CHRT Remedy Ruling?

[yycflyguy]

Anyone thought about a cull on the 60+ group? ..

That won't be necessary...studies have shown that those who "choose" to work into their mid and late 60's have an enormously decreased life expectancy relative to those who leave full-time work earlier, and that isn't taking into account a high stress/fatigue job role

So, fortunately this problem won't be very long lasted...

...and cue Lost in Saigon with his no correlation between retirement age vs death age is bunk comment. The Boeing study is flawed, he will say.

Personally, I have noticed a very high correlation between those that do long-haul flying and fatal cases of Cancer. It is an ongoing study that, in my non-medical opinion, makes sense to monitor.

I just can't get over the fact that after a fruitful career these guys want to come back to CARA catering.

[Mechanic787]

Anyone thought about a cull on the 60+ group?

And you wonder why you are having legal problems...

[Localizer]

Its called humour ... get a funny bone!

Since we consider ourselves a democratic society and the usual philosophy of a democratic society is majority rules .... how have we come to the point where it seems the tail now wags the dog? I find the minority now hold the balance of power with nothing more then one single word ... discrimination ...

Discrimination: treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.

I see the meaning .. but I don't see where it says "If I don't get what I want, then i'm being discriminated against!"

Question: Does ACPA keep a record of who votes and how they vote on a collective agreement? If so, and the +60 group has there name attached to a yes vote for the current or past collective agreements (which has the 60 and out clause), was that considered in the ruling?

[UC-64A]

Quote from previous:
"Let me ask you this, when you signed up at the ripe young age did you not agree to the conditions of that contract with full understanding of what you were signing up for ?? Come on Ray, how's about a little disclosure of your knowledge regarding the negotiated contract at the time you signed up. You all started at AC knowing full well that you would retire at the age of 60 !!
All the advancement of that career you all enjoyed was based on the entire pilot group retiring at the age of 60 or earlier."

You seem to be avoiding the simple question to whether you had the knowlegde of the contractual retirement age/conditions throughout the duration of your fruitful career !! selective response proceedure in effect ??


-pilot
-lawyer
-politician
what was ever mastered ?? you stand off side for the very party you would like to represent !! try the red team !!
What team were you ever a part of ??


hmmmmm you are the master if your own demise ! I laugh in the face of danger !!

[Mechanic787]

You seem to be avoiding the simple question to whether you had the knowlegde [sic] of the contractual retirement age/conditions throughout the duration of your fruitful career !! selective response proceedure [sic] in effect ??

what was ever mastered ?? hmmmmm you are the master if [sic] your own demise !

What was ever mastered?

Obviously not English grammar, spelling, logic or dispassionate reflection.

[UC-64A]

The least of your worries would be some grammatical errors made in haste !! It has become very obvious that the individuals defending this 60 ruling have very little quality of life outside of their ego !!

point in being that you all knew exactly what you signed up for in your early years of employment at Air Canada !!

I smell a lurking alias me thinks !! HAHA

[115B]

For UC64 and all others; When Ray Hall joined Air Canada; 60 was not in the Contract or the Pension Agreement. 60 is still not in the Contract, it is in the Pension Agreement; no-one signs that.

Prior to about 1986 CALPA opposed a fixed retirement age; that was the condition under which anyone joining prior to that time agreed to. 60 was only slipped into the wording after a Captain won re-instatement. 60 was slipped into the wording to discourage anyone else from trying to stay. There was nothing to stop anyone from flying past 60 in Canada at that tme. The ICAO recommendation is now 65 for Captains; no limit for F/O's Many countries including Canada have no limit; ICAO recommendations are not binding. In any case, the 65 Captain rule and the over/under rule (which does not apply in Canada or the US) were simply a starting point for ICAO and may well be raised.

At one time in Canada, no man over 45 could fly "for hire or reward". No women of any age could do so. Some pilots who retired in the 1970's had started their career under the Age 45 rule. Nobody expected them to retire at 45 simply because that was the practice when they joined.

No-one has the right to tell someone who is fit and capable when they have to retire. There are few other examples in Canada of age based retirement; they will soon be gone. There is no other airline in Canada with a 60 rule. The EU did away with it some time ago.

ACPA leadership has created an enormous Legal and financial problem for the Association by taking this position. AC has nothing to gain and much to lose by taking this position; the benefit to the Pension Plan from piots staying longer is enormous.

Life is what happens when you are making other plans; get over it!

[Mechanic787]

The least of your worries would be some grammatical errors made in haste !! It has become very obvious that the individuals defending this 60 ruling have very little quality of life outside of their ego !!

The nice thing about being employed outside of your sandbox is that I can actually be dispassionate about your issues. It's not the motivation of the individuals involved, or the effects upon your peers, plus or minus, that concerns me, it is the coming impact of the Federal Court decision that will forever change the way we organize the workplaces in all our federal industries, including my workplace, that concerns me.

