BFOR

[Fanblade]

Raymond,

Putting the issue of post 60 pilots becoming FO's aside. It is IMO an argument that makes the CHRT ruling difficult to rationalize.

But putting that aside it would appear the Tribunal has taken a much larger, or broader look at performance of the job than you were expecting. That performance seems to have little to do with an individuals capability to perform the work. Physically fly an airplane in this case. But rather the impact on the company with regard to productivity of the individuals in question, to perform the work.

In this case do post 60 pilots reduce productivity? Can post 60 pilots be as productive as pre 60 pilots. If the answer is no, no matter why, (in this case it is foreign law) then their ability to perform the work Air Canada needs done is impaired.

This argument could easily extend to the situation of no retirement age at all. Considering the amount of lead time required for training and planning, the concept of no retirement date may also be considered something that may impair AC's ability to perform the work. Delta above was mentioned as managing the situation when it happened to them prior to CH. 11. I have a friend there. It was mayhem. Luckily they were all trying to leave as the company was planning mass layoffs. A negotiated settlement was all that kept the airline running.

Again. Making all post 60 pilots FO's, with either a fixed retirement date or a requirement to give something like a two year lead time to retirement would mitigate both issues, so I am not quite sure why they ruled in the fashion they did.

Were either of these options before the Tribunal?

Would making a post 60 pilot an FO be burdensome on AC in some fashion? Training for example. Not the training of the individual but the training plan itself?

The ability to implement a required notification time of say two years for retirement? Is it legal? Is it discriminatory?

It would appear on the surface that the Tribunal found that AC had a BFOR based on the combination of international law and the current contract it has with ACPA. If one or the other were removed there would be no BFOR. Can the Tribunal intervene in seniority rights within a collective agreement when those specific seniority rights are not discriminatory? They may in fact form the basis for the BFOR, but in and of themselves they are not discriminatory.

[Raymond Hall]

The issue is not about the Tribunal seriously considering having Captains works a F/Os. The issue is about getting the SCC-mandated steps correct. BFOR is an exemption to discriminatioin that has the power to undermine the entire thrust of the statute, if not narrowly construed. It is to be allowed only in circumstances where the job requirements dictate the use of it to override the blanket prohibitions on discrimination. There are stringent restrictions on the applicability of its use, including a rational connection to the performance of the work, an honest good faith belief by the employer that the restrictions are actually necessary to accomplish the job tasks, and an accommodation of those adversely affected up to the point of unhardship.

The message that I posted above indicates nothing more than that the new Tribunal Member who decided the case only by reading the transcript and viewing the Exhibits from the 2007 hearing did not get a sufficient understanding of the facts to put them in the context of the existing SCC case law on BFOR. That is indeed a criticism of the decision, but it is a criticism that will flow through into the judicial review hearing that is absolutely necessary in response to this decision. That criticism is in regard to only one of several legal flaws that I believe exist in the decision.

I do not want to cast aspersions on the integrity of the Member who rendered the decision. He made an intense effort over a very short time period to render the decision that he obviously thought was appropriate based on his understanding of the law and the evidence. BFOR is a very narrow area of the law. My criticism is of the decision, not of the person that rendered it. The fact is, the decision is flawed and must be reviewed by the Court.

Don't look any deeper into the operational constructs surrounding the work relation itself. That's not where the analysis lies. It lies in the required legal tests and whether the evidence met those tests.

[the original tony]

Obviously his decision was flawed..... it contradicts your stance on the case.
you will never see eye to eye with anyone who believes retiring at a set age is ok.
Or the fact this is nothing but a money grab. I know, I know, it has nothing to do with money.
I love the way most pilots on this idiotic forum love to use legalities only to better their own case. On a specific day, at a set time.
Air Canada has out dated retirement policies, it must change....ok
Air Canada wants to change our pensions from the out dated DB plan that has collapsed several companies, not just airlines..... NO CHANCE!!! That part of the 70's must stay, the rest can go. Or the parts that we dont like.
Speak out of one side of your mouth. You want AC to be like all other companies regarding retirement but not other parts? And you wonder why we get TAs like we did.
As Rockie likes to say, get your head out of your ass, his is still firmly planted in his no doubt. Especially now with a possible road block to him never quitting the job to fly for a company he hates so much. Amazing.
DB pensions are gone, no number of retirees staying past 60, 70 or 80 will fix that. 2 billion dollars, how many tickets must be sold to cover that? once that is dealt with, we can be on an even playing field. Then lets discuss 60+
which i still disagree with.

