Francais en Quebec, what about the rest of Canada?

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog

Falken
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:14 pm

Post by Falken »

I don't understand how some people refuse to see the danger in not speaking the same language.

I couldn't care less WHICH language is chosen, but everyone has to admit that ONE language is safer than two. I agree with what some are saying: eventually two pilots in some uncontrolled pattern are going to be talking different languages and smack right into one another.

(it's happened with NORDO aircraft before.. so why shouldnt it happen to two aircraft that are for all intents and purposes NORDO)

It definately benefits safety to only speak one language. Sure, its only an advantage, but isn't that what its all about? Why have fuel guages, we can approximate how much fuel the plane burns anyway :P

Truthfully, this might not be possible. As some have said: what would we do with average person who doesn't speak english and just wants their private? There are many practices that we could adopt that would make flying safer, but they make it prohibitive and more expensive. A crazy example might be: if we limited the A380 to only two pax and filled the rest with fuel, we would virtually eliminate any chance of fuel running out mid-flight. Safer? SURE! (well, unless you have to land.. but we can forget about my crazy example for a minute) Practical? NO WAY!

Anyway.. I suppose I sorta sit on the fence with this one. Is it a good ideal to speak only one language? Sure. Is it really practical in this day and age? Not quite.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Niodatchi
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:58 pm

Post by Niodatchi »

I recently read in a TC publication, that in order to make our licences more difficult to dupplicate in the post-9/11 era, we will have in a near future, a licence that will be quite similar to the Canadian passport format. On that new licence, informations such as our type ratings,picture and even language proficiency levels will be displayed. The article didn`t mention if the proficiency level would be in either one of the two of our official languages. What do you guys think about that? Have you guys heard anything about it ?Thanks,MajorKong
---------- ADS -----------
 
frac
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:02 am

Post by frac »

MajorKong wrote:On that new licence, informations such as our type ratings,picture and even language proficiency levels will be displayed. The article didn`t mention if the proficiency level would be in either one of the two of our official languages. What do you guys think about that? Have you guys heard anything about it ?Thanks,MajorKong
Language proficiency will be rated on the two official languages in Canada. I don't think that it will change anything. I think that it will be possible to fly in BC with a French only proficiency rating. The amdt 164 thing is only a requirement for international flying.

Regards
Frac
---------- ADS -----------
 
bmc
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4014
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Switzerland

Post by bmc »

Hedley wrote:I rest my case wrt politics.

Hey, why don't we allow Mandarin on the radio at YYZ?

Why should there only be 2 languages spoken on shitty AM VHF comm radios? Why not 3? Why not 10? :roll:

mmm...interesting perspective. Essentially, keep it white. Keep it English. Just don't take away my Chinese restaurant.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bmc
petey
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 3:01 pm

Post by petey »

So, a sport that has been around longer than anything on this side that has always been called football needs a new name when we import it.
Not true. Both football and FOOTBALL are spinoffs of rugby.
in 1863, the game of football was split into rugby football (the parent sport of American football), in which handling and carrying the ball was allowed, and association football, which banned the use of the hands.
Since 1900, the Olympics included a soccer tournament whose winners were considered world champions.
Soon after the end of the American Civil War, around eighteen sixty five, colleges began organizing football games. In eighteen sixty seven, Princeton led the way in establishing some rudimentary rules of the game. Also in that year, the football itself was patented for the very first time.
I know, I know, who cares.

GO RIDERS! :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
TG
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2104
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Around

Re: Safety...

Post by TG »

SkyLounger wrote:
Lear45XR wrote:According to your logic it must be really unsafe to fly in Germany, Italy, Cuba, Russia and oh! the rest of the world where English is not spoken by locals...I can't believe we're still having this discussion in 2007!

May I remind you that the rest of world speaks the local language+English on the radio! I've spent the last 10 years of my life flying as far east as Russia down to Argentina from Canada. I know for a fact that Standard ICAO phraseology is well...not standard (the US is by far the worst/ cleared down to 5 leave it on the glide, tower inside/ AC123 FL330...welcome aboard!) across the board but what are we gonna do? Shut down airspace over Europe, prevent an Italian pilot from getting his PPL?

Would you prefer to fly into Montreal, Mexico City or Moscow and have a 250hr-unilingual Ace McCool try to speak English on the radio, mix-up clearances endeangering himself and others...or have a professional bilingual controller (who's paid good money) take care of the language issue so you and I don't have to...

Cheers!
Amen brother!

