Cruz Pushes to Raise Airline Pilot Retirement Age to 67

(MONTREAL, QUEBEC, CANADA) Senator Ted Cruz is pressing the United States to back a global change in the pilot retirement age as aviation regulators and delegates gather for an ICAO meeting in Montreal. Cruz wants the government under President Trump to support raising the mandatory commercial airline pilot retirement age from 65 to 67, both at home and through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

The push comes as the 42nd General Assembly considers the issue this week, with airlines and several countries urging a coordinated move and labor groups warning against it. Cruz argues the current age limit is arbitrary, wastes deep experience, and worsens a pilot shortage that has hit small and mid-sized communities hardest.

He says lifting the ceiling to 67 would help airlines keep seasoned captains on the flight deck, steady schedules, and ease pressure on fares. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, Cruz has framed the change as a way to retain proven talent without lowering safety, so long as medical checks remain strict and frequent. He points to studies that find pilot performance tracks more closely with experience and recent flight time than with age alone.

Legal and regulatory background

Federal law in the United States sets the pilot retirement age for Part 121 airlines at 65. That cap was established by Congress and cannot change without new legislation.

Internationally, ICAO’s Annex 1 limits multi-pilot airline operations to age 65 for flights that cross borders, and most countries match their domestic rule to that standard. The dual layer—Congress at home and ICAO abroad—means a lasting fix for the pilot retirement age would require both U.S. action and global alignment.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) enforces the U.S. rule and has asked for more study before any change, emphasizing the need for robust medical data on older pilots and the real-world impacts on flight operations. The FAA’s background on the Age 65 rule is available on its official site: see the agency’s Age 65 explainer for context on how the current limit came to be and how it is applied in daily operations by U.S. carriers. For readers seeking official details, the FAA provides a summary here: FAA Age 65 Information.

Key regulatory takeaway

Any durable change requires action by both the U.S. Congress (to amend domestic law) and ICAO (to adjust the international standard).

Who’s supporting the change — and why

At the ICAO meeting in Montreal, the International Air Transport Association (IATA), with support from Canada 🇨🇦, Australia, Brazil, Japan, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, is advocating for a global shift to 67.

Supporters’ main arguments:
– Safety depends on rigorous medical fitness, recurrent training, and operational oversight, not a single age number.
– Extending the age would slow attrition and give training pipelines time to produce new pilots without cutting corners.
– Fares and reliability could improve if airlines don’t have to cancel routes or reduce frequency when senior pilots age out.

Opposition and concerns

Opponents, led by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), emphasize that age-related health risks increase over time, even with strong medical screening. They warn an increase could complicate crew scheduling, reserve coverage, and international operations.

Key concerns:
– If the U.S. raises the age before ICAO acts, U.S. pilots older than 65 would still be barred from international flights, creating a patchwork standard.
– A split standard would force airlines to juggle crews, reduce flexibility, and increase costs.
– The FAA calls for more scientific evidence and safety analysis before policymakers move ahead.

Legislative history and current status

The legislative path has been rocky:
– The “Let Experienced Pilots Fly Act” was debated in 2022 (would have raised the U.S. cap to 67) but failed to pass.
– In 2024, lawmakers again declined to adopt a similar measure, requesting deeper study.
– Senate Republicans renewed the push, but resistance from labor and the FAA—and concern about international mismatch—kept the issue unresolved.

As of September 22, 2025, the United States has not formally backed the ICAO proposal. The matter remains under review in both Washington and Montreal.

Supporters, opponents, and what comes next

For Cruz and his allies, the timing of the ICAO meeting, the ongoing pilot shortage, and the impending retirement wave among baby-boomer pilots make the case for quick, coordinated action. They argue a two-year extension would not change core safety rules: pilots would still pass first-class medical exams, complete check rides and simulator sessions, and meet duty and rest limits.

ALPA’s stance highlights different risks:
– Even brief medical events in flight can have serious outcomes, and risk rises with age.
– The industry still faces post-pandemic training challenges.
– A new age tier may complicate crew bidding, seniority flows, and upgrade timelines for younger pilots.
– Some pilots worry senior captains delaying retirement could slow upgrades and pay growth for junior pilots.

Airlines generally favor flexibility and a unified global standard. Their priorities:
– Avoiding a patchwork of domestic vs. international rules.
– Ensuring transitions are aligned between ICAO and national law to prevent operational disruptions.

If alignment does not occur, carriers could face:
– Senior captains barred from flying overseas, requiring rapid reassignments.
– Increased pressure on junior captains to cover long-haul routes.
– Operational complexity that pushes costs higher, especially for carriers with large international networks.

Impact on travelers, pilots, and schedules

For travelers:
– If the retirement age stays at 65, airlines will plan for steady senior exits, which might keep training slots open for new hires but could strain service to smaller cities.
– If the age moves to 67 with strong medical oversight, airlines say they can preserve more capacity while the next wave of pilots completes training.

For pilots nearing 65:
– The uncertainty is personal—some reduce schedules, others retire on time rather than wait.
– Financial planning, retirement benefits, and seniority bidding are all affected by last-minute rule changes.
– Airlines are doing contingency planning because crew training, route planning, and seasonal schedules are set months in advance.

Medical and safety measures likely to be debated

If the age rises, expect a focus on enhanced medical standards. Potential measures under discussion include:
– Shorter intervals between first-class medical exams for pilots over 65.
– Targeted cardiovascular screening, sleep apnea checks, and cognitive tests grounded in aviation medicine.
– Enhanced data sharing on in-flight medical incidents to track trends in older age groups.

None of these are formal proposals today, but they indicate the direction of the safety debate if policy shifts. The FAA’s current position—that more science should come first—will carry weight with lawmakers and ICAO delegates.

The central question remains: can policymakers balance the value of experienced pilots against any incremental medical risks, and do so in a coordinated international way?

Process and next steps

• ICAO’s decision in Montreal will set the tone; if delegates back a rise to 67, individual countries would still handle rulemaking and timelines.
• If ICAO declines, national moves become harder because of the international flight bar for pilots over 65.
• In the U.S., any bill would likely move through the Senate Commerce Committee and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, where testimony from medical experts and the FAA will be decisive.

Canada 🇨🇦 hosting the assembly and supporting the shift suggests a potential regional consensus even as the U.S. deliberates its next steps.

Practical considerations and closing notes

• Airlines and regulators say clear lead time and firm guidance from both ICAO and the FAA would be needed to avoid surprises.
• For now, Montreal’s message is that the question is wide open: staffing, fares, and crew family schedules are all at stake.
• Senator Cruz’s push adds political pressure behind the IATA-backed proposal, while ALPA and the FAA urge caution and more evidence.

Whether the ICAO meeting produces a pathway to 67 or sends the issue back for more study will shape what Congress does next—and determine whether U.S. pilots can keep flying international routes past their 65th birthday.