Tony

[Rockie]

You can go whenever you like Tony, nobody is stopping you. What pisses you off is people ahead of you in the line who might decide to stay longer, because they're in your way. You should probably stop criticizing other people over money, because that is the only thing driving your opinion on this. Social issues be damned. Inadequate pension be damned...at least until it's your turn to retire. Then watch out Air Canada, the Original Tony's suddenly had a change of heart because he's learned what age discrimination is.

[the original tony]

I'll be honest with you. I don't want the option to stay longer. Most people that have screwed their retirement so badly that they need to make 200g plus a year should have a little more structure. Not carte blanche on what ever they like. Just like their whole life has been a great ride, why stop now???
I at the very least have the balls to admit this has everything to do with money. They had their day and now it's someone else who gets theirs. If this is hard to swallow leave the evil AC and go to WJA, you'll love their pension plan and schedule...Or Transat, Sunwing. All those companies with DB plans. Oh wait, they don't. Sorry I guess life here isn't as bad as you thought it was. Make your money and get the F out. You married five ladies, not my problem. You invested in shit stocks, I don't care. Stop making your problems my problems.
Plan your career, execute and leave. If there is no end in sight then why even plan for retirement? Just keep working then die. Life couldn't be better! Don't save, don't do anything. Just keep sucking off that tit till it's dry and there you have it.
This has 100% to do with money and nothing to do with discrimination. As a person who has been discriminated against and won in court I take great offense when that word is tossed around with very little regard.

LL
Emb FO

[tailgunner]

Plus 1 for Original Tony

[The Raven]

Plus another 1 for Original Tony.

B767 Captain

[ACAV8R]

Plus 1 for Original Tony

A320 Captain

[Rockie]

I'll be honest with you. I don't want the option to stay longer. Most people that have screwed their retirement so badly that they need to make 200g plus a year should have a little more structure. Not carte blanche on what ever they like. Just like their whole life has been a great ride, why stop now???
I at the very least have the balls to admit this has everything to do with money. They had their day and now it's someone else who gets theirs. If this is hard to swallow leave the evil AC and go to WJA, you'll love their pension plan and schedule...Or Transat, Sunwing. All those companies with DB plans. Oh wait, they don't. Sorry I guess life here isn't as bad as you thought it was. Make your money and get the F out. You married five ladies, not my problem. You invested in shit stocks, I don't care. Stop making your problems my problems.
Plan your career, execute and leave. If there is no end in sight then why even plan for retirement? Just keep working then die. Life couldn't be better! Don't save, don't do anything. Just keep sucking off that tit till it's dry and there you have it.
This has 100% to do with money and nothing to do with discrimination. As a person who has been discriminated against and won in court I take great offense when that word is tossed around with very little regard.

LL
Emb FO

This is why Air Canada pilots will continually lose. The boots blocking our view past the next rung up on the seniority ladder blinds us to everything else.

I don't want the option to stay longer.

You're an EMJ FO and I'll guess you have many years to go till retirement. What you want now has no bearing on what you'll want then, especially when what you want now is completely driven by your own mindless climb up the seniority ladder rather than careful assessment of conditions and thoughtful planning. You ignorantly and arrogantly criticize people with drivel like this:

You married five ladies, not my problem. You invested in shit stocks, I don't care. Stop making your problems my problems. Plan your career, execute and leave. If there is no end in sight then why even plan for retirement? Just keep working then die. Life couldn't be better! Don't save, don't do anything. Just keep sucking off that tit till it's dry and there you have it.

But you don't know which of those life events will happen to you yet or any of the million or so other unfortunate events life can throw at you, such as an employer systematically gutting your pension, salary and working conditions for instance. Sound vaguely familiar? What will you want then Tony? You are a no-nothing whelp with everything to learn.

