, but because of the attitude of Air NZ we were just hung out to dry.’’