This article is published in Air Transport World part of Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN), and is complimentary through Aug 08, 2026. For information on becoming an AWIN Member to access more content like this, click here.
FAA’s latest air traffic controller workforce plan outlines the steps the agency is taking to solve the US controller shortage, but the report does not address an issue that has flown under the radar in the debate over staffing air traffic control towers.
A 1971 US federal law mandates that controllers retire at age 56—nine years below the pilot mandatory retirement age—even though clear evidence has never been provided to justify pushing out the most experienced controllers at this relatively young age.
FAA’s efforts to address the controller shortage focus on streamlining the hiring process to “surge” young controllers into the workforce and incentivizing older controllers eligible to retire with federal benefits to stay on the job longer—but not past age 56.
“At this time, the FAA is not considering changes to the mandatory retirement age for air traffic controllers,” the agency said in response to queries from ATW.
Many controllers are eligible to retire with federal government benefits as early as age 50, and FAA is offering bonuses to retain these controllers until age 56. “We’re out of the game at 56,” US transportation secretary Sean Duffy said during a press conference in 2025.
Duffy explained that he approached the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), the union representing US controllers, in the spring of 2025 to ask what type of financial incentive might persuade controllers in their early 50s to stay on for a year or two more.
As a result, FAA and NATCA reached an agreement, announced on May 1, 2025, under which FAA would offer bonuses to retirement-eligible controllers. As of June 1, FAA had spent around $12.3 million on retention bonuses to 560 retirement-eligible controllers.
“By encouraging experienced controllers to continue working, the FAA maintains staffing at key facilities while new hires complete training and certification,” the agency said in the new workforce plan, which was released in May.
FAA conceded, however, that “despite the increased incentive to delay retirement, most controllers still leave the controller workforce prior to reaching the mandatory age.”
NATCA opposes raising the controller mandatory retirement age.
WAIVING RETIREMENT
Under the 1971 law, the US transportation secretary has the authority to approve retirement waivers for 56-year-old controllers who have demonstrated “exceptional skills and abilities,” allowing them to work until age 61. Duffy told NBC News early last year that he “100%” planned to issue waivers. However, NATCA president Nick Daniels responded to Duffy’s comments by saying he did “not believe this is an effective solution to addressing the chronic air traffic controller staffing crisis,” and it is not clear whether Duffy has used this authority.
Despite multiple requests from ATW, FAA would not provide figures on how many waivers the secretary has granted, if any. Waivers were not mentioned in FAA’s new controller workforce plan.
Even so, the waiver process is done on a case-by-case basis and requires controllers to request one, hardly a reliable path to boost workforce numbers by retaining the most experienced controllers, who could serve as mentors to new hires. Congress, which set the retirement age at 56 in 1971, could raise the mandatory age with new legislation.
NO DATA
The law enacted 55 years ago was not based on empirical evidence. Lawmakers were persuaded by Donald Francke, then the executive director of the Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA), who stated in congressional testimony that controllers past the age of 56 could “no longer make the rapid and accurate decisions essential to the preservation of human life.”
According to a 2005 FAA report, Francke justified this statement only through “anecdotal reports” from older controllers. “Despite the strong assertion made by [Francke], no testimony or data were presented in 1971 to demonstrate that older controllers were more likely to make errors that might compromise the safety of flight,” the report said.
ATCA still stands by its 1971 stance on the mandatory retirement age. “We need to upgrade and modernize our air traffic management system … first before we could consider reexamining workforce rules such as the controller mandatory retirement age,” an ATCA spokesperson told ATW. “The current system, several decades old, places significant cumulative stress on controllers precisely because aging technology demands more from the human operator, not less.”
Once new technology is in place, “we’d then need to study the human factors and the impacts a modernized system would have on controllers and then perhaps a discussion about the retirement age could follow,” the ATCA spokesperson added. “That evidence-based conversation is worth having, but it follows modernization, not the other way around.”
FAA estimates 717 controllers will retire over the next three years.
The unwillingness of FAA, NATCA and ATCA to revisit the age rule begs the question: If the pilot is over the age of 60, how is it reasonable that a younger person in the tower poses a risk?
Related Content
