Air Canada Age 60 Limit To End
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sidney, BC, Canada
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intelligent discussion
Nah, simply stop visiting you posturing ninny.
Rpob
Rpob
Age 60+ is an emotional issue. So was the Magna Carta. If the issue was not important, it would not generate such emotion. The 1215 charter committed the King not to punish a freeman unless under the rule of law. Don't imagine King John was too pleased with THAT! He likely would have loved to censor the rabble who was forcing his hand to sign the document. It was, understandably, disrupting his court and Monarchy. It would have been so much easier for him to maintain the status quo.
Changes in the retirement age, motivated by the evolution of societies perceptions, are causing similar disruptions. It would be so much easier to maintain the status quo. Therefore, silence the rabble as they are making things so difficult! Well done PPrune! King John would be PROUD!
Last edited by Flytdeck; 13th Aug 2010 at 22:28. Reason: Additional thoughts
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent analogy.
Yes, the Magna Carta and Air Canada's age 60 retirement debate share so much in common.
I've been follow said debate over on the other site, and it seems to me a rather substantial section of you are confused as to what you're being told. Looks like some mature communication skills would go a long way to helping continue said debate.
Jim
I lifted this:
Yes, the Magna Carta and Air Canada's age 60 retirement debate share so much in common.
I've been follow said debate over on the other site, and it seems to me a rather substantial section of you are confused as to what you're being told. Looks like some mature communication skills would go a long way to helping continue said debate.
Jim
I lifted this:
- It is NOT a taboo subject - yet. Joe is very close to giving the whole topic a 6 month holiday.
- If the subject can be discussed without contravention of the site rules, then it will stay. The CHRT Remedy Ruling thread will stay, but some of the latest posts have been removed as they are not on topic.
- Any personal attacks, slander, naming of names, or vicious posts will be removed, the users warned accordingly, and they will be given a small vacation.
- It is not WHAT is being discussed, or who is discussing it as some of you would like to believe, nor is it political censorship, it is simply how it is being discussed that is the issue for Joe and the Moderators.
- If the subject can be discussed without contravention of the site rules, then it will stay. The CHRT Remedy Ruling thread will stay, but some of the latest posts have been removed as they are not on topic.
- Any personal attacks, slander, naming of names, or vicious posts will be removed, the users warned accordingly, and they will be given a small vacation.
- It is not WHAT is being discussed, or who is discussing it as some of you would like to believe, nor is it political censorship, it is simply how it is being discussed that is the issue for Joe and the Moderators.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CANADA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Raymond is a lawyer who represents and has given legal advise to many pilots who are feeling discriminated. Mr. Hall is the legal representative at the CHRC for many of those pilots.
Has any one heard of or seen an active lawyer participating on a forum public, private of otherwise while a case is active? I would think not. And it would appear that "mining these sites" is all that is really being done to support Ray's legal case at the CHRC.
Has any one heard of or seen an active lawyer participating on a forum public, private of otherwise while a case is active? I would think not. And it would appear that "mining these sites" is all that is really being done to support Ray's legal case at the CHRC.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Barrie
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Raymond is a lawyer who represents and has given legal advise to many pilots who are feeling discriminated. Mr. Hall is the legal representative at the CHRC for many of those pilots.
Has any one heard of or seen an active lawyer participating on a forum public, private of otherwise while a case is active? I would think not. And it would appear that "mining these sites" is all that is really being done to support Ray's legal case at the CHRC.
Has any one heard of or seen an active lawyer participating on a forum public, private of otherwise while a case is active? I would think not. And it would appear that "mining these sites" is all that is really being done to support Ray's legal case at the CHRC.
As a gentleman who has been heavily involved in ACPA matters from an executive standpoint his wealth of information on any of these topics is second to none. He answers everybody's questions in a straighforward factual manner and really welcomes anybody who wants information on these topics and is tireless in his contributions. If there's anything that needs more information he always qualifies that. If somebody else's argument is better he always accepts that. He's the real deal, the debater's debater.
There are a lot of hot button topics and they always attract an element of ranting and raving from some individuals whose only means of communication is to really get in there and first of all try to rip a great big strip off the messenger with threats, innuendo, etc., etc. Sometimes the personal attacks get downright banal.
