Why Won't You Come to WestJet?

[PittBoss]

Why Why Why Why Won't You Come to WestJet?

Give me a good reason.

[Canadaflyer46]

Longest narrowbody upgrades in the world perhaps?

[cdnavater]

Why Why Why Why Won't You Come to WestJet?

Give me a good reason.

I would consider it if my salary came in the form of a “lumpsump”

[goingnowherefast]

Can't afford the pay cut to start at the bottom.

Commute would be terrible.

[PittBoss]

Why Why Why Why Won't You Come to WestJet?

Give me a good reason.

I would consider it if my salary came in the form of a “lumpsump”

You get a LUMPSUMP

[PittBoss]

Can't afford the pay cut to start at the bottom.

Commute would be terrible.

YUL YYZ YWG YEG YYC YVR why commute

[lowoleo22]

They're not hiring for one.

[CaptDukeNukem]

They're not hiring for one.

[accountant]

Because they’re the Greyhound of aviation?

[goingnowherefast]

Can't afford the pay cut to start at the bottom.

Commute would be terrible.

YUL YYZ YWG YEG YYC YVR why commute

There are other cities in Canada beyond that list.

[PittBoss]

Can't afford the pay cut to start at the bottom.

Commute would be terrible.

YUL YYZ YWG YEG YYC YVR why commute

There are other cities in Canada beyond that list.

Why not move then?

[nohojob]

I tried NOT to work for Westjet, but it didn't work.

[goingnowherefast]

YUL YYZ YWG YEG YYC YVR why commute

There are other cities in Canada beyond that list.

Why not move then?

The thread title is "why won't you come to WestJet?"

The answer is because I'd have to change my kid's school, my wife would have to quit her job and find a new one. Sell our house, move to a new city, buy a new and more expensive house. All for a pay cut.

That's why not WJ.

Sure, if they started much higher, then I'd really consider it. I might even be able to afford it. Despite the CEOs antics during the recent negotiations, it seems like a reasonable company. ALPA did a good job with QOL rules in the contract. But no, WJ just isn't an option.

[N181CS]

I think the better question is why would anyone choose to go to Westjet over any of the other 705 operators, AC,AT,SW(rip),FL etc. What does Westjet do better than the rest?

[sicamore]

I think the better question is why would anyone choose to go to Westjet over any of the other 705 operators, AC,AT,SW(rip),FL etc. What does Westjet do better than the rest?

Up until a few years ago, many of these pilots also handled tasks like tidying up the cabins. Today, if you hear some of their views on Sunwing pilots, you might think they see themselves as one of the world’s long-standing carriers.

WestJet started as a low-cost airline, and that foundational approach still influences its operations today. Not a high bar.

[8895]

Upgrade times too long and being stuck on a 737.

Congrats to the pilot group on the new pension though, looks great just from briefly looking into it.

[Hysteria]

Upgrade times too long and being stuck on a 737.

Congrats to the pilot group on the new pension though, looks great just from briefly looking into it.

Where is the new pension info?

[Airspeed Addict]

Why Why Why Why Won't You Come to WestJet?

Give me a good reason.

because they're not currently hiring?

[MaxAuto]

Don't go to an airline that allows pilots over 65 to continue flying and cherry picking domestic flights thereby stagnating movement up the list.

Get rid of that in CA3.

[DanWEC]

After giving 30 years of service to an airline, through all the good and bad, what's wrong with that?

[eyebrow737]

Don't go to an airline that allows pilots over 65 to continue flying and cherry picking domestic flights thereby stagnating movement up the list.

Get rid of that in CA3.

So, don't go to a company that respects human rights instead of putting people to the pasture based upon an arbitrary number and not health and experience?

Air Canada Pilots Association v. Kelly et al., 2011 FC 120:

Federal Court of Canada Judgment Summary: Vilven v. Air Canada et al., 2009

The Federal Court of Canada’s judgment fundamentally challenged the mandatory retirement policy of Air Canada, arguing that it violated the pilots' human rights by discriminating based on age. Here’s a summary of the judgment:

• Age Discrimination: The court found that forcing pilots to retire at age 60, regardless of their ability to continue flying safely, constituted age discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA). The policy limited the pilots’ right to continue their careers solely due to age, which is a protected ground under the CHRA.
• Charter of Rights and Freedoms: The court considered the case in the context of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, particularly Section 15, which guarantees equality rights. The mandatory retirement policy failed to treat individuals equally by ignoring that many pilots could still meet physical and professional requirements beyond age 60.
• Normal Age of Retirement Argument Rejected: Initially, Air Canada and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal argued that age 60 was the “normal age of retirement” for pilots, as allowed under section 15(1)(c) of the CHRA. However, the court found this justification outdated and incompatible with modern equality rights under the Charter. The court noted that changing industry standards, such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) raising the age limit to 65, suggested that the "normal" retirement age was flexible.
• Bona Fide Occupational Requirement (BFOR): Air Canada argued that the retirement age of 60 was a bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR) for safety. However, the court ruled this argument insufficient, as pilots could undergo regular medical and proficiency checks to confirm their capability. Age alone was not an adequate measure of fitness for duty.
• Implications for Human Rights: The court’s ruling signified that mandatory retirement based solely on age, without regard for individual capability, was inherently discriminatory. By rejecting Air Canada’s arguments, the court set a precedent that employers could not justify age-based employment termination without substantial, non-discriminatory reasons tied to job performance or safety.
• Outcome: The ruling allowed pilots to continue working past age 60, provided they met necessary health and performance criteria. It underscored that retirement policies must evolve with international standards and modern human rights principles, affirming that age alone should not prevent capable individuals from employment.

Summary
This judgment was a victory for human rights in Canada, affirming that mandatory retirement based solely on age is discriminatory. The case set an important precedent that policies must consider individual abilities and align with current human rights standards rather than relying on outdated assumptions about age and capability.

[MaxAuto]

The federal court of MaxAuto says screw all that.

[Canadaflyer46]

From the Air Canada ruling on working past 60:
It underscored that retirement policies must evolve with international standards

Take it up with ICAO then, and the FAA. They won’t allow anyone over 65 in their airspace. It’s not age discrimination by the airline if you’re not legally allowed to do the job anymore.

[cdnavater]

From the Air Canada ruling on working past 60:
It underscored that retirement policies must evolve with international standards

Take it up with ICAO then, and the FAA. They won’t allow anyone over 65 in their airspace. It’s not age discrimination by the airline if you’re not legally allowed to do the job anymore.

Yes, you are correct but in Canada there is no such rule, so unless it’s an undue hardship, WJ legally needs to accommodate in Canada.
If there is Canada only flying, they have the responsibility to provide aged pilots an accommodation

[ant_321]

From the Air Canada ruling on working past 60:
It underscored that retirement policies must evolve with international standards

Take it up with ICAO then, and the FAA. They won’t allow anyone over 65 in their airspace. It’s not age discrimination by the airline if you’re not legally allowed to do the job anymore.

Yes, you are correct but in Canada there is no such rule, so unless it’s an undue hardship, WJ legally needs to accommodate in Canada.
If there is Canada only flying, they have the responsibility to provide aged pilots an accommodation

How does Air Canada get away with it? They have plenty of domestic narrow body flying and forced retirement at 65.