Air Canada Age 60 Limit To End
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The flying skills of a pilot are only age related based on the individuals all around health MidgetBoy.
When I retired at age seventy I still held and was flying in airshows in Europe and held an unrestricted airdisplay authority under JAR, which incidentally is far more demanding than the Canadian equivalent.
My Icon as a pilot was Bob Hoover who was still flying air show displays well into his eighties, I retired not because of my inability to fly safely but because I wanted to see how the rest of society lived before it was to late.
So you can argue your position as much as you want it still does not negate the fact your opinion does not reflect the facts of the matter....which is age is not a determining factor in a pilots ability to fly.
Unless of course you are an Air Canada employee with the mindset that the law does not apply to you.
When I retired at age seventy I still held and was flying in airshows in Europe and held an unrestricted airdisplay authority under JAR, which incidentally is far more demanding than the Canadian equivalent.
My Icon as a pilot was Bob Hoover who was still flying air show displays well into his eighties, I retired not because of my inability to fly safely but because I wanted to see how the rest of society lived before it was to late.
So you can argue your position as much as you want it still does not negate the fact your opinion does not reflect the facts of the matter....which is age is not a determining factor in a pilots ability to fly.
Unless of course you are an Air Canada employee with the mindset that the law does not apply to you.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck, I think being current has more to do with ones flying skills than age, the classic being the homebuilder who spends five years building and not flying and then bends his/her labour of love on the test flight program, we have seen three of these at our base in the last while. Yesterday we did a circling down to mins at our home base, at 72 years old I was quite at home, have seen others at eighty do just the same. On the other hand I flew with some who were burned out at 55, much as I think that those wishing stay in a large company over 60 need to get a life, the competency arguments are simply not valid.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is Vilven's pension?
What is Kelly's pension?
How much does an EMJ F/O make?
Vilven and Kelly will be paid an amount to fly as EMJ F/O ... they will also receive the pension which they have earned. (I think this is what I read on this forum)
Will the amount Vilven and Kelly get paid to fly as EMJ F/O be less than the pay other EMJ F/O's get?
That would mean ACPA has agreed to a reduced pay level for certain EMJ F/O's.
Is this possible? Has ACPA (for no reason or benefit?) agreed to let the Company pay certain EMJ F/O's less than other EMJ F/O's?.
Can anyone supply these numbers?
What is Kelly's pension?
How much does an EMJ F/O make?
Vilven and Kelly will be paid an amount to fly as EMJ F/O ... they will also receive the pension which they have earned. (I think this is what I read on this forum)
Will the amount Vilven and Kelly get paid to fly as EMJ F/O be less than the pay other EMJ F/O's get?
That would mean ACPA has agreed to a reduced pay level for certain EMJ F/O's.
Is this possible? Has ACPA (for no reason or benefit?) agreed to let the Company pay certain EMJ F/O's less than other EMJ F/O's?.
Can anyone supply these numbers?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I expect Vilven and Kelly will get top 777 FO pay, no matter which aircraft they are trained on, and whether or not they even turn a wheel.
Top 777 FO pay is currently $163.10/hr day and $176.64/hr night.
Top 777 FO pay is currently $163.10/hr day and $176.64/hr night.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I expect Vilven and Kelly will get top 777 FO pay, no matter which aircraft they are trained on, and whether or not they even turn a wheel.
Top 777 FO pay is currently $163.10/hr day and $176.64/hr night.
Top 777 FO pay is currently $163.10/hr day and $176.64/hr night.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kelly would be number 5 on the 2010 seniority list and Vilven would be 750.
I don't know if they will continue to receive their pensions when they come back.
The max pay for an EMJ FO is the 12 year scale which is $86.51, but that is raised to $96 with the higher paid pilot still in Position Group being forced to give up some of their formula pay to subsidize the lower paid pilots.
(don't get me started on Position Group
)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any pilot who decides to stay beyond 60 or come back is still a member of the bargaining unit represented by ACPA. For that reason ACPA had better be very, VERY careful how they treat these individuals. Their current strategy of punitive and discriminatory treatment will land them in DFR complaint territory in the blink of an eye along with more CHRT complaints.
