Air Canada Age 60 Limit To End
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: canada
Age: 82
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This latest move between ACPA and AC is like waving a red flag at a bull. I'm sure the CHRC tribunal will be very disturbed with this developement.The ACPA MEC sooner or later are going to have to realize they will never win this one, and while continuing on this futile path, the damages keep mounting. Do the math ACPA 150 pilots who have lost about $100,000 per yer ( would have been wages less pension ) for an average of over 2 years. The total simple damages are well over $30 million and split between ACPA and AC , that's $15 million ACPA is on the hook for , not to mention their legal bill. When is it going to dawn on the regular ACPA chap that his share will be over $5000. Tha's something that the ACPA MEC have never mentioned to the union public.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thing we can come here and "freak out" about this issue with the ACPA forum shut down.
But you have to use your real name there actually with accountability and of course we wouldnt have "Ray"
But you have to use your real name there actually with accountability and of course we wouldnt have "Ray"
Just curious
There seems to be a lot of playing the player and not the ball here. The motivations of a party to a suit are totally immaterial so what the slagging?
Does anyone on here contend that forced retirement due to age is not discrimination?
A collective agreement is not the law. It is a contract that must adhere to the law and laws change. Is the AC collective agreement above the law?
20driver
Does anyone on here contend that forced retirement due to age is not discrimination?
A collective agreement is not the law. It is a contract that must adhere to the law and laws change. Is the AC collective agreement above the law?
20driver
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Forced retirement based on age is age discrimination.
2. Age discrimination in Canada is illegal.
Those two simple facts are indisputable because for years now courts, various levels of government and the CHRT have said so.
The arguments put forth by many of our pilots defending discrimination are a severe embarrassment, as they scream out to the public that we are unable to adapt to changing social attitudes and are incapable of recognizing that laws apply to us. We might as well put "Whites only" labels on our flightbags instead of "Maximum 60". Stop thinking about your poor little old self and open your bloody eyes to what's going on around you....
ACPA's continued actions on this issue leave me completely at a loss to explain. They are on a path of self-destruction that is doing incalculable damage to the pilots they are supposed to represent.
2. Age discrimination in Canada is illegal.
Those two simple facts are indisputable because for years now courts, various levels of government and the CHRT have said so.
The arguments put forth by many of our pilots defending discrimination are a severe embarrassment, as they scream out to the public that we are unable to adapt to changing social attitudes and are incapable of recognizing that laws apply to us. We might as well put "Whites only" labels on our flightbags instead of "Maximum 60". Stop thinking about your poor little old self and open your bloody eyes to what's going on around you....
ACPA's continued actions on this issue leave me completely at a loss to explain. They are on a path of self-destruction that is doing incalculable damage to the pilots they are supposed to represent.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is a severe embarrassment is some of our colleagues trying to make themselves seem like people who are/were discriminated for gender/race/religion...
They are an embarrassment because greed is their motive, not redressing their "perceived" injustice. Just look at the reaction to one of the plaintiffs to him being offered a job with 777 FO equivalent pay, but not actually flying the 777...he feels it's beneath him to fly the EMJ.... wow, that says it all.
How about this...if all the plaintiffs agreed to let the thousands of AC pilots who retired before them, get compensated and offered jobs first...then they might be able to say that they were doing this for altruistic reasons...if they can't do that, then we know that this is all about greed.
They are an embarrassment because greed is their motive, not redressing their "perceived" injustice. Just look at the reaction to one of the plaintiffs to him being offered a job with 777 FO equivalent pay, but not actually flying the 777...he feels it's beneath him to fly the EMJ.... wow, that says it all.
How about this...if all the plaintiffs agreed to let the thousands of AC pilots who retired before them, get compensated and offered jobs first...then they might be able to say that they were doing this for altruistic reasons...if they can't do that, then we know that this is all about greed.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: YUL
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how about
Being a current 777 CA with Air Canada my opinion is to allow all pilots at 60 who want to continue to do so as RPs on 777.
