First, before you slander those who had a legitimate complaint before the Commission, you should take the time to read the actual decision itself. The decision was not unanimous. There was a strong dissent by one of the top judges in the country, the judge who literally wrote the book on federal court procedure. If you read the decision, you will see that the outcome turned exclusively on legal procedure, not on the merits of the underlying issues—procedure before the Commission in how they assess the complaints before them.
[*]https://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf ... 1/index.do
Second, while you on your high horse, why don't you send an e-mail to each one of your former representatives on the Age 60 Legal Committee to ask them how they can look themselves in the mirror when they are now, to your detriment, earning big bucks slowing your seniority progression, working as Captains on the top-rated equipment, working after age 60, after they represented you opposing anyone who continued employment beyond age 60. You deserve an answer from them.
And by the way, as Yogi Berra so famously said, "It ain't over 'till its over." This is not the end of the road for those who simply sought to have what you now have, freedom from age discrimination. In the end, the government did for you what they could not achieve through the courts. Same outcome, different timing.
I don’t think the new generations who are doing the long haul flying for 20-25 years or longer will be quite so active in their late 60’s.
Had the best careers, hired young, traded off the wawcon
all along the way, either wanted to stay or are staying today... 35+ years... maxed pensions...
All pigs at a trough...
and it's all our fault...
Yah, we all know, you made all the right decisions thru your entire career, but are not at the place you feel you deserve, and it's all somebody else's fault...
Since they are all close to 70 now, it was just a money grab at this point. 65 is the new 60.....unfortunately they were on the wrong side of the new "line". I would call it a victory for the FP 60 crowd.
Perhaps its best to just let this thread float off the board and into Avcanada history like all the other related threads have.
Hardly. I'm just where I want to be and it's all on me.goldeneagle wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 12:03 pmYah, we all know, you made all the right decisions thru your entire career, but are not at the place you feel you deserve, and it's all somebody else's fault...
I'm not the one with lawsuits saying something is someone else's fault.
Umm, that’s how judicial reviews work- it’s not an avenue to re-litigate your case because you didn’t like the outcome on the first go.
The line between litigant and counsel seems to keep blurring. I’d be worried about a cost award against counsel. It’s not unheard of, and this case seems to be a good candidate IMO.
The decision was rendered with no award of costs to any party. It is now res judicata and the judges are rendered functus. In other words, subject to an appeal, the case is closed.