ACPA and Air Canada are directly responsible for the hostile attitude many of our members have towards people in favour of 60+. ACPA chose an outdated, divisive position on a moral human rights issue that was inevitably doomed from the start. Despite obvious societal changes to mandatory retirement in general, the age 60 question for pilots around the globe and an actual ruling against them by the CHRT last august, discriminating against pilots older than 60 is not only still acceptable but official ACPA policy.
ACPA will never be credible in ensuring equal treatment of over 60 pilots.
ACPA and Air Canada are directly responsible for the hostile attitude many of our members have towards people in favour of 60+. ACPA chose an outdated, divisive position on a moral human rights issue that was inevitably doomed from the start. Despite obvious societal changes to mandatory retirement in general, the age 60 question for pilots around the globe and an actual ruling against them by the CHRT last august, discriminating against pilots older than 60 is not only still acceptable but official ACPA policy.
ACPA will never be credible in ensuring equal treatment of over 60 pilots.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an American and retired airline type, I'd like to address some of the comments on age and flying. Age or hours has no real world bearing on competence in my experience. As an ex-chief pilot/check airman and line pilot with experience worldwide with five airlines, I have seen competency demonstrated regardless of age/experience.
In my mind, this entire age argument boils down to individual freedom and desire to work/fly without regard to individual or collective motive. The basic criteria is safety and legality. Since a set age can't determine competency, competency should be determined on an individual basis, which is what we have prior to the required retirement age...hence, the system of training, checkrides and physicals may not presently work pefectly, but it does work. To impose a particular age limit based solely on competence is not logical, because it can be demonstrated the two are not always directly related. An age limit is only part of the competency equation. Experience (professional track record), individual merit and a person's physical profile must also be considered.
For those who say old guys are a pain to fly so they should receive the old guy's pay...I can acknowledge that, but I can also relate my experiences with young guys who are lazy and only look forward to the upcoming destination in order to chase the easy, lovely du jour. They could care less about the means to the pleasurable end, i.e. competence and attitude cuts both ways.
Needy, greedy, passion/love of the game and being tired of the "grind" are all motivating factors in one's individual decision concerning when to end the flying career. Is a younger pilot's need or greed anymore important than an older pilot's? Redistribution of wealth, perhaps?
The younger one's will eventually take the same position many of the older one's have now. Over the years I've heard a few young guys say they don't want to work past 50 or 55...but when the time comes...they very rarely adhere to their earlier stated philosophy...due mostly to need or greed. The wheel isn't going to get reinvented, and neither will the conflicting, agenda driven opinions of pilots on either side of the age aisle.
FWIW, I am 66, still flying a multi-engine turbine aircraft, have an FAA 1st class physical, am the company Check Pilot, take an annual simulator check and an inhouse, 6 month recurrent training/check and I fly my own 185 in bush and mountain environments. I also remain involved in the profession via aviation forums and publications...and yes, I do it for love of the game...and the money ain't bad either.
Press on.
In my mind, this entire age argument boils down to individual freedom and desire to work/fly without regard to individual or collective motive. The basic criteria is safety and legality. Since a set age can't determine competency, competency should be determined on an individual basis, which is what we have prior to the required retirement age...hence, the system of training, checkrides and physicals may not presently work pefectly, but it does work. To impose a particular age limit based solely on competence is not logical, because it can be demonstrated the two are not always directly related. An age limit is only part of the competency equation. Experience (professional track record), individual merit and a person's physical profile must also be considered.
For those who say old guys are a pain to fly so they should receive the old guy's pay...I can acknowledge that, but I can also relate my experiences with young guys who are lazy and only look forward to the upcoming destination in order to chase the easy, lovely du jour. They could care less about the means to the pleasurable end, i.e. competence and attitude cuts both ways.
Needy, greedy, passion/love of the game and being tired of the "grind" are all motivating factors in one's individual decision concerning when to end the flying career. Is a younger pilot's need or greed anymore important than an older pilot's? Redistribution of wealth, perhaps?