With respect, sir, you have a bigger problem than spelling and diction, and your current focus on the individuals, as opposed to the issue itself, is not allowing you to see it.

[Godder]

Gents,

New to the thread. A little windy there.

The Age 60 Issue looks like it will rage on for quite sometime, agreed.

It's like the Keller Punitive Corrections, they rage on unabated, abrogating the Right's of a certain class of ACPA Member.

G.

[circlingfor69]

Here we go!! Just a matter of time before some seniority whack job tried to resurrect that dead horse.

[Godder]

Here we go!! Just a matter of time before some seniority whack job tried to resurrect that dead horse.

69,

Would that imply you're a retired "whack job" ? Perhaps even a "Lotto Whack Job" ?

[barefootpilot]

Was there somewhere that it stated about V+K seniority numbers? Was it in this temp agreement? Or is it just assumed that they are coming back as 1 n 2. The seniority list is set every year.
Put them at the bottom and let them build up seniority with new hires all over again. I am sure they would love reserve in YYZ and possible living out of a flop house. But I guess they have already turned it down. I can only imagine flying with them if they got 777, between trying to keep them awake on the longhaul night flights and making sure they take all there old age pills that help keep them going. Not that I would take a pairing with them.

[Godder]

Raymond,

Can you explain how the Seniority of Vilven & Kelly was addressed in the MOA?

They've been off the property for approximately 6 years now? The issue from the Retirees is the "Right to Work" and the deemed discrimination of same. If the issue includes the "Right to Seniority" as well, shouldn't that piece of the claim be directed to The CIRB for Formal Address?

Is the CHRT cross-jurisdictional in their powers? Confirm they have the power to Integrate a Seniority List at ACPA, that's not up for appeal or repudiation at the CIRB by the current Membership?

Thank you.

[pilotede320]

Here we go!! Just a matter of time before some seniority whack job tried to resurrect that dead horse.

69,

Would that imply you're a retired "whack job" ? Perhaps even a "Lotto Whack Job" ?

Wow! The forum stasi would never allow that!

Let's get out the red and blue bats...better start another thread though...then again, does Brian Keller say anything about fly past 60?

Perhaps when the over 60 come back B.K. could give them a punitive correction as well...oh no, that would be unjust...we would all get a correction to compensate the over 60 for the years of indignity they suffered at our hands...right, plus compensation from AC and ACPA...ah...I love these lotteries!

[Godder]

[quote="pilotede320

"then again, does Brian Keller say anything about fly past 60?"

At this point in time Mr. Keller can't repudiate how punitive his corrections became. Two noted Arbitrators Mr. Teplitsky and
Mr. Lordon have confirmed that on two separate occasions. If it wasn't for a number of Putz's on past and current ACPA MEC's, the "Internal Union Problem" that the Association still endures would have been solved years ago.

Enter Chair Sinclair.

[Lost in Saigon]

If it wasn't for a number of Putz's on past and current ACPA MEC's, the "Internal Union Problem" that the Association still endures would have been solved years ago.

Those ACPA "Putz's" just offered the Air Ontario pilots an out of court settlement. Do you think they will accept it? I don't.
I think they are going to hold out for the "Full Meal Deal".

Those same ACPA "Putz's" are now taking on millions of liability with the age 60 issue. How's this one going to turn out?

[Raymond Hall]

Can you explain how the Seniority of Vilven & Kelly was addressed in the MOA?

So you signed up on this Forum three days ago specifically to post messages on this thread that are totally unrelated to this thread topic--so that you can inject the emotion and dissention of a previous dividing issue into the middle of this dividing issue.

If you want to post messages about that issue, start a new thread and take your controversy there. You will likely find enough angst on this Forum by those polarized by that issue to accomplish your objective of getting everyone riled up and distracted from substantive discussion.

But leave that topic out of this and the other threads that concern the mandatory retirement issue.

[yycflyguy]

Can you explain how the Seniority of Vilven & Kelly was addressed in the MOA?

So you signed up on this Forum three days ago specifically to post messages on this thread that are totally unrelated to this thread topic--so that you can inject the emotion and dissention of a previous dividing issue into the middle of this dividing issue.

If you want to post messages about that issue, start a new thread and take your controversy there. You will likely find enough angst on this Forum by those polarized by that issue to accomplish your objective of getting everyone riled up and distracted from substantive discussion.

But leave that topic out of this and the other threads that concern the mandatory retirement issue.

What difference does it make when he registered on AvCanada? None. I think you have done a much, much better job at polarizing the pilot group on this "dividing issue".

How is the Manitoba Bar handling the conduct complaint against you?