The world has changed Tony, and only the very blind or very stupid fail to recognize it. You and many others are fixated on blaming this on other Air Canada pilots when a complete idiot can see that the whole country has changed and we are only catching up. You and others arrogantly think we can isolate ourselves from that change. So go ahead, blame people who had nothing to do with this change. Have your whole anachronistic idea of the world come crumbling down around your ears because you were too stupid to recognize the changing reality and not only adapt to it, but take advantage of it at this critical time in our history. Thanks to you, ACPA and the people who insist on living in the past we deserve what we get. Time will show you what that is.

[HavaJava]

You are a no-nothing whelp with everything to learn.

[Rockie]

I really shouldn't post on here until I've had my third cup of coffee. I have less patience with teenagers until then.

[the original tony]

I don't give a rats ass about you, or anyone else trying to take food off my families plate.
Name calling?? Dealing with teenagers indeed. Call myself or one other person on this forum an idiot for not wanting to agree with you and you WILL get called out.
Let me ask you this genius, how many DB plans are still out there??? Get with the times, they are a thing if the past. Yet we, more you, rely on a company to pony up billions to keep an archaic plan in place. Sure I'll give up everything to keep it.
Wake up, the world is changing. Does this sound familiar?
If I resorted to name calling, I'd really enjoy myself.
Last post on here.
Thanks to the courts for calling this what it is.

Tony

[accumulous]

The facts are that ACPA has moved to permanently erase an open career path for themselves and their entire membership.

The net result is that regardless of the hiring age of AC pilots, their career will be a short one in relation to every other airline on the continent.

For a huge number of guys, 15 to 20 years will be all she wrote, and for the rest, not much more, given the current hiring demographics.

ACPA has previously retained Job Placement Committees for Furloughed Pilots and the Force Retired Pilots, and it should be a fairly easy matter to broaden the scope of that Committee to make it even more effective.

Every other airline on the Continent has an open career path, with AC being the only one now on track to be legislated out of that stream.

The AC Job Placement Committee should be able to look into more comprehensive liaison with all the other carriers to make it easier for AC pilots to continue their flying careers, and perhaps that is something the new executive could look at providing.

[Rockie]

Let me ask you this genius, how many DB plans are still out there??? Get with the times, they are a thing if the past.

Very good Tony, this is progress. Now advance that line of thought into the future when you retire and your DB pension, or at least a livable DB pension is a thing of the past. Gone along with the pension you covet so much now will be anything like a wage that you're expecting when you finally reach the 777. What do you think your opinion on mandatory retirement at age 60 is going to be then? Think really hard Tony.

The problem with this issue is that everybody views it in terms of what's good for ME. You have nothing but contempt for the close to 200 pilots (and growing every month) challenging mandatory retirement, but in reality they are you. They were just like you when they were your age, and you will be just like them when you're their age. You're cut from the same cloth because it's all about what's good for ME. Your claim that you won't be like them is just noise you make to try and distinguish yourself and feel superior to them, but it's all bullshit. You'll do the same, by then likely because you have to despite how much you don't want to.

What nobody (especially ACPA) is doing is what's good for US. If anybody gave that any thought this would be a very different type of discussion. Every other union and employee group gets it, but somehow the superior pilots don't.

[LeadingEdge]

Let me ask you this genius, how many DB plans are still out there??? Get with the times, they are a thing if the past.

Very good Tony, this is progress. Now advance that line of thought into the future when you retire and your DB pension, or at least a livable DB pension is a thing of the past. Gone along with the pension you covet so much now will be anything like a wage that you're expecting when you finally reach the 777. What do you think your opinion on mandatory retirement at age 60 is going to be then? Think really hard Tony.

The problem with this issue is that everybody views it in terms of what's good for ME. You have nothing but contempt for the close to 200 pilots (and growing every month) challenging mandatory retirement, but in reality they are you. They were just like you when they were your age, and you will be just like them when you're their age. You're cut from the same cloth because it's all about what's good for ME. Your claim that you won't be like them is just noise you make to try and distinguish yourself and feel superior to them, but it's all bullshit. You'll do the same, by then likely because you have to despite how much you don't want to.

