14 C.F.R. § 121.383

Airman: Limitations on use of services

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) No certificate holder may use any person as an airman nor may any person serve as an airman unless that person—

(1) Holds an appropriate current airman certificate issued by the FAA;

(2) Has in his or her possession while engaged in operations under this part—

(i) Any required appropriate current airman and medical certificates; or

(ii) A temporary document issued in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section; and

(3) Is otherwise qualified for the operation for which he is to be used.

(b) Each airman covered by paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall present his or her certificates or temporary document for inspection upon request of the Administrator.

(c) A certificate holder may obtain approval to provide a temporary document verifying a flightcrew member's airman certificate and medical certificate privileges under an approved certificate verification plan set forth in the certificate holder's operations specifications. A document provided by the certificate holder may be carried as an airman certificate or medical certificate on flights within the United States for up to 72 hours.

(d) No certificate holder may use the services of any person as a pilot on an airplane engaged in operations under this part if that person has reached his or her 65th birthday.

(e) No pilot may serve as a pilot in operations under this part if that person has reached his or her 65th birthday.

[Docket 6258, 29 FR 19212, Dec. 31, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 121-144, 43 FR 22646, May 25, 1978; Amdt. 121-344, 74 FR 34234, July 15, 2009; Amdt. 121-372, 80 FR 33401, June 12, 2015; Amdt. 121-381, 83 FR 30282, June 27, 2018]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 70 cases, 1976–2015 · leading case: Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111 (1985).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111 (1985). “14 CFR § 121.383 (c)(1984). Captains and first officers are considered “pilots” subject to this regulation; flight engineers are not.”

Emory v. United Air Lines, Inc., 821 F. Supp. 2d 200 (D.D.C. 2011). · cites it 5× “¶ 19 (a) (citing 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c) (2007) (“Age 60 Rule”)), even “though [the defendants knew or should have known that each [plaintiff purported *208 ly] met the statutory requisites” of the Fair Treatment of Experienced Pilots Act (“FTEPA” or “Act”), Pub.”

James Bailey v. United Airlines, 279 F.3d 194 (3rd Cir. 2002). “” 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c) (2001). In compliance with this regulation, United notified Bailey that he was no longer qualified to work as a first officer.”

Carswell v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n Intern., 540 F. Supp. 2d 107 (D.D.C. 2008). · cites it 3× “¶ 9 (citing 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c) (the “Age 60 Rule”)).”

Troy G. Avera vs Airline Pilots Assoc. Int'l, Airline Pilots Assoc. Master Exec. Couns., 436 F. App'x 969 (11th Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “§ 44729 , and the Federal Aviation Administration’s (“FAA”) “Age 60 Rule,” 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 , were unconstitutional.”

W. Air Lines, Inc. v. Criswell, 472 U.S. 400 (1985). “” 14 CFR § 121.383 (c) (1985). The FAA has justified the retention of mandatory retirement for pilots on the theory that “incapacitating medical events” and “adverse psychological, emotional, and physicial changes” occur as a consequence of aging.”

Jones v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int'l, 642 F.3d 1100 (D.C. Cir. 2011). “” 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c) (2008). Part 121 governs the operations of most commercial airlines.”

Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. The Boeing Co., 843 F.2d 1213 (9th Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “The court concluded that the FAA Rule “is essentially conclusive evidence” that being less than 60 is a BFOQ for Boeing pilots.”

78 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1019, 74 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 45,664 Robert H. Tice v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 162 F.3d 966 (7th Cir. 1999). “See 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c); Baker v. FAA, 917 F.”

Murnane v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 482 F. Supp. 135 (D.D.C. 1979). · cites it 2× “14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c) (1979). [8] American does not allow former Captains, age sixty and over, to bid back to the Flight Officer position.”

Emory v. United Air Lines, Inc., 720 F.3d 915 (D.C. Cir. 2013). “See 14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c) (2007). 3 Although the Rule survived nearly a half-century’s worth of challenges in federal courts, see, e.”

Bert M. Yetman, Jerry L. Adams, Frank L. Ahern v. Jane Garvey, Adm'r, Fed. Aviation Admin., 261 F.3d 664 (7th Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “14 C.F.R. § 121.383 (c). As an initial justification for its rule, the agency argued that the regulation promotes air safety, as “available medical studies show that sudden incapacitation due to heart attacks or strokes becomes more frequent as men approach age sixty and present…”

Show all 70 citing cases →

— 14 C.F.R. § 121.383(c) — 4 cases

Adams v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 550 F.3d 1174 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

Coupé v. Fed. Express Corp., 121 F.3d 1022 (6th Cir. 1997).

Houghton v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 627 F.2d 858 (8th Cir. 1980).

23 Fair empl.prac.cas. 757, 23 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,180 Phillip W. Houghton, & Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, Intervenor v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., Phillip W. Houghton, & Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 627 F.2d 858 (8th Cir. 1980).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.