That's why it has become evident that these forums are not really up to the par that you would expect when information of that depth is being offered because there are so many listeners who just simply do not understand any of it, period. And what you can't figure out, well in redneck country, you just shoot it through the head and drive away.
That's why you can't put a big pile of Type A personality pilots in the same room with a guy who has a lot of really complicated legal knowledge. The guys just don't understand any of it so it's like just get the hell out of the way, thanks. Most of them could get in a argument if they were all alone. Pilots are like that. That's why the divorce rate is about 700 times the national average. They just like a good old scrap.
If Raymond is not here the information that's being discussed on the 'hot' topic is generally just wrong, incomplete, or just misleading. There are a lot of guys who want the real correct info. Of all things the guy with the most correct information on it is not here and that's everybody's loss. But the rumor is there will shortly be another forum where anybody can go to get the facts straight as an arrow. This present forum is fun but as the moderators will attest it just gets too randy on these hot topics and it's too much work herding pilots.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This present forum is fun but as the moderators will attest it just gets too randy on these hot topics and it's too much work herding pilots.
Question:
If you lock a pilot in a room with two steel balls in the evening, what will you find come morning?
Answer:
He has lost one and broken the other.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CANADA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will disagree with you in the mining comment. The legal record stands and many posts were submitted as evidence at the CHRT, whether I agree with the posts or their specific tone is another matter.
I still believe that a lawyer in an active legal case, representing clients, should not be on public or private forums, offering opinions and answering questions from his perspective. Whether he was/is a pilot, former MEC Chairman is not relevant. At this time he is an officer of the court acting in that position. Ray should be wise enough to stay well away from forums.
I still believe that a lawyer in an active legal case, representing clients, should not be on public or private forums, offering opinions and answering questions from his perspective. Whether he was/is a pilot, former MEC Chairman is not relevant. At this time he is an officer of the court acting in that position. Ray should be wise enough to stay well away from forums.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Milky Way
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That notion has always puzzled me as well Gasbag. Most lawyers have always used the "no comment" line when legal matters are still pending. This, IMO, is why ACPA is unable to spout about the case. The nay-sayers will assert that ACPA wants to keep its' members in the dark because of the impending drubbing. One things for sure, the forums only provide the FP60 side of things.
Know this : Our opinions don't matter a lick.
Know this : Our opinions don't matter a lick.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Itsaliving66, What you say is true, but if one is running for elected office, then public exposure is the way to go, this may be the reason Ray has gone this route, only he can answer this. {He is by the way running for election to "Fort Fumble" in Ottawa.} Maybe a bit of CRM can raise the level of debate in the house, it sure could use it!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: YVR
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The age 60 IVR vote that was used in the current news release by acpa.
The vote was taken in 2006. Not 2010. The rules, were different then.
For those of you, who like to see that 80% of the pilots supported the mandatory retirement of 60. Do the math, less than 50% of the ac pilots supported the age 60 issue.
IVR # 72
May 8 2006
Certified, Audited results:
3083 eligible voters
1840 voted
1382 yes
0458 no
so only 1382 of 3082 voted yes. LESS than 1/2 the members voted to fight this. acpa is not, representing its members.
A new poll, which acpa would never do, would show even less yes votes.
The world has changed, and so should acpa,ac, and the individuals who only see the world in the rearview mirror.
The issue of greed, well it is common to all of us. So, the constant flogging of the FP60 group is just plain greedy, is no more, or no less, than the greed of the middle and junior pilots, they want the seniors out of the way, so they can get more money, its greed on their part, no more no less than the FP60.
The vote was taken in 2006. Not 2010. The rules, were different then.
For those of you, who like to see that 80% of the pilots supported the mandatory retirement of 60. Do the math, less than 50% of the ac pilots supported the age 60 issue.
IVR # 72
May 8 2006
Certified, Audited results:
3083 eligible voters
1840 voted
1382 yes
0458 no
so only 1382 of 3082 voted yes. LESS than 1/2 the members voted to fight this. acpa is not, representing its members.
A new poll, which acpa would never do, would show even less yes votes.
The world has changed, and so should acpa,ac, and the individuals who only see the world in the rearview mirror.
The issue of greed, well it is common to all of us. So, the constant flogging of the FP60 group is just plain greedy, is no more, or no less, than the greed of the middle and junior pilots, they want the seniors out of the way, so they can get more money, its greed on their part, no more no less than the FP60.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Quebec, Canada
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that ACPA is representing the members who care to vote and express their opinion. The 50% or so (more or less) that did not vote are not interested in what is actually happening at ACPA and they should not be crying if a course of action they dislike is taken.
