Mandatory Retirement Repealed!!!

[Johnny Mapleleaf]

Nice update posted on the Fly Past 60 web site today, including a couple of simplified road maps that graphically show the status of the various hearings before the tribunal and the courts.

http://www.flypast60.com/Update.htm

http://www.flypast60.com/Documents/RoadMap1A.pdf

http://www.flypast60.com/Documents/RoadMap2.pdf

Also, the update says that the 70 Thwaites pilots now have their remedy hearing for reinstatement and damages tentatively scheduled to commence June 18th, subject to the final decision on the Charter to be issued by the Federal Court of Appeal.

[777longhaul]

If, you want a BFOR chart, it is on the FlyPast60 home page.

http://www.flypast60.com

http://www.flypast60.com/Documents/Flowchart.pdf

[Norwegianwood]

"Air Canada pilots have launched a constitutional challenge in Ontario court against federal back-to-work legislation passed last week that prevents a strike or lockout at the country's largest carrier.

The union representing pilots said Tuesday that the law forces them to fly and accept a contract imposed by arbitration which contravenes the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

What about the "Rights and Freedoms" of the hundreds of pilots acpa DID NOT represent when they turned 60 over the last 6 years?

Selective representation????????

Rant over!!!!!!!!!

[duranium]

"... which contravenes the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

What about the "Rights and Freedoms" of the hundreds of pilots acpa DID NOT represent when they turned 60 over the last 6 years?

Naw

Not to worry. Only aspects in this lowly world of ours that directly sprinkle more than beatitudes of gratifications are even considered and then, the hight priests of said group must first accept aforementionned gratifications and sift thru them to see if they can be applicable ( ei: grab for only self ) to same personna in the future.

Boy oh boy, that concrete wall is looming larger and larger by the second. As I wrote on an other thread, can't wait for the forthcomming splat.

One interested spectator

[Johnny Mapleleaf]

So, ACPA has filed a Charter challenge? What section? Section 12?

Constitution Act, 1982
Canadian charter of rights and freedoms
12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

Good luck. Mr. Harper is waiting to see you in court.

[Morry Bund]

Probably section 2(d), freedom of association, not section 12, is the section relied upon in the filing.

Even so, I doubt very much that this legal case was filed with any realistic hope of successfully challenging the ad hoc restrictive legislation, as opposed to being filed for other, non-legal reasons. Uphill battle, to persuade the courts that Parliament cannot legally do what it is legally obligated to do, namely, to make law to address specific legislative (political) objectives.

From my limited understanding of the constitution, including the separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, the courts are extremely reluctant to tell Parliament how to do its job, any more than Parliament should tell the court how to do its job.

In addition, as I understand it, apart from ACPA’s success before the various tribunals, including the CHRT and the CIRB, ACPA has experienced only miserable, expensive failures before the courts. In addition to its unsuccessful attempt to overturn the CHRT’s decision on mandatory retirement, it has other more inauspicious failures, including its costly attempt to stop the ACE distribution of wealth that was realized by the CCAA reorganization of Air Canada’s components:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/20 ... ii337.html

which resulted in a severe rebuke of ACPA’s submission and an award of costs (exclusive of lawyer’s fees, of probably about the same amount) of $161,936.00:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/20 ... 20093.html

that was confirmed on appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal in one of the court’s shortest decisions on record:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/20 ... ca531.html

"We agree with the reasons of Cumming J."

[rudder]

Take a look at the lawyer and named firm on the latest ACPA filing. This firm has done very well for itself due to the plethora of legal proceedings initiated on behalf of ACPA, some of questionable merit. Many ACPA MEC's have come and gone yet this firm remains firmly secured to the financial teet of ACPA.

Same lawyers, same advisors, same results.

[777longhaul]

This link is also on this forum. It is very appropriate, to those that constantly ask why this issue is only being brought up now. ( in the last few years)

From the Ottawa Citizen Newspaper Nov. 26 1981.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2 ... 88,4028935