The younger one's will eventually take the same position many of the older one's have now. Over the years I've heard a few young guys say they don't want to work past 50 or 55...but when the time comes...they very rarely adhere to their earlier stated philosophy...due mostly to need or greed. The wheel isn't going to get reinvented, and neither will the conflicting, agenda driven opinions of pilots on either side of the age aisle.
FWIW, I am 66, still flying a multi-engine turbine aircraft, have an FAA 1st class physical, am the company Check Pilot, take an annual simulator check and an inhouse, 6 month recurrent training/check and I fly my own 185 in bush and mountain environments. I also remain involved in the profession via aviation forums and publications...and yes, I do it for love of the game...and the money ain't bad either.
Press on.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kelly would be number 5 on the 2010 seniority list and Vilven would be 750.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CANADA
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"the fact that they might be receiving a pension also ... should never enter into the calculations for their flying pay ... it is a separate issue."
Vic 777 lets see your logic, Vilven wants to continue to pay into his pension to increase that pension, Kelly has reached the maximum pension of 35 years. Both can not be Captains...an ICAO thing. Vilven will increase his pension by this agreement...it does not matter to Kelly.
Of course there is this sticky Revenue Canada problem to address as to being able to collect your full pension and work for the same company, see how far one's rights are trampled by them.
Seniority is a whole different kettle of fish...lets see what the CHRC has to say about that.
Vic 777 lets see your logic, Vilven wants to continue to pay into his pension to increase that pension, Kelly has reached the maximum pension of 35 years. Both can not be Captains...an ICAO thing. Vilven will increase his pension by this agreement...it does not matter to Kelly.
Of course there is this sticky Revenue Canada problem to address as to being able to collect your full pension and work for the same company, see how far one's rights are trampled by them.
Seniority is a whole different kettle of fish...lets see what the CHRC has to say about that.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course there is this sticky Revenue Canada problem to address as to being able to collect your full pension and work for the same company, see how far one's rights are trampled by them.
Last edited by Vic777; 25th Jul 2010 at 17:09.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well then Chuck, tell every airline pilot to jump into a job that doesn't put hundreds of people at risk. No one cares if you fly alone, TC sure doesn't.
Do what you love doing, and regardless of whether or not this thread has anything to do with our economy and promotion of newbies, our country forces us to bring it in. We can't just think of it as some rights protest crap.
Do what you love doing, and regardless of whether or not this thread has anything to do with our economy and promotion of newbies, our country forces us to bring it in. We can't just think of it as some rights protest crap.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well then Chuck, tell every airline pilot to jump into a job that doesn't put hundreds of people at risk. No one cares if you fly alone, TC sure doesn't.
Do what you love doing, and regardless of whether or not this thread has anything to do with our economy and promotion of newbies, our country forces us to bring it in. We can't just think of it as some rights protest crap.
Do what you love doing, and regardless of whether or not this thread has anything to do with our economy and promotion of newbies, our country forces us to bring it in. We can't just think of it as some rights protest crap.
Ray767 Just a question so I know why you are so involved in this issue. In the article (Winnipeg Free Press) from your political web site you were quoted that you had not made up your mind on returning to flying.
So just that we all know your motivation, if you lose the federal election will you go back to your legal practice or go back to being a pilot for Air Canada?
So just that we all know your motivation, if you lose the federal election will you go back to your legal practice or go back to being a pilot for Air Canada?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is it a dummy like me with very little formal education beyond high school and no access to legal advice on the matter can see the folly of ACPA actions...and they can't?
It defies any explanation.
It defies any explanation.
Last edited by engfireleft; 26th Jul 2010 at 01:46.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I see it, the ACPA officials who calling the shots, know they haven't a hope in hell of ever winning this battle. All they want to do is postpone the inevitable as long as possible so that they can personally benefit from the upward movement of the current age 60 retirements.
They don't care about the potential financial liabilities because that will be paid by the entire membership. Each and every day they postpone "Flypast 60" is another day closer to their own financial reward of what ever seat they are hoping to get next.
RAY767 as a fan of Question Period and Prime Ministers Questions (U.K.) I had a chuckle on your non-response........
