Mandatory Retirement Repeal Passes 2nd Reading in Parliament

[Johnny Mapleleaf]

Individual/worker rights are used as bum wad in executive washrooms and the chances of an undiluted victory of FP60 will rest largely with what deals get cut. None of us will be privey to that information.

My favourite deals that get cut are the deals imposed by Court order. And my most favourite of all is the deal that gets cut by a Contempt of Court order, from failing to abide by the original order. The nice thing about those types of deals is that everyone is privy to that information.

[vic777]

Every poster has a personal interest in the outcome. Your's is evident.

OK, Ah_yeah, put your money where your mouth is. Just what is Rockie's personal interest, and why? It seems like you don't know what you're talking about.

[Ah_yeah]

Whoaaaa...simmer down boys. You guys are pretty quick to pop off on an opinion that may differ slightly from yours. Based on Rockie's posts I made the assumption he is in support of FP60. I guess I'm wrong on that too...No wonder this thread is ruled by a handfull...ciao.

[Rockie]

Whoaaaa...simmer down boys. You guys are pretty quick to pop off on an opinion that may differ slightly from yours. Based on Rockie's posts I made the assumption he is in support of FP60. I guess I'm wrong on that too...No wonder this thread is ruled by a handfull...ciao.

As a matter of fact I am for the quaint reason that forcing someone out of a job they are fully capable of doing for no reason other than reaching an arbitrary age is discriminatory. By the way that's despite the fact I'm nowhere near retirement myself and will be subject to the same stagnation everybody else is. But that's not why I am vocal about it.

Why do you think I'm so adamantly opposed to how the union's handled this?

[bandaid]

I know this is a bit off topic and I opologies now but I have to say that through my working years all my thoughts have been on how soon I can retire, not how long I can hang on.

[Raymond Hall]

I know this is a bit off topic and I opologies now but I have to say that through my working years all my thoughts have been on how soon I can retire, not how long I can hang on.

Not off topic at all. This and other threads have as the central theme mandatory retirement, which is only slightly more narrow than the topic of retirement.

You have good company in your heretofore philosophy. The academic studies show that approximately 85% of employees in the country feel the same way. But those thoughts are strongly divided on occupational choice.

Very, very few loggers, miners, fishermen and service workers desire to stay any longer in their employment than necessary. The average age of retirement in Canada is around 62, not 65, the age at which most can retire with a full pension, without penalty, if they have a pension.

Where you see the other 15% highly concentrated is in the higher professions. Not that that means the work is any better. But in the sense of the years of qualification to get to the top-rated jobs. Lawyers, surgeons, and especially university professors. They tend to retire in the early 70s.

[DrBoeing]

I know this is a bit off topic and I opologies now but I have to say that through my working years all my thoughts have been on how soon I can retire, not how long I can hang on.

There is a large difference between when you WANT to retire as opposed to FORCED to retire!

[bandaid]

I know this is a bit off topic and I opologies now but I have to say that through my working years all my thoughts have been on how soon I can retire, not how long I can hang on.

There is a large difference between when you WANT to retire as opposed to FORCED to retire!

I understand that. just saying. My job is a very physical one. I have done calls with, let's say, 55+ partners where the physical demands have been tough, some can handle it, most struggle. In my job once you reach 55 with 35 years in and your time and your age adds up to 80 your pension is not going to get any better. Why would you hang on with such a demanding job knowing that? There now I have strayed from the topic a bit, sorry.

[klacker]

Does anybody know of a rumor that Air Canada is not going to force any retirements as of February 15, 2012???

[vic777]

In my job once you reach 55 with 35 years in and your time and your age adds up to 80 your pension is not going to get any better. Why would you hang on with such a demanding job knowing that?

Well, obviously everyone's situation is different, and since you're focussing on the money, you do realize that the job pays more than the pension. For this reason some must keep working. Others want to keep working for other reasons. Also those that continue may not feel the demands the same as others.

[Norwegianwood]

So...... did the Senate seal the deal this evening?

Can't find it on .gv.ca

[bandaid]

In my job once you reach 55 with 35 years in and your time and your age adds up to 80 your pension is not going to get any better. Why would you hang on with such a demanding job knowing that?