After 15 years at AC I retired at 60. And I am very happy about it because the work does not interfere with my life anymore... I am enjoying retirement.
Personally, I do not understand someone who got a full pension and still wants to work...those guys have a real big personnal problem more likely problems. Everybody that I know around me, just wishes to be retired and not work anymore and they are not pilots.
May be a psy could provide some explanation...
After 15 years at AC I retired at 60. And I am very happy about it because the work does not interfere with my life anymore... I am enjoying retirement.
Personally, I do not understand someone who got a full pension and still wants to work...those guys have a real big personnal problem more likely problems. Everybody that I know around me, just wishes to be retired and not work anymore and they are not pilots.
May be a psy could provide some explanation...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re greed: Don't call the juniors greedy, please, you are not fooling anyone. We only want what you already had. The same. There is only one group that wants MORE, that is the 60+ group, that is greedy.
Again, expecting the same progression, status quo, not greedy.
Having advanced due to retirements and wanting to stay at the top, greedy, real simple.
Stop spreading distortions on the subject, it is straight forward, the courts will decide. Your propaganda machine is well oiled, I give you that.
Joseph Keisinger
Again, expecting the same progression, status quo, not greedy.
Having advanced due to retirements and wanting to stay at the top, greedy, real simple.
Stop spreading distortions on the subject, it is straight forward, the courts will decide. Your propaganda machine is well oiled, I give you that.
Joseph Keisinger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
777longhaul, you have either been off the property for a while, OR you are one of the many that could not be bothered with the latetest WACON survey. I suspect the latter, in which case, thanks for taking the time to help out ACPA and therefore us all, not!
The press release numbers would be based on the recent survey held this year, very proportionate and therefore representative results.
Joseph Keisinger
The press release numbers would be based on the recent survey held this year, very proportionate and therefore representative results.
Joseph Keisinger
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Again, expecting the same progression, status quo, not greedy"
Then I suggest you give up that First Officer job you were hired directly into and go back and spend 6 - 12 years as a Second Officer. Then and only then might you understand what progression is all about.
MTK
Then I suggest you give up that First Officer job you were hired directly into and go back and spend 6 - 12 years as a Second Officer. Then and only then might you understand what progression is all about.
MTK
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: canada
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Joseph Keisinger,
I congratulated you for letting us know who you are. So maybe Joseph, you can tell us why you deserve to be an Air Canada pilot. The reason i ask such a question is because you were hired when you were over the age of thirty.
Maybe you are unaware of the history of this great airline ???? Six Transport Canada pilots had to appear before a Human Rights Tribunal to raise the hiring age. It was Air Canada's position that once you were over the age of 27 they would not hire you. They also would not hire you if you were female, wore glasses, shorter than 5'7", to name but a few. There was some exceptions but for the vast majority their career at AC was not to be. To state the obvious, you most likely wouldn't be here.
I was one of the lucky one...I was hired over the age of thirty...as was everyone in our course and to this day I am eternally thankful. Since you don't know me...but maybe you do............many things i am but one of those is not greedy.
Maybe you could tell us why you were the exception because hundreds of us here are grateful that we were given this opportunity by men and women that we do not know.
Respectfully submitted.
I congratulated you for letting us know who you are. So maybe Joseph, you can tell us why you deserve to be an Air Canada pilot. The reason i ask such a question is because you were hired when you were over the age of thirty.
Maybe you are unaware of the history of this great airline ???? Six Transport Canada pilots had to appear before a Human Rights Tribunal to raise the hiring age. It was Air Canada's position that once you were over the age of 27 they would not hire you. They also would not hire you if you were female, wore glasses, shorter than 5'7", to name but a few. There was some exceptions but for the vast majority their career at AC was not to be. To state the obvious, you most likely wouldn't be here.
I was one of the lucky one...I was hired over the age of thirty...as was everyone in our course and to this day I am eternally thankful. Since you don't know me...but maybe you do............many things i am but one of those is not greedy.
Maybe you could tell us why you were the exception because hundreds of us here are grateful that we were given this opportunity by men and women that we do not know.