On a serious side I have found the human factors in accident investigation to be fascinating. That being said your involvement in this issue is very curious as you have basically lobbed a fragmentation grenade in a crowded room and stood back to watch the body parts fly around. I thought the seniority battle was a "chuckle" but it pales to this. It appears "fly till you die" will be in place but consider this; the next W.A.W.C.O.N. survey will be dictated and won by the junior pilot not the senior pilot. So what Charter Provision or jurisprudence will you use than to try to rectify that?
I would choose your battles with more care as you just might lose the war. I believe Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said it best after Pearl Harbour "I fear we have woken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible anger".
On a serious side I have found the human factors in accident investigation to be fascinating. That being said your involvement in this issue is very curious as you have basically lobbed a fragmentation grenade in a crowded room and stood back to watch the body parts fly around. I thought the seniority battle was a "chuckle" but it pales to this. It appears "fly till you die" will be in place but consider this; the next W.A.W.C.O.N. survey will be dictated and won by the junior pilot not the senior pilot. So what Charter Provision or jurisprudence will you use than to try to rectify that?
I would choose your battles with more care as you just might lose the war. I believe Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said it best after Pearl Harbour "I fear we have woken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible anger".
Enginefire left, Vic777 and Lost in Saigon
With regards to A.C.P.A. if I remember correctly there was a vote on retirement on age 60 by the member ship and roughly 2/3 supported it and 1/3 did not. By the nature of that vote the M.E.C. went ahead to support this as the memership wanted that direction.
How ever the recent events have appear to have negated the wishes of the majority of the membership.
To suggest that the leadership is "challenged" intellectually would put Ray767 on the same level as he was in senior leadership as well.
Part of the membership dues is for legal help and to use a statement from a management pilot who was very much in his "cups" in FRA he said "we never stand a chance fighting a grievance as A.C.P.A. has more resources at thier disposal than I do".
No union is perfect as I can remember in the C.A.L.P.A. days there was a individual who was voted in for change and each L.E.C. (YUL,YYZ,YWG and YVR) took him into thier well stocked hospitality room at the YYZ Airport Hilton and told him how he would conduct himself. From memory he did the honourable thing and resigned.
That being said the best union would be the Teamsters............
With regards to A.C.P.A. if I remember correctly there was a vote on retirement on age 60 by the member ship and roughly 2/3 supported it and 1/3 did not. By the nature of that vote the M.E.C. went ahead to support this as the memership wanted that direction.
How ever the recent events have appear to have negated the wishes of the majority of the membership.
To suggest that the leadership is "challenged" intellectually would put Ray767 on the same level as he was in senior leadership as well.
Part of the membership dues is for legal help and to use a statement from a management pilot who was very much in his "cups" in FRA he said "we never stand a chance fighting a grievance as A.C.P.A. has more resources at thier disposal than I do".
No union is perfect as I can remember in the C.A.L.P.A. days there was a individual who was voted in for change and each L.E.C. (YUL,YYZ,YWG and YVR) took him into thier well stocked hospitality room at the YYZ Airport Hilton and told him how he would conduct himself. From memory he did the honourable thing and resigned.
That being said the best union would be the Teamsters............
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to A.C.P.A. if I remember correctly there was a vote on retirement on age 60 by the member ship and roughly 2/3 supported it and 1/3 did not. By the nature of that vote the M.E.C. went ahead to support this as the memership wanted that direction.
Do you support the MEC’s position to maintain the
Age 60 retirement provisions?
Age 60 retirement provisions?
FOR YES PRESS (01) FOR NO PRESS (02)
The MEC had already made up their mind and pressed the case to the membership. No examination of the issue or discussion on the potential consequences of their decision. The membership has never been given the information they needed to form an informed opinion on the matter except as provided by those in favour of 60+. And their attempts to inform the membership result in being shouted down or simply having their posts on various forums deleted.
It is also not true that 2/3 of the membership supported the MEC. 3083 members were eligible to vote but only 1840 did. Of those 1382, or roughly 44% of the membership actually voted to support the MEC, and that was without the required information to make an informed choice. Since then 500 or so pilots have been hired who have never been given a chance to vote on anything. So where does this 2/3 number come from?