Well, obviously everyone's situation is different, and since you're focussing on the money, you do realize that the job pays more than the pension. For this reason some must keep working. Others want to keep working for other reasons. Also those that continue may not feel the demands the same as others.

Understood. I am not with AC and I am probably speaking out of my a$$. I have been forced to retire due to injury. Many of our boys/gals work past the max as well due to circumstances. I'm just saying even if I weren't injured I would have retired to that job at Walmart or the friendly old guy at Wendy's passing out the mints. There is more to my life than money.

[Lost in Saigon]

There is more to my life than money.

Did you ever stop to consider that a pilot's desire to work past 60 may have nothing to do with money?

[Morry Bund]

Does anybody know of a rumor that Air Canada is not going to force any retirements as of February 15, 2012???

Not true, based on the most recent info: http://www.flypast60.com/Update.htm

35 Pounds of documents? That's a lot of trees. Air Canada is obviously not giving up the fight.

Correction to Post: The Senate debate adjourned late Monday evening. Bill C-13 will finish third reading Tuesday December 13th.

[777longhaul]

DEC 12 2011

C-13 passes 3rd reading. This is from the Senate.

Update

Monday, December 12th, 2011

16.3 Kg. That is the weight of the box of documents that we received from counsel for Air Canada this morning, in support of its judicial review application before the Federal Court in respect of the BFOR issue. That is not a surprise, despite the weight.

Tonight Bill C-13 received Third Reading in the Senate. It now awaits Royal Assent, which should be given tomorrow. The implication of the Royal Assent is that effective one year from tomorrow, December 13, 2011, the repeal of the mandatory retirement exemption to the general prohibition against discrimination on the basis of age in the Canadian Human Rights Act will come into effect in the federal jurisdiction, affecting the career choices of over 800,000 people nationwide.

The upshot of this for Air Canada and all for all other federally regulated employers is that effective December 13, 2012 they will no longer be able to terminate the employment of any person on the basis of an arbitrary age of the employer's and/or the union's choosing.We take some small degree of satisfacton in respect of this change, not because we had anything to do with its genesis. We did not. But because we openly predicted the change.

The original Bill to abolish mandatory retirement in the federal sector was introduced in Parliament in 1992 (it died on the Order Paper when an election was called). Several additional legislative attempts were made over the course of the last 19 years to bring today's legislation into effect. They all suffered the same procedural fate. Great ideas, but they all suffered from issues of implementation.

That is all behind us today. Our limited satisfaction, and it is small, is that we went on record in 2006 telling anyone and everyone who would listen that what happened today was coming. We saw that. Others did not. We saw the implications. Others did not. Many are still in denial.

Air Canada, for example, by dropping that 35 pound box of documents on our doorstep today, is saying that it still cannot accept the will of Parliament. It is saying that it must attempt in whatever way possible to continue to exempt itself from reality, instead of accommodating the change and moving forward as its competitors have done.

It insists not on accommodating change, despite that fact that every other international airline in the world since 2006 has accepted and accommodated that change by adapting their operations, but on denying and fighting the change. So be it.

Change we will. 35 pounds of documents will not have have much impact on the winds of change, no matter how much this airline refuses to adapt to the realities of the 21st Century.

[Al707]

"every other international airline in the world since 2006 has accepted and accommodated that change by adapting their operations"

Not true.....

[Rockie]

"every other international airline in the world since 2006 has accepted and accommodated that change by adapting their operations"

Not true.....

Does it matter?

Air Canada will have to and we are behind about six years, an undisclosed amount of legal fees and potentially millions of dollars in liability. Not to mention the chaos that will result from reinstating people to the seniority list and the deep division driven into the pilot ranks.

So, what was it we gained by fighting this again.....?

[rudder]

Given the change in legislation, is it legal for ACPA/AC to not include modifications to current retirement practices post December 2012 in this round of collective bargaining? Would doing so trigger an automatic DFR or alternatively could AC be accused of bad faith bargaining given that it is required by law to abide by all Federal employment and human rights statutes?

