A very good, honest, explanation, From "Understated" on the AVCANADA.CA forum:
This is a good explanation, as to what is happening with the Federal Bill, and the CHRT issues. They are different, in time lines. The end results, SHOULD BE the same. Only time will tell.
Quote:
You don't have to be a lawyer, but it helps to have a road map.
Mandatory retirement, in the federal jurisdiction, historically existed under the statute as an "exemption" to the general prohibition against age discrimination. There are two challenges to that "exemption." The first, through the Tribunal and the courts, is to have the exemption declared "of no force and effect" or "unconstitutional." That determination, when found, is effective upon the date of the Tribunal or the courts' deterimination, and applies to the cases before the court for terminations of employment that have already taken place.
All of the current complainants before the Tribunal meet or will meet this test, when their cases come forward for hearing, so all are potentially able to be reinstated.
The second challenge is to have the exemption repealed. That is what this Bill proposes. It will become law only after passage through Parliament and the Senate, on a date specified as "the date of coming into force." We are at least a year away from the repeal coming into force, so the earliest that it will take effect is in 2012, but it will potentially apply to all 800,000 employees in the federal jurisdiction, including all employees of Air Canada.
The Tribunal and court challenges are retrospective (they apply to the past cases, on a case-by-case basis). Repeal is prospective (it applies to all potential termination of employment after the date that the law comes into force).
End quote.