Huck:
For the sake of simplicity, the premise was stated in relation to the issue before the Tribunal, namely age discrimination in relation to mandatory retirement. I don't need to explain that the law supports putting age restrictions on firefighters, the military, judges etc. or that the Canadian law prohibiting discrimination permits restrictions on minimum ages for licences. We know that.
Both Air Canada and ACPA attempted to bring the pilots' cases within the framework of bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR) before the Tribunal. Both failed. Air Canada will be giving it another shot before the Federal Court in November, trying to persuade the Court that the Tribunal erred on their BFOR argument which was based not on the pilots' competency, but on the ability of the airline to operate its flights given the ICAO restrictions with respect to the Over-Under Rule: they said they can't do it, despite the fact that every other airline in the world that has to do it hasn't complained about it.
So, the premise of my fundamental involvement is that age discrimination is illegal. The sooner we get on with our professional lives, taking into consideration the consequences of that fact and making the necessary adjustments, instead of trying to make the water flow uphill and instead of cursing the dark, the better off we shall all be.
Last edited by Raymond767; 2nd May 2010 at 20:40.