What nobody (especially ACPA) is doing is what's good for US. If anybody gave that any thought this would be a very different type of discussion. Every other union and employee group gets it, but somehow the superior pilots don't.

Your post really says it all about your group. You assume that you speak for the Pilot group as a whole, when in fact you don't. You assume that everyone else will have somehow failed to plan for retirement, when in fact they do plan for retirement. You assume that because a small minority want this, the rights of the majority somehow do not matter. And lastly, you somehow seem to know what is best for Tony when he has clearly stated what is best for him.

I really suggest that you take a long hard look at the award and the proposed legislation, and you will see that this is not going to happen. Then, maybe you can go enjoy a well earned retirement that the vast majority of Canadians can only dream about.

[Rockie]

You assume that you speak for the Pilot group as a whole, when in fact you don't.

It's glaringly obvious I don't speak for the pilot group. It's equally obvious that strategic thinking is not our pilot group's strength. Marching up that seniority ladder without thinking is.

That's why we lose.

[tailgunner]

Yes Rockie. You lose.

[rudder]

Relax folks. This ruling will be appealed just like every other ruling. And the beaurocrats that we hand the matter too will continue to get it wrong because we cannot get our act together and speak with authority on the subject matter.

[Raymond Hall]

The following is our public position on the decision, as of Monday, July 11th:

Fly Past 60 Coalition Comment re Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Vilven-Kelly Decision of July 8th

1. The decision is seriously flawed by reason of the fact that the decision overlooks the Supreme Court of Canada's mandated "rational connection" between mandatory retirement and the specific occupational requirements of the job necessary to establish a bona fide occupational requirement;

2. The Tribunal's flawed decision implies that if employers do not wish to comply with the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibitions against age discrimination, they can simply "contract out" of the legislation;

3. The International Civil Aviation Organization ("ICAO") requirements impose no restriction whatsoever on First Officers; they apply only to pilots-in-command (Captains), so those requirements can never impose a bona fide occupational requirement to terminate the employment of First Officers; and

4. The decision will be placed before the Federal Court for judicial review at the earliest possible opportunity.

[Mig29]

Some of you are just fools !!! hahaha

Who says their ever will be ANY pension in 10-20 years at AC??? Or that AC will even be called AC anymore? Just make the money that you can, and get out EARLY with a good/respectable pension and enjoy your well deserved time off. Heck, it the ship sinks at least you had some piece of the cake being retired, then working like a miserable dog in your 68th year, just to find that some 17th DICKWEED CEO of Air Canada, decided that he had enough dealing with all of you and just shut the airline down. And walked away with a huge change in his pocket, while you all got nothing at the end.

I'm happy for recent decision and it gives me hope that there will still be some light in this career for all of us.

Deal with it and accept the facts and adjust your aspirations. Let me rephrase that......accept what you have ALREADY accepted by taking on the job at AC in the first place, whether you got hired in your 20s, 30s or 40s!

IT CALLED LIFE PEOPLE! And it can be a lot more miserable then taking a 100k pension at 60!! (many of you forget that sitting up at 38,000' feeling immortal and bigger then God himself )

[Rockie]

Who says their ever will be ANY pension in 10-20 years at AC???

Exactly.

Knowing that the pension and working conditions are under sustained attack from Air Canada, abetted by the government, I would think people would want to protect themselves with an ability to work longer if necessary. But not Air Canada pilots. Despite knowing they will never get enough years in to earn a full pension under the best of circumstances never mind what the future holds, they hate the current retirees so much they will destroy their own future to get back at them.

It's like taking candy from a baby for Air Canada management.

[MackTheKnife]

they hate the current retirees so much they will destroy their own future to get back at them.

It's like taking candy from a baby for Air Canada management.

Thank you ACPA for another job well done !! I wonder what's in store that you can screw up next.

[Mig29]

Who says their ever will be ANY pension in 10-20 years at AC???

Exactly.

Knowing that the pension and working conditions are under sustained attack from Air Canada, abetted by the government, I would think people would want to protect themselves with an ability to work longer if necessary. But not Air Canada pilots. Despite knowing they will never get enough years in to earn a full pension under the best of circumstances never mind what the future holds, they hate the current retirees so much they will destroy their own future to get back at them.