Hedley et al... You really will never give up will you... Lear45xr stated it best and you only read and twist it to suit your opinion... stop looking at your own belly button and get out of Canada a bit!
I'll second that :smt023
---------- ADS -----------
 
Niodatchi
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:58 pm

Post by Niodatchi »

Thanks for the info Frac! MajorKong :)
---------- ADS -----------
 
bic
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:52 pm

Post by bic »

Regarding that language proficiency levels, i heard that it will be rated on a scale of 6. French people will automatically be rated 6 and english people will receive a 6. that will be determine by where you went to school...French or english. To receive an international licence, pilot will need a minimun of 4 which is "fonctionnal" and i think only french pilots will have to be evaluated. Also, the "level" won't be on the licence cause of the confidentiality thing, it will just say pass or not.. That is what i have heard....
Sorry for my english.. i am French !!!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Grey_Wolf
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:23 pm

Post by Grey_Wolf »

Legal status in Canada
See Canadian French, Languages of Canada, Bilingualism in Canada


Bilingual (English/French) stop sign on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. An example of bilingualism at the federal government level in Canada.About 7 million Canadians are native French-speakers, of whom 6 million live in Quebec [2], and French is one of Canada's two official languages (the other being English). Various provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms deal with Canadians' right to access services in both languages, including the right to a publicly funded education in the minority language of each province, where numbers warrant in a given locality. By law, the federal government must operate and provide services in both English and French, proceedings of the Parliament of Canada must be translated into both these languages, and most products sold in Canada must have bilingual labels.

Overall, about 13% of Canadians have knowledge of French only, while 18% have knowledge of both English and French. In contrast, over 80% of the population of Quebec speaks French natively, and 95% can speak it. It has been the sole official language of Quebec since 1974. The legal status of French was further strengthened with the 1977 adoption of the Charter of the French Language (popularly known as Bill 101), which guarantees that every person has a right to have the civil administration, the health and social services, corporations, and enterprises in Quebec communicate with him in French. While the Charter mandates that certain provincial government services, such as those relating to health and education, be offered to the English minority in its language, where numbers warrant, its primary purpose is to cement the role of French as the primary language used in the public sphere.

The provision of the Charter that has arguably had the most significant impact mandates French-language education unless a child's parents or siblings have received the majority of their own primary education in English within Canada, with minor exceptions. This measure has reversed a historical trend whereby a large number of immigrant children would attend English schools. In so doing, the Charter has greatly contributed to the "visage français" (French face) of Montreal in spite of its growing immigrant population. Other provisions of the Charter have been ruled unconstitutional over the years, including those mandating French-only commercial signs, court proceedings, and debates in the legislature. Though none of these provisions are still in effect today, some continued to be on the books for a time even after courts had ruled them unconstitutional as a result of the government's decision to invoke the so-called notwithstanding clause of the Canadian constitution to override constitutional requirements. In 1993, the Charter was rewritten to allow signage in other languages so long as French was markedly "predominant." Another section of the Charter guarantees every person the right to work in French, meaning the right to have all communications with one's superiors and coworkers in French, as well as the right not to be required to know another language as a condition of hiring, unless this is warranted by the nature of one's duties, such as by reason of extensive interaction with people located outside the province or similar reasons. This section has not been as effective as had originally been hoped, and has faded somewhat from public consciousness. As of 2006, approximately 65% of the workforce on the island of Montreal predominantly used French in the workplace.

The only other province that recognizes French as an official language is New Brunswick, which is officially bilingual, like the nation as a whole. Outside of Quebec, the highest number of Francophones in Canada, 485,000, excluding those who claim multiple mother tongues, reside in Ontario, whereas New Brunswick, home to the vast majority of Acadians, has the highest percentage of Francophones after Quebec, 33%, or 237,000. In Ontario, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Manitoba, French does not have full official status, although the provincial governments do provide some French-language services in all communities where significant numbers of Francophones live. Canada's three northern territories (Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut) all recognize French as an official language as well.

All provinces make some effort to accommodate the needs of their Francophone citizens, although the level and quality of French-language service varies significantly from province to province. The Ontario French Language Services Act, adopted in 1986, guarantees French language services in that province in regions where the Francophone population exceeds 10% of the total population, as well as communities with Francophone populations exceeding 5,000, and certain other designated areas; this has the most effect in the north and east of the province, as well as in other larger centres such as Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, Mississauga, London, Kitchener, St. Catharines, Greater Sudbury and Windsor. However, the French Language Services Act does not confer the status of "official bilingualism" on these cities, as that designation carries with it implications which go beyond the provision of services in both languages. The City of Ottawa's language policy (by-law 2001-170) has two criteria which would allow employees to work in their official language of choice and be supervised in the language of choice; this policy is being challenged by an organization called Canadians for Language Fairness.

