MEA CULPA

Thank you for getting the number out as I had forgotten.

If there is a blame here it lies at the npn participation of the membership aka "you get the government you desrve".

By the way have you ever done any union work?

RAY767 no this is not personal all I wanted to know is the motivating force?

That being said it is a legacy that I do not envy and when it is over there can be a proper history of the events

already ordered on line from the library thanks

Yes I have. And it was done in fairness to the entire membership with their best interests always the number 1 priority. They didn't always like what I had to say or the position I took on various items, but it was always correct. That is why I cannot rationalize what our union is doing here.

A330PilotCanada you seem to miss the obvious ... or you just like to argue for arguments sake ...

I don't know Ray ... but I know he obtained a Law degree while flying for Air Canada.

He obviously saw a great injustice right in his own backyard.

What a great opportunity to put his Lawyer Expertise to good work.

It seems like a totally obvious natural chain of events.

Now forget Ray ... the issue now is ... how can the Air Canada Pilots benefit from the huge windfall gains Air Canada is going to reap from these new rules.

If you have any ideas pass them on to the ACPA movers and shakers.

Went for a bath last night, and good grief, Ive finally run out of those little hotel bars of soap gathered over the years during my time at AC, I gues I will have to get my name on the list to go back and stock up again! Being "hair challenged" the shampoo seems to OK for a while.OK Ray, put me down for another ten years, that should do it.

Yes there are others who have had law degrees such as our last President who as a second officer was bored went to law school and gaduated magna cum laude and was asked to article for a very prestigious law firm in YYZ. That being said he worked on issues from within and attempted to build consensus amongst some very challenging issues of the day.

As far as giving guidance to the "movers and shakers" at A.C.P.A. the constitution does not allow retired members to vote and they have no standing so that makes my input rather academic.

So rather standing from afar why do not get involved yourself? Based on the last L.E.C. votes for councillor anyone who put thier hand up was acclaimed by "lack of interest" by those who were so disengaged they could not take the five minutes to sign on to the A.C.P.A.web site and VOTE!!!!

Oh yes I did participate a little myself with some I.A.C. work, some work on seniority issues that had me going some days to 03:00 but that pales to the work that the M.E.C. and L.E.C. do on your behalf.

Ray, did you not try to introduce postings from the ACPA site as evidence in court?

Written like a true lawyer... Of course why would we expect anything different? :ugh:
If the answer was no, you would just say so. If you are denying the accusation in court what damage could denying it on a public forum do?

RAY767 that is the first I have heard of that taking posted comments off of a web site to be used in court? I guess that confirms the "expectation of privacy" does not exist in restricted access forums... Or is this considered a public venue even if it requires a pass word to access it?

Also are you keeping a record of all posts on PPRUNE for further use by you at a later date?

On another subject please confirm or deny that you have birth dates and home addresses of pilots from your work for C.A.L.P.A. from the early eighties?

If so please confirm if this information is considered priveleged that you will expunge this information from your data base.

A 330 Pilot:

God help anyone who discloses their real identity here for the purpose of being straightforward, honest and contributing anything worthwhile to the discussion. They are immediately set upon by the wolves who will take pleasure in tearing any shred of meat off their victim, no matter how small, from no matter what part of the individual, and for no reason other than that they can. Why? Certainly not to add to the substance of the discussion of the issue at hand.

Although I am new here, it would appear to me that there are two types of posters here. The ones who elevate themselves by the quality of their contribution. And the ones who cannot resist the egotistical temptation to try to bring others down to their own miserable level.

Why don't you disclose your true identity, so that we can level the playing field and expose some the apparent skeletons in your closet? It would only be fair.

You brought the topic up when you added it to your post. You want everyone to know that you have been asked to cease and desist posting on the ACPA forum and denied access to the meetings but seem very threatened when someone posts a potential reason for it.

Raymond767 where can one find the list of the +138 pilots that you represent? Or is it a secret?

I'm just wondering how many of them are younger (ie less then 40) and are interested in flying past 60 or are all of the 138 very close to retirement?

Thanks

Anyone in the age group you refer to would not be on the list in the first place because according to the CHRT rules, you cannot claim discrimination until it actually happens. IOW, anyone under 60 would have to wait until their name no longer appears on an equipment list in order to file a claim in the first place. It is from that point onwards that you are being discriminated against.

When you consider that 5 years ago almost 500 pilots voted against ACPA's foregone conclusion of a vote, there are hundreds of pilots out there not saying or doing a thing until they legally can. It would be extremely interesting to see what a re-vote would look like in todays climate where pilots are finally actually starting to understand the issue.

MTK

Move along folks, nothing to see here. Just 138 litigants taking their rightful place at the buffet. After all, it is the "Law". Put any spin you want on it Ray; at days end it is avarice.

Frankly I'm surprised you are not preparing a challenge to the ICAO age 65 Captain thing. Or are some discriminatory practices acceptable?

Oh to be a French- speaking aboriginal lesbian in a wheelchair. With your considerable skills we could turn this country on its ear!:cool:

Overunder: I think that what you are missing in the discussion is a simple fact that "Ray767" had an option of going to the YYZ L.E.C. Base meeting to present a motion on how to rectify the retirement issue at hand. Based on current meeting turnouts where some are cancelled because there are not enough people present to form a quorum, he could have stacked the meeting with his supporters to force the L.E.C. to present this issue to the M.E.C. and then present it to the membership which, if they did not, he could have done a D.F.R. to force A.C.P.A. to follow through.
It would appear that he took the easy way out and went to the C.H.R.C. first which would suggest a show of contempt towards the normal process. The sole issue that I have with "RAY767" is that he did not follow the process under the A.C.P.A. Constitution to move this issue forward.
As I have no desire to have my karma consumed by dogma as you would suggest as I am quite at peace with myself surrounded by family and close friends. But then again that last statement is not germane to the points you raised as your focus is elsewhere.
So rather than running away from any problem you will be better respected if you educate and motivate from within your peer group than take the undemanding way through litigation which suggests a lack of moral fibre.

a330pilotcanada first you say ....
then you say .. You funny guy.

He had a choice...................

A330

Who do you think you are...Brian Mulroney?

Thankyou RAY767 that is making it more clear