Respectfully submitted.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MTK, with respect, but getting hired at age 20, being given a multi engine rating by Air Canada, and then sitting sideways seeing the world while building pension time and enjoying benefits is NOT a hardship. It was winning the lottery. Not to mention the purchasing power of that salary at the time. Or living in "the south".
Speaking strictly for myself here, but my story is more the norm and not the exception for pilots of my vintage/seniority. While you (your vintage/currently close to 60 pilots) enjoyed layovers I had 14 different employers (some shorter contracts) building my time to make myself marketable. Always new SOPs, different types, moving, different licences and validations, exams etc etc. Not whining here, I loved it.
By the time I got to the "direct entry FO" on the DC9 in 2000, I had 50 seat command time, tons of 12500+ turbinePIC, taken off and landed on eskers, roads, rough seas, ice, on the bare tundra, in and out of the fjords of Norway, moved god knows how many times, ALWAYS with the hope and goal in mind of that job at the major. And compared to the guys in my 550 class, I was low time. We had heavy jet command guys, highly experienced military pilots; We all paid our dues my friend. Just not in a cushy way/seat.
Finally here, my group has seen a lot of stagnation already, loss of purchasing power approaching 50% of what my seat paid a decade ago, and now you guys are coming for us too. Fair enough, but please spare us the " you didn't sit sideways". That is pathetic.
BTW, many of us were RP's/SO's too.
rant over, flame away or pm me with your real name if you want to chat.
Joseph
Speaking strictly for myself here, but my story is more the norm and not the exception for pilots of my vintage/seniority. While you (your vintage/currently close to 60 pilots) enjoyed layovers I had 14 different employers (some shorter contracts) building my time to make myself marketable. Always new SOPs, different types, moving, different licences and validations, exams etc etc. Not whining here, I loved it.
By the time I got to the "direct entry FO" on the DC9 in 2000, I had 50 seat command time, tons of 12500+ turbinePIC, taken off and landed on eskers, roads, rough seas, ice, on the bare tundra, in and out of the fjords of Norway, moved god knows how many times, ALWAYS with the hope and goal in mind of that job at the major. And compared to the guys in my 550 class, I was low time. We had heavy jet command guys, highly experienced military pilots; We all paid our dues my friend. Just not in a cushy way/seat.
Finally here, my group has seen a lot of stagnation already, loss of purchasing power approaching 50% of what my seat paid a decade ago, and now you guys are coming for us too. Fair enough, but please spare us the " you didn't sit sideways". That is pathetic.
BTW, many of us were RP's/SO's too.
rant over, flame away or pm me with your real name if you want to chat.
Joseph
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: canada
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joseph,
The Canadian Human Rights Act (1977), the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, the Parliament of Canada,and individuals standing up for your rights helped you and I [to name but a few] fly for Air Canada....................Are you telling us that these institutions and these men and women played no part in your being hired ??
"I say again", Air Canada did not hire pilots over the age of 27. You were very close to being 31.
Would appreciate your views....Please share your wisdom with us.
Respectfully submitted.
R.
The Canadian Human Rights Act (1977), the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, the Parliament of Canada,and individuals standing up for your rights helped you and I [to name but a few] fly for Air Canada....................Are you telling us that these institutions and these men and women played no part in your being hired ??
"I say again", Air Canada did not hire pilots over the age of 27. You were very close to being 31.
Would appreciate your views....Please share your wisdom with us.
Respectfully submitted.
R.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"MTK, with respect, but getting hired at age 20, being given a multi engine rating by Air Canada, and then sitting sideways seeing the world while building pension time and enjoying benefits is NOT a hardship. It was winning the lottery.
Your absolutely right about one thing. When I got hired I felt I had won the lottery. After 8 yrs in general aviation, being hired in my late 20's, FULLY QUALIFIED, spending 11 years as a Second Officer watching someone else do the job I wanted to do, then 9 as a First Officer, I finally got promoted when I was 48. No you didn't read that wrong. TWENTY years with the company to make left seat. Admittedly if I had bid to the bottom and moved to YWG I could have had it about 6 yrs sooner.
I actually got to spend 2 1/2 yrs in my dream job as a wide body Captain, until some outdated arbitrary line in a pension document said I could no longer enjoy what I had worked my entire life to attain.