It's like taking candy from a baby for Air Canada management.

No, see that's the thing Rockie.

You are impeding the advancement (natural and contractual one as previously signed when you accepted the job) of many, many pilots behind you. So in an effect, yes, I can still retire (at the present moment) early or at 60, but I will never get to the point that you are when I finally retire because you are still there plugging along at 67th year. You just created a less satisfying career for me and many others. Where as you, in your mind, are happy to voluntarily work beyond the set age restriction, disrespecting ALL those people behind you and those AHEAD of you who have retired AT ONE TIME so you can have a job one day. Not to go way too deep in all of this, but look at just one simple scenario. By 150-200 pilot (for now) staying longer, the same number of pilots outside of Air Canada may be waiting for 5-10 years LONGER to ever get in there, making them effectively OLDER once they ever get in, and then giving them effectively even LESS time to accrue respectable pension (or seniority) time when THEY can retire on schedule.

And you know what, one of these 200 pilots waiting could have been you, or your son, or a son of your family member (or a daughter of someone, not being prejudice ). But you don't care, right? Because you want a bigger piece of pie NOW than you ORIGINALLY agreed when you got hired????! Did I understand that right?

I say, the only way we can maybe see eye to eye here is that you let one pilot go EARLY (prior to 60) with UNRESTRICTED FULL pension for every AC pilot wanting to work past 60!! One for one, and then maybe I will EVER agree to this nonsense. But you got tell the company that and convince them for me. Instead of wasting our time and money (of your union members) on arbitration and law suites, unnecessary retraining of those guys who are now going home AGAIN etc, etc.

[Rockie]

You are impeding the advancement (natural and contractual one as previously signed when you accepted the job) of many, many pilots behind you.

Actually I'm not. I'm nowhere near retirement myself, and the vast majority of pilots are above me on the seniority list. I just have the ability to figure out cause and effect into the future. There is also no such thing as "natural and contractual" advancement. Nothing in our contract guarantees you advancement. Nobody, including you, signed anything committing you to retire at age 60. Both are a fallacy.

Where as you, in your mind, are happy to voluntarily work beyond the set age restriction, disrespecting ALL those people behind you and those AHEAD of you who have retired AT ONE TIME so you can have a job one day.

The only disrespect is the willingness to discriminate against people because of their age. You don't understand that yet because you're not that age, but you will be, and you are too focused on moving up another rung on the seniority ladder. That's true disrespect.

I say, the only way we can maybe see eye to eye here is that you let one pilot go EARLY (prior to 60) with UNRESTRICTED FULL pension for every AC pilot wanting to work past 60!!

Great idea, but I'm afraid you can't take credit for it. That very thing has been suggested by the FP60 group many times along with plenty of other methods of mitigating whatever negative effects this might have. But your hatred must have deafened you to it. I guess it's only a good idea if you think of it right?

[LeadingEdge]

Actually I'm not. I'm nowhere near retirement myself, and the vast majority of pilots are above me on the seniority list. I just have the ability to figure out cause and effect into the future. There is also no such thing as "natural and contractual" advancement. Nothing in our contract guarantees you advancement. Nobody, including you, signed anything committing you to retire at age 60. Both are a fallacy.

Actually, in law, the contract is everything. It governs your working conditions, benefits, pension and retirement. When you took the job, you tacitly agreed to abide by the contract. You enjoyed the benefits, and in the eyes of the law, you must abide by its limitations. This is the basis labour contracts, and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court many times.

The only disrespect is the willingness to discriminate against people because of their age. You don't understand that yet because you're not that age, but you will be, and you are too focused on moving up another rung on the seniority ladder. That's true disrespect.

As of right now, this is not considered the legal interpretation(See the latest award). It may change, however, in the meantime it is your opinion, thats all.

Great idea, but I'm afraid you can't take credit for it. That very thing has been suggested by the FP60 group many times along with plenty of other methods of mitigating whatever negative effects this might have. But your hatred must have deafened you to it. I guess it's only a good idea if you think of it right?

You are accusing a poster of "hatred" you need to step back and re-examine things, a difference of opinion is not hatred. I recommend that you apologize for that comment.