I've benefited my whole career by the retirement at 60 and I don't plan to screw the guys below me .
I've benefited my whole career by the retirement at 60 and I don't plan to screw the guys below me .
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That won't work.
If you want to see what will work, just substitute age 60 with Race, Religion, Sex, etc.
You can't force a guy at 60 to be an RP against his will anymore than you can force a Woman, Black, or Muslim.
You don't get it do you?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I have an great idea for those at Air Canada anyway
Whomever stays beyond 60 states how long they wish to remain for beyond 60 as they approach 60. They sign a contract that specifies whats best for that person for how much longer the wish to stay. They must contribute to the pension however to keep the pension plan in good shape as our current plan is based on pilots retiring at 60.
For every pilot signing a contract to stay beyond 60 another pilot is allowed to retire early without penalty. Ie one pilot wants to go 3 years past 60 another is allowed to go 3 years early no penalty.
If the pilot signing the contract to go past 60 retires prior to the date he wanted to go to in the contract he signed then he pays a penalty (same that one would have paid to retire early).
I'm sure we would find LOTS of guys wanting to go early and the whole thing would be equal thus not affecting the more junior pilots and not costing the company a thing!!!!
Everyone would be happy!!!
Whomever stays beyond 60 states how long they wish to remain for beyond 60 as they approach 60. They sign a contract that specifies whats best for that person for how much longer the wish to stay. They must contribute to the pension however to keep the pension plan in good shape as our current plan is based on pilots retiring at 60.
For every pilot signing a contract to stay beyond 60 another pilot is allowed to retire early without penalty. Ie one pilot wants to go 3 years past 60 another is allowed to go 3 years early no penalty.
If the pilot signing the contract to go past 60 retires prior to the date he wanted to go to in the contract he signed then he pays a penalty (same that one would have paid to retire early).
I'm sure we would find LOTS of guys wanting to go early and the whole thing would be equal thus not affecting the more junior pilots and not costing the company a thing!!!!
Everyone would be happy!!!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: YUL
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes-I got a life
No-you don't get it McDuck. We NEGOTIATED retirement at 60. Just because a few of you guys never got a life outside of playing pilot doesn't mean you can screw everyone else.
Why do I bother .
Why do I bother .
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So if you NEGOTIATED into the contract that Women, Blacks, or Muslims could not be hired, or not hold Captain positions, you would be alright with that?
I see no difference.
I see no difference.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So if you NEGOTIATED into the contract that Women, Blacks, or Muslims could not be hired, or not hold Captain positions, you would be alright with that?
I see no difference.
I see no difference.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: beachfront
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is a population with the best free education so hung up on a #...........if these guys have built the airline over the years let them fly till they say "no more" not based on your pathetic senority list..............always wonder how many of the complainers cross the line when they hit 60
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Canada
Age: 51
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vilven/kelly
Acpa just reported that Vilven and Kelly are not intersted in returning to AC.
"The "interim and without prejudice" agreement reached between ACPA and Air Canada regarding return to work protocols for the two complainants before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) were apparently insufficient to induce either retired pilot to actually return to active status. Press reports indicated that both former pilots considered the EMJ First Officer position unacceptable, despite their stated desire to continue their flying careers and the fact that the protocol ensured that neither pilot would suffer any financial penalty as a result of accepting the positions offered"
Got to love this human rights violation stuff..............(not intended to insult anyone who has actually had their human rights violated here in Canada or abroad.)
Carnie
"The "interim and without prejudice" agreement reached between ACPA and Air Canada regarding return to work protocols for the two complainants before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) were apparently insufficient to induce either retired pilot to actually return to active status. Press reports indicated that both former pilots considered the EMJ First Officer position unacceptable, despite their stated desire to continue their flying careers and the fact that the protocol ensured that neither pilot would suffer any financial penalty as a result of accepting the positions offered"
Got to love this human rights violation stuff..............(not intended to insult anyone who has actually had their human rights violated here in Canada or abroad.)
