No Clear Winner in FCA Mandatory Retirement Decision

[yycflyguy]

In accordance with the prescient statement of Yogi Berra, "It ain't over 'till its over..." this issue is far from over.

Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada of the Federal Court of Appeal Adamson decision was filed last week.

I guess the funding was raised.

[Fanblade]

In accordance with the prescient statement of Yogi Berra, "It ain't over 'till its over..." this issue is far from over.

Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada of the Federal Court of Appeal Adamson decision was filed last week.

Kind of a bold statement don't you think?

Are you saying that the Supreme Court hearing your case is a foregone conclusion?

[Raymond Hall]

Are you saying that the Supreme Court hearing your case is a foregone conclusion?

Not at all. In the past five years, there have been an average of over 800 Leave To Appeal applications filed per year, and the Court can hear only about 70 cases per year, some of which it must hear because they are "appeals as of right."

So statistically, the chances of getting leave are only about one in eleven. But almost every applicant faces the same odds, including the ones who are ultimately successful. One thing is certain--if you don't file the application, you don't get Leave. There is obviously a number of factors that go into the Court's decision to grant Leave, and it is up to legal counsel to present a Leave argument that meets those criteria.

Don't forget, the Supreme Court did grant leave in the early phase of the Air Ontario - Air Canada Pilots case, and after the issues before the SCC were decided, the case then went on for years afterwards, before being decided with finality in the lower court.

[hithere]

Speaking of which, I believe someone mentioned in the AOPG thread that the plaintiffs had until the end of September to appeal to the SCC. Anyone know what they did?

[Rockie]

"Ageism" bulletin.

The hypocrisy pouring out of that bulletin from ACPA is enough to gag anyone familiar with the history. There is not an ounce of credibility behind the words but at least now they are being forced to say them.

[777longhaul]

Rocky

Would you please post this so those of us who are not "washed" clean, (force-retired) can read acpa's bulletin?

Thanks.

[Rockie]

It is a joint AC/ACPA bulletin so I cannot post it...sorry. Suffice to say the sudden concern for individual rights WRT to retirement coming from this union is more than a little rich. However as insincere as it sounds coming from ACPA it is nevertheless gratifying to see them finally, publicly acknowledging the discriminatory nature of the issue and defending those who choose to go beyond 60.

[Lt. Daniel Kaffee]

Guess you better find another job where people (like many of the posters on this thread) living on such high moral ground are appreciated...

[Rockie]

Guess you better find another job where people (like many of the posters on this thread) living on such high moral ground are appreciated...

No need. People like you (whom this bulletin was directed at) will either learn to respect the rights of others, or if you are incapable of that then learn to keep your mouth shut and opinions to yourselves, or be asked not so politely to go work somewhere else. This is the year 2015 my friend...time to get up to speed.

You got the memo now take some solid advice, read it carefully and take it seriously.

[777longhaul]

Thanks Rocky.

I appreciate your quick response. I understand.

cheers

[Understated]

My, my. How things change...

Imagine that, a union defending the human rights of its own members, after it has spent 10 years and a huge sum of dollars on legal fees doing just the opposite!

Well, the chickens haven't all come home to roost, at least not yet.

[sportingrifle]

In a few years it will be interesting when some of the widows or estates of the original complainants have to decide if they wish to continue to fund and fight this battle.

[TrailerParkBoy]

In a few years it will be interesting when some of the widows or estates of the original complainants have to decide if they wish to continue to fund and fight this battle.

WTF?
HAPPY FU*@$#& THANKSGIVING TO YOU TOO!

[duranium]

"Ageism" bulletin.

The hypocrisy pouring out of that bulletin from ACPA is enough to gag anyone familiar with the history. There is not an ounce of credibility behind the words but at least now they are being forced to say them.

Does anybody have enough fortitude, backbone, gumption, GUSTS, to post this bulletin so the unwashed, us , have an idea of what is been said. What say you out there?

[The Raven]

"Ageism" bulletin.

The hypocrisy pouring out of that bulletin from ACPA is enough to gag anyone familiar with the history. There is not an ounce of credibility behind the words but at least now they are being forced to say them.

Does anybody have enough fortitude, backbone, gumption, GUSTS, to post this bulletin so the unwashed, us , have an idea of what is been said. What say you out there?

Crikey, don't get your panties in a knot. You're reading too much into it.

I have the bulletin in front of me, and no I am not going to post it. Not because I don't have the "fortitude, backbone, gumption, GUSTS (sic), but because it is none of your business.

I will give a quick synopsis though. Essentially, it says that there is a list with pilots birth dates and seniority numbers floating around. Hell, I've been at Air Canada for 35 years and that list has always been available. As a matter of fact I have a list in front of me right now and if you are ex-Air Canada, you probably had one before you retired. It's no big deal.

All the company and ACPA are saying is that if anyone uses the list to threaten or harass anyone that it will not be tolerated. As I approach age 60, I can honestly say that I have not been approached, threatened, harassed, cajoled, intimidated, or anything else regarding my intentions on flying/or not flying past age 60.

Nothing to see here. Time to go outside and play.

[Rockie]

I would avoid discussing specifics.

[Raymond Hall]

I see it a little differently.

The fact that both the employer and the union have essentially been forced to take a public stance in response to an apparent or potential practice of employee age discrimination in the workplace indicates that both now recognize that the legally debatable issue of termination of employment at age 60 that was heretofore being dealt with through due legal process is presently manifesting itself in a manner separate from the law, and that that now improper behavior must be accorded the full weight of administrative governance.

There is a legal duty imposed on both to ensure compliance with both the spirit and intent of the law. This bulletin, in addition to recognizing the existence of potential improper behavior, provides a caution to those who would be tempted to carry their previous ostensibly legal distinction forward in a manner that is decidedly not in accordance with the present law.

[TrailerParkBoy]

I think Bernie Sanders said it well last night in reference to Hilary Clinton email issue..."Enough with the damn emails"

I think we have heard enough of the FL60 issue. Please let it go!

[Old fella]

I think Bernie Sanders said it well last night in reference to Hilary Clinton email issue..."Enough with the damn emails"

I think we have heard enough of the FL60 issue. Please let it go!

I am surprised the moderators are letting it continue with the numerous threads and many associated pages on this AC FL60 issue that have go on. But whatever!!!!!!!

[Ah_yeah]

"Ageism" bulletin.

The hypocrisy pouring out of that bulletin from ACPA is enough to gag anyone familiar with the history. There is not an ounce of credibility behind the words but at least now they are being forced to say them.

Does anybody have enough fortitude, backbone, gumption, GUSTS, to post this bulletin so the unwashed, us , have an idea of what is been said. What say you out there?

Pfftt. Nice try.