[Rubberbiscuit]

Some insight into Raymond Hall's resume and aspirations:

http://www.wpgsouthcentre.com/Documents/Whynominate.pdf

[Raymond Hall]

How is the Manitoba Bar handling the conduct complaint against you?

Take my word. You have more pressing issues to deal with than concern about the above attack against me by your elected representatives. Why don't you demand a briefing from them of what's really going on there? Then maybe you won't be so cocky.

[Godder]

Can you explain how the Seniority of Vilven & Kelly was addressed in the MOA?

So you signed up on this Forum three days ago specifically to post messages on this thread that are totally unrelated to this thread topic--so that you can inject the emotion and dissention of a previous dividing issue into the middle of this dividing issue.

If you want to post messages about that issue, start a new thread and take your controversy there. You will likely find enough angst on this Forum by those polarized by that issue to accomplish your objective of getting everyone riled up and distracted from substantive discussion.

But leave that topic out of this and the other threads that concern the mandatory retirement issue.

Raymond,

Seniority and The Age 60 Issue ignite a spark of emotion in most of the Membership. In fairness, I think you have touched that hot button on more than one occassion? IMO the issues are very similar when it comes to the S Word.

I think it is a legitimate question. How are V & K going to slot in? Does the Company & ACPA have that power? Does the CHRT?

Most agree that the CIRB holds the power. Will they be involved at the end of the day?

Thank you.

[Old fella]

Good move to lock this AC age 60 rants. Some of us who visit this site often(like me, probably way too much) are, more than likely tired of this ranting about a subject that is internal to the big Maple Leaf. It's like over at the Cruise Ship blogs(member) I read at times, lots of moaning/bitching about Formal dinner dress codes

[bluemic]

Some of us who visit this site often(like me, probably way too much) are, more than likely tired of this ranting about a subject that is internal to the big Maple Leaf.

Well, with all due respect "old fella", last time I looked this particular area of the board was titled: "Air Canada - Discuss topics relating to Air Canada."

So, while I don't disagree that the thread was getting carried away with w-a-a-y too much emotion and maybe shoulda been locked, I gotta point out that the 'owner' of the board decided to have an "Air Canada" section.

Which makes me believe that discussions about Air Canada are intended to happen here.

And yes, it would be very nice to keep all of these discussions "internal" - but since the demise of the ACPA forum, that ain't gonna happen - so if you're tired of reading about stuff that only pertains to AC, may I respectfully suggest you don't bother with this section of AVCanada?

Pearson

edited for slight grammar change

[Kevin Russell]

I have to agree with bluemic,with the shutdown of the ACPA forum its nice to have a place to vent and share your views. In the interest of venting and shameless self promotion I'll post again what I did the other day without names.

This is an issue that will greatly affect me and many like me as well as anybody aspiring to move up the pilot ladder regardless of what their goal is. My story is fairly typical of most recent hires at AC. 35 years old when hired, family and paid my dues for about 10 years prior to getting hired. Working for AC has been great, however the pay at the Embraer F/O level leaves a lot to be desired. There have been a number of downward pressures on the pay and working conditions of our profession over the last 10 years: regional pilots in the US flying for poverty level wages while hoping for a mainline job that will never happen, AC wages at 15 to 20% lower than they were 10 yrs ago, even lower when comparing the Embraer to the DC9, crooked owners that take $30,000 from pilots, the list goes on. This group is just turning the knife a little more in the "gut" that has become our profession. With respect to the pilot profession, I hope for the best but fear the worst. It is for this reason that I and many others of my generation and situation have found it necessary to have another job in order to provide for our families. In addition to being a pilot I also am a mortgage agent. I am not complaining, I'm just stating what is necessary for me and many others to continue in this industry today.

I find the discrimination argument a little ridiculous. Forcing a person to sit at the back of the bus because of their skin colour is discrimination, not allowing someone to vote because of their sex is discrimination. Maybe Mr. XXX see's himself in the same light as a Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King Jr. and his cause as just. Retiring as a pilot from AC is just the "circle of life" as known to the AC pilot. Perhaps when Mr. XXX is on his death bed as an old man he will file a complaint with God (or the Devil, if that's his maker) because dying of old age is clearly a case of being discriminated against because of your age.

All joking aside there are cases of age discrimination, however in this case the discrimination argument is being used as a guise for this particular groups quest for greed.

Kevin Russell, BBA
E190 F/O, YYZ
Mortgage Agent, M10000751
Dominion Lending Centres Bankfighter Inc. Licence #11129
Tel: 705 241 8283
email: krussell@bankfighter.com
website: http://kevinrussellmortgage.ca
Contact me for the best available mortgage rates

[yycflyguy]

I guess not every thread got deleted or locked!!