Carnie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Persistent Myths
Lets lay to rest some "Urban Myths" about Age 60.
Age 60 was not anywhere in the contract or Pension Agreement till the mid 80's.
Anyone who joined before that did not agree to 60; CALPA opposed a fixed retirement age prior to that time.
Age 60 was never negotiated; it was slipped into the Pension Agreement after a Captain won re-instatement after forced retirement. After that individual left, CALPA and AC slipped 60 into the Pension agreement.
Even though the individual in question was not particularly popular, quite a number of other pilots supported his position on principle.
Many of the current complainants opposed Age 60 prior to their retirement. They could not make formal complaints till they were retired.
Some of the history of this issue was on the ACPA website; it was removed some time ago.
This is an issue that should have been "retired" long ago; ACPA has wasted piles of members dues in fighting a lost cause; a cause no reputable union would have fought.
Age 60 was not anywhere in the contract or Pension Agreement till the mid 80's.
Anyone who joined before that did not agree to 60; CALPA opposed a fixed retirement age prior to that time.
Age 60 was never negotiated; it was slipped into the Pension Agreement after a Captain won re-instatement after forced retirement. After that individual left, CALPA and AC slipped 60 into the Pension agreement.
Even though the individual in question was not particularly popular, quite a number of other pilots supported his position on principle.
Many of the current complainants opposed Age 60 prior to their retirement. They could not make formal complaints till they were retired.
Some of the history of this issue was on the ACPA website; it was removed some time ago.
This is an issue that should have been "retired" long ago; ACPA has wasted piles of members dues in fighting a lost cause; a cause no reputable union would have fought.
Last edited by O360A1A; 31st Jul 2010 at 03:12. Reason: editorial
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are an embarrassment because greed is their motive, not redressing their "perceived" injustice. Just look at the reaction to one of the plaintiffs to him being offered a job with 777 FO equivalent pay, but not actually flying the 777...he feels it's beneath him to fly the EMJ.... wow, that says it all.
As and individual it isn't surprising that you let your emotions get the better of your good judgement or reason, but ACPA isn't supposed to let that happen, and as I've stated countless times we will all pay a heavy price for it.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by engfireleft
First of all, as Ray states they haven't said anything at all.
Last year, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled that Air Canada’s contract with the pilots’ union, the Air Canada Pilots Association, was discriminatory. On Friday, former pilot George Vilven received a phone call.
“It was the director of flight operations. They were offering me an entry-level job on the smallest plane, an Embraer, that does regional flights. That’s what new hires start at. I said I wouldn’t do it.”
Vilven was forced to retire at 60 and is now 66. He wants to know why, if he’s fit to fly a smaller plane, he can’t go back to the Boeing 777 (the largest in the fleet at the time) he used to fly between Hong Kong and Vancouver as senior first officer. It appears from the offer Air Canada made, that he would get the same salary as when he retired.
The union, Vilven said, is out to get its older pilots. “The union has decided that they’re going to make it (the work) so distasteful that we wouldn’t want to come back.”
Toronto Star: Air Canada pilots say they still face restrictions
“It was the director of flight operations. They were offering me an entry-level job on the smallest plane, an Embraer, that does regional flights. That’s what new hires start at. I said I wouldn’t do it.”
Vilven was forced to retire at 60 and is now 66. He wants to know why, if he’s fit to fly a smaller plane, he can’t go back to the Boeing 777 (the largest in the fleet at the time) he used to fly between Hong Kong and Vancouver as senior first officer. It appears from the offer Air Canada made, that he would get the same salary as when he retired.
The union, Vilven said, is out to get its older pilots. “The union has decided that they’re going to make it (the work) so distasteful that we wouldn’t want to come back.”
Toronto Star: Air Canada pilots say they still face restrictions