Canada has the status of member state in the Francophonie, while the provinces of Québec and New Brunswick are recognized as participating governments. Ontario is currently seeking to become a full member on its own.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"A good traveller has no fixed plan and is not intent on arriving." -Lao Tzu
User avatar
rezassasain
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:01 pm
Location: avcanada blows

Post by rezassasain »

I am with El Comet on this one, i was just in Quebec flying into a small airport to the east of mirabel and once cleared from terminal to the local airspace i made all my calls in english, as i do not speak french. And thier were a few a/c in the circuit making calls but all in french i had no idea what they were doing and i dont think they had an idea what i was doing the whole event was very stressful and unsafe. I was happy to get on the ground and even happier when i was out of Quebec
---------- ADS -----------
 
“When once you have tasted flight you will always walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward: for there you have been and there you will always be.”
Luis
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 11:54 am

Post by Luis »

I understand your concerns about safety. The problem is even bigger now because of all these ATC/FSS closing in Québec. The biggest issue for safety is in uncontrolled area because you have to rely on the other pilot's english knowledge. Being french canadian myself, I always took care to translate my trafic advisories in english when needed. But I don't think that there is a threat in controled airspace because ATC is doing a good job of translating to english pilots if the situation requires it.

Now, would it be safer to ban French from the air? I don't think so and here is why: if you ask the french private pilot from Baie-Comeau to learn english only to fly once a month, he won't understand 2/3 of what he's gonna hear. It's going to be far more dangerous that it is right now.

Unilingual french pilots don't fly outside Québec (they would be stupid to do so) and generally, they fly somewhere where there isn't any english speaking pilot. If there is though and you are flying IFR, Montreal Center will notice you in a perfect english.

The only place where it can become dangerous is in ATFs, in VFR and in Northern Quebec. Unfortunately, I don't have any solution for it. What I know is that banning french in Québec would create other problems far more dangerous than it actually is.

Thank for reading and being open minded.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
pilotbzh
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 612
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 7:33 am
Location: yyz

Post by pilotbzh »

remember that when you're cleared for an approach, they don't cover you for VFR trafic, info only. In those area, keep your eyes open, french flyers are no different than nordo airplanes, should we ground them all? don't forget where you came from and when you fly VFR keep away from those clouds, they may have airplanes in them....
---------- ADS -----------
 
MCA
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:35 pm

Post by MCA »

Luis wrote:Unilingual french pilots don't fly outside Québec (they would be stupid to do so)
as it is to fly in Québec when you don't speak french.
---------- ADS -----------
 
I'm intercontinental when I eat french toast
.......
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 9:43 pm
Location: North of YMX

Post by ....... »

MCA wrote:
Luis wrote:Unilingual french pilots don't fly outside Québec (they would be stupid to do so)
as it is to fly in Québec when you don't speak french.
Ouch MCA... I guess you're not intent on making any anglophone friends with that comment!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Post by Hedley »

At least he's honest - I respect that.

And I agree with him - from my experience, flying in Quebec is dangerous if you don't speak french, so stay out if you don't.
---------- ADS -----------
 
towbird
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:13 pm

Post by towbird »

We just have a meeting last week with a TC representative about the linguistic cote.

At the beggining it was supposed to be needed to fly anywhere outside Québec, but as it was clearly stated earlier, the Canada is a bilingual country, so now we will be required to have the english profenciency level to fly outside Canada as per ICAO standards.

The cote will be stated in the new licence and if you get only the functionnal cote you will be required to be tested every year. If you get the expert level, it's good for life.

For the rest of the dispute, being a french canadian, I had to learn english so why you just don't do the same thing and learn french if you have to fly inside Quebec. I found that we are used to answer you in english almost anywhere in Québec and that you don't give a damn about trying just a little bit to understand french. Are you so stupid you can't learn another language???

Just my two cents.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bmc
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4014
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Switzerland

Post by bmc »

towbird wrote: For the rest of the dispute, being a french canadian, I had to learn english so why you just don't do the same thing and learn french if you have to fly inside Quebec. I found that we are used to answer you in english almost anywhere in Québec and that you don't give a damn about trying just a little bit to understand french. Are you so stupid you can't learn another language???

Just my two cents.

