As the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) General Assembly meets from September 23 to October 3, 2025, in Montreal, one of the most closely watched issues will be a proposal from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) to raise the retirement age for airline pilots from 65 to 67.
IATA put the idea forward in a working paper submitted in late August. The group argues that health data and medical advances support what it calls a “cautious but reasonable step consistent with safety”.
The association says that any crew with a pilot over 65 should also include another pilot under 65 to provide a safeguard against inflight medical risks. IATA added that the change would help airlines to keep experienced pilots in the cockpit, at a time when shortages threaten to limit air travel growth around the world.
ICAO can approve new global standards, but each member country must decide whether to adopt them into their national rules. Even if the assembly approves the higher retirement age, governments will decide how to apply the change, and some may resist.
ICAO last raised the international retirement age in 2006, when it shifted from 60 to 65.
The plan has already met stiff resistance from pilot unions. The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), which represents more than 77,000 pilots in the US and Canada, issued a statement rejecting the idea.
“The United States is the global leader in aviation safety, and we should resist any attempts to arbitrarily make changes to the regulatory framework that has helped us achieve this record,” ALPA said. “The US should continue to provide global leadership on this issue and maintain its current position.”
The Allied Pilots Association, which represents American Airlines pilots, has also raised concerns. Dennis Tajer, a spokesman for the group, told Reuters there is “insufficient data regarding what risks would be associated with increasing pilot retirement age. We don’t gamble with safety that way”.
Union leaders argue that, while people are living longer, there is still not enough evidence about the cognitive and medical risks faced by pilots in their late 60s. They also warn that delaying retirement ages could slow promotions, complicate scheduling, and impact training opportunities for younger pilots.
Airlines counter that mandatory retirements are forcing thousands of skilled aviators out of cockpits just as demand for air travel is surging. IATA has also noted that pilots must pass regular medical exams and that some countries already let pilots continue flying past 65 without obvious safety issues.
Commercial airline pilots flying under ICAO rules for multi-crew, scheduled international operations face mandatory retirement at 65, but no such global rule applies to pilots in general aviation or other commercial operations. In the United States, for example, pilots flying under Part 91 and 135 — which covers private as well as non-scheduled commercial flights — can continue flying indefinitely so long as they pass the required medical exams. Internationally, similar frameworks allow business jet pilots and many others to keep flying without an upper age limit, again contingent on medical certification.
Accident data has not shown a clear pattern of higher risk solely due to pilot age in these categories. Instead, regulators point to the medical oversight process as the main safeguard. However, safety experts caution that the scale and complexity of airline operations raise the stakes, which is why stricter limits are needed for airline crews.
At the Assembly, delegates will debate the proposal and could vote to adopt it, amend it, or call for more study. Observers say the outcome could be a compromise — such as gradual adoption with stricter medical checks for older pilots — or a delay while ICAO gathers more data.