AC is certainly not alone in this as all airline employers in Canada are now similarly affected. However, it is AC that is currently in bargaining. God help us all if it is AC/ACPA that are going to continue to be the standard bearers for the BFOR argument as it applies to airline pilots.

[Old fella]

There is more to my life than money.

Did you ever stop to consider that a pilot's desire to work past 60 may have nothing to do with money?

L in S

That is certainly true for any place of employment, not only Air Canada. Although not an airline pilot(never was), I am 60+ so I can speak with some authority on this matter(retirement) and as well suggest that all of my many current 60+ acquaintances(airline pilots as well) certainly think along the lines as I do. We – in the course of our lifetimes have been subject to: acquisitions/leveraged/buy outs/lay off/terminated/dismissed/dismissed for cause/do more with less/make less for more/new way of doing things/latest management style/re-organization/total quality management/modernization/renewell/new generation/latest technology……… I think you get the hint. There comes a time when enough is enough, seen/heard it all and by 60 yrs old, that time is usually here. There is a very small percentage and I mean small who want to continue working if they can see their way clear not to – that is our nature as old people,and that will never change.
That small percentage are well within their rights to continue in the workforce as I see it and that go for Air Canada as well. If your life is your job, well isn’t much myself and old cronies can really comment on, can we.

[Lost in Saigon]

Most pilots reaching age 60 today started their careers in their early 20's and have seen their working conditions constantly degraded over the years. After working for 35-40 years, I can appreciate why they have had enough.

Those of us who were hired in their 30's, and even early 40's, have worked all our lives to get to Air Canada. I can't imagine having to quit the job I love after 20 short years.

[FADEC]

"The Vote was split along Party Lines".

Before the Naysayers jump all over this; remember that this particular item was a tiny part of a very large Bill, other parts of which were contentious. The issue of Mandatory Retirement in The Federal Sector came up as a stand-alone Bill prior to the Election; as such, The Bill To Eliminate Mandatory Retirement in The Federal Sector received Unanimous Consent; ALL parties agreed with it.

The issue now is to finally deal with reality; ACPA, Air Canada, and the Pilots have to move on.

[Old fella]

Most pilots reaching age 60 today started their careers in their early 20's and have seen their working conditions constantly degraded over the years. After working for 35-40 years, I can appreciate why they have had enough.

Those of us who were hired in their 30's, and even early 40's, have worked all our lives to get to Air Canada. I can't imagine having to quit the job I love after 20 short years.

Old age changes your way of thinking. In 20 yrs time, you will have faced plenty of working issues, believe me and you will tire of seeing/hearing it all. Only the really die hards see it different and that is fair enough as well, and if that is your lot in life good for you and enjoy.

. For the record, I have difficulty understanding why a 40 yr old(or even a 30 yr old) who joined AC at that age can't continue beyond his/her mandatory age of 60 yrs old in order to get their max pension or age 65 whichever comes first, if they choose to do that. However I do stand by my commentary in that the vast majority(no matter where they work) will get out if they can see themselves clear and able to do so financially by 60 yrs of age. Folks like me who did just that, have no regrets, that I can attest to.

By your leave, over and out and I have said enough on this topic.

Best
OF

[Rockie]

However I do stand by my commentary in that the vast majority(no matter where they work) will get out if they can see themselves clear and able to do so financially by 60 yrs of age.

I think you're absolutely right Old fella. But according to the doomsayers at ACPA everybody will stay until they die because the ridiculous financial impact study they whipped the pilots up with is based on it. The reality will make a lot of people look stupid given the career destruction that was predicted.

[Stu Pidasso]

The massive perversity of this is; after all of Ray Halls work, funded by the Flypast 60 guys, the winners (if you consider them that) will be the Pilots still here wanting to stay past 60.

No one is coming back!

The upside has been that ACPA has successfully dragged this out and with the passing time we have seen hundreds of retirements. The vast majority of which, have retired happily.

ACPA and the Company will pick a time and roll over together on the issue.

...and the beat goes on.

[duranium]

The issue now is to finally deal with reality; ACPA, Air Canada, and the Pilots have to move on.

If I was a betting man and had to establish odds between the aforementionned and the chances of an icecube in Hell, I would put the odds at 50/50