As i understand it, ATC people the world over must have a working proficency in English. You made a career choice and did what you had to do to pursue your career ambitions. All ATC people the world over have done the same. Are you suggesting that those of us that do not have a language requirement for our work are being stupid?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by bmc on Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:30 am, edited 2 times in total.
bmc
Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Post by Hedley »

why you just don't do the same thing and learn french if you have to fly inside Quebec
Agreed. If you don't speak french (like me), stay the hell out of Quebec.
Are you so stupid you can't learn another language?

Well, let's see ... I think I'm pretty proficient in C and at least 4 different architectures of assembly language ... and I can read and write Aresti ... so counting Canadian, that's seven different languages.

Does french make the list? Nope, I just stay out of Quebec. No problem for me.

I tell kids these days, if they want to learn a really useful 2nd language, choose Spanish or maybe Chinese.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CFMartin
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 6:52 am

language

Post by CFMartin »

I would tend to agree with you, towbird.

Wether by requirement or by pure courtesy, learning the language of the area you work/live in makes total sense, wether it is aviation or any other business.

I have noticed, in most canadian French speaking areas, that French speaking pilot will usually at least try to make the effort of translating their communications for an English speaking crew when it is clear that this crew did not understand, but I have yet to hear an English speaking crew making the reciprocal effort in an area where French is spoken by the majority.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bmc
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4014
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Switzerland

Post by bmc »

Towbird...I edited my post above before reading the other responses. I'm in Switzerland and cross into France everyday. Many English-only speaking people here that get by just fine. I was fortunate enough to have learned French throughout school and I'm proud that I am now conversational with the locals.

I appreciate what you're saying and I also appreciate the political overtones. The reality of learning any language is "use it or lose it". Unless you have a remarkable memory, maintaining proficiency in anything requires practice.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bmc
corporate joe
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 8:18 am
Location: the coast

Post by corporate joe »

Mandarin is the language spoken by the most people in the world (1051 million people vs 510 million for English). China's aviation industry is going to be number 1 in the world within the next decade.
Mandarin is already starting to replace English as the official language for business. When the time comes, and and China's aviation industry surpasses the English speaking aviation industry, how would we feel as English Canadians if we are told we need to learn Mandarin to promote safety so that only one international language can be used? How would we react to the arguments that are being used here to tell French Canadians they need to speak English in their own Francophone province, if those same arguments were used to tell us we need to speak Mandarin in our English speaking country? We shouldn't fool ourselves by thinking that English will never be replaced as an international language (for aviation or anything else).

The answer is simple: we would never go along with it, because we would expect to be able to fly in our home region speaking our own native tongue. The same goes for French Canadians in Quebec. Quebec is a francophone province, and it has the right to communicate on the airwaves in it's own language. Just as we should have the right 10, 20 or 50 years down the line to not have to speak Mandarin on our airwaves to "promote a safer environment". It's easy and convenient to tell other people to learn your language, but when you flip the tables and look at it from the other side, it changes things up a bit.

The point here is not to debate if Mandarin will replace English as an international Aviation language, the point is to think about others and what is asked of them, and how we would react in if the same was asked of us. We are quick to suggest removing other people's liberties (like the right of French Canadians to talk French in their homeland) in the name of safety, but if our liberties were threatened, then it would be a whole different story.

Just something to think about...
---------- ADS -----------
 
The 3 most important things to remember when you're old:

1) Never pass an opportunity to use a washroom
2) Never waste a hard on
3) Never trust a fart



John Mayer
CFMartin
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 6:52 am

language issue

Post by CFMartin »

Corporate joe, I think you sum it all. Great post.
---------- ADS -----------
 
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4328
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Post by 2R »

I can tell you that there are abusers of the English language that would never pass an ICAO standard radiotelephoney course.The purpose of standard radio telephoney is so that People who do not speak english can be safer as standard phases are used .To confuse ICAO Standard radio telephoney with english is political opportunism.Just because you speak english does not make you any safer if you do not use standard phases.
It is the standard phases that where decided many years ago to improve safety .Now we will have to wait until someone dies to go back to the way it was in the 1947 ICAO agreements concerning the use of standard phraseology .All because some dipshit wants to talk to his homeies in their local slang that nobody but they understand .
---------- ADS -----------
 
.......
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 9:43 pm
Location: North of YMX

Post by ....... »

All partisanery apart.... Corporate Joe and 2R, BRAVO!

Greatest posts read in a long time!!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
sprucegoose
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 7:25 pm

Post by sprucegoose »

Thank you Corporate Joe! you summed it up very nicely

( I came to the same reflexion today!! , yes yes.... I sometimes think about AvCanada during working hours ) :cry:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”