"loss of purchasing power approaching 50% of what my seat paid a decade ago"
For some reason you think this only applies to your generation. Every one on the property has paid dearly the last 10 years for which you have a succession of gutless MEC members
and everyone who voted YES to blame for it.
Yes, I know, you voted NO, like every one else I talked to.
My "rant" is also over.
Your absolutely right about one thing. When I got hired I felt I had won the lottery. After 8 yrs in general aviation, being hired in my late 20's, FULLY QUALIFIED, spending 11 years as a Second Officer watching someone else do the job I wanted to do, then 9 as a First Officer, I finally got promoted when I was 48. No you didn't read that wrong. TWENTY years with the company to make left seat. Admittedly if I had bid to the bottom and moved to YWG I could have had it about 6 yrs sooner.
I actually got to spend 2 1/2 yrs in my dream job as a wide body Captain, until some outdated arbitrary line in a pension document said I could no longer enjoy what I had worked my entire life to attain.
"loss of purchasing power approaching 50% of what my seat paid a decade ago"
For some reason you think this only applies to your generation. Every one on the property has paid dearly the last 10 years for which you have a succession of gutless MEC members
and everyone who voted YES to blame for it.Yes, I know, you voted NO, like every one else I talked to.
My "rant" is also over.
Last edited by MackTheKnife; 21st Aug 2010 at 20:06.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking strictly for myself here, but my story is more the norm and not the exception for pilots of my vintage/seniority. While you (your vintage/currently close to 60 pilots) enjoyed layovers I had 14 different employers (some shorter contracts) building my time to make myself marketable. Always new SOPs, different types, moving, different licences and validations, exams etc etc. Not whining here, I loved it.
By the time I got to the "direct entry FO" on the DC9 in 2000, I had 50 seat command time, tons of 12500+ turbinePIC, taken off and landed on eskers, roads, rough seas, ice, on the bare tundra, in and out of the fjords of Norway, moved god knows how many times, ALWAYS with the hope and goal in mind of that job at the major. And compared to the guys in my 550 class, I was low time. We had heavy jet command guys, highly experienced military pilots; We all paid our dues my friend. Just not in a cushy way/seat.
Finally here, my group has seen a lot of stagnation already, loss of purchasing power approaching 50% of what my seat paid a decade ago, and now you guys are coming for us too. Fair enough, but please spare us the " you didn't sit sideways". That is pathetic.
BTW, many of us were RP's/SO's too.
By the time I got to the "direct entry FO" on the DC9 in 2000, I had 50 seat command time, tons of 12500+ turbinePIC, taken off and landed on eskers, roads, rough seas, ice, on the bare tundra, in and out of the fjords of Norway, moved god knows how many times, ALWAYS with the hope and goal in mind of that job at the major. And compared to the guys in my 550 class, I was low time. We had heavy jet command guys, highly experienced military pilots; We all paid our dues my friend. Just not in a cushy way/seat.
Finally here, my group has seen a lot of stagnation already, loss of purchasing power approaching 50% of what my seat paid a decade ago, and now you guys are coming for us too. Fair enough, but please spare us the " you didn't sit sideways". That is pathetic.
BTW, many of us were RP's/SO's too.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everybody has the worst "poor me and my pathetic life so far, further ruined forever by your disgusting greed" story, but here are the facts:
1. Mandatory age based retirement is over in this country, and that includes Air Canada.
2. Air Canada and ACPA can continue to bash their face against the wall but they will find it increasingly costly to do so, because they are not going to turn this tide around. If they haven't figured that out yet there is no hope whatsoever for this pilot group.
3. You can blame whoever you like for as long as you like, but it will not change fact number 1.
4. When the majority of those fighting this reach that magic age of 60 they may retire or they may not. But they will be grateful that someone endured the massive **** and abuse thrown at them by way of thanks for forcing Air Canada into the 21st century and obeying the law.
1. Mandatory age based retirement is over in this country, and that includes Air Canada.
2. Air Canada and ACPA can continue to bash their face against the wall but they will find it increasingly costly to do so, because they are not going to turn this tide around. If they haven't figured that out yet there is no hope whatsoever for this pilot group.
3. You can blame whoever you like for as long as you like, but it will not change fact number 1.
4. When the majority of those fighting this reach that magic age of 60 they may retire or they may not. But they will be grateful that someone endured the massive **** and abuse thrown at them by way of thanks for forcing Air Canada into the 21st century and obeying the law.