Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Canada

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, Sulako, North Shore

Raymond Hall
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:45 am

Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Canada

Post by Raymond Hall » Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:36 pm

A Leave To Appeal application in respect of Federal Court of Appeal decision 2012 FCA 209, Kelly v. Air Canada Pilots Assn. et al., was filed with the Supreme Court of Canada on Monday, October 1st. The Memorandum of Fact and Law (factum) in support of the application is posted on the web at:

http://www.flypast60.com/Documents/SCC-Factum.pdf.
---------- ADS -----------
  

morefun
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:18 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by morefun » Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:43 pm

Ray, how long does it take to get a response from the Surpreme Court on whether or not they will hear the case? If they do in fact decide to hear the case how long before you're able to stand in front of the chief justices ? I hear through the rumor mill that senior flight attendants over 65 are coming back to work, don't know if this true or not! Cheers :rolleyes:
---------- ADS -----------
  

Raymond Hall
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:45 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Raymond Hall » Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:36 am

The Respondents (Air Canada, ACPA and the CHRC) will have an opportunity to respond to our application. The Court hears leave applications on a regular basis, by a panel of three judges selected by the Chief Justice. Applications are decided anywhere from three to six months after filed. If leave is granted, we would expect a hearing early next year.

There are two new developments with the other employee groups. First, Air Canada was ordered by arbitrators in three separate arbitration hearings brought by the IAMAW, CAW and CUPE to temporarily reinstate a large number of employees who had their unions file grievance on their behalf. As well, Air Canada has offered reinstatement to some employees who had simply filed human rights complaints with the Commission in respect of their forced termination of employment.

Second, Air Canada made the following announcement a couple of weeks ago:

Air Canada Eliminates Mandatory Retirement

Following recent legislative amendments, Air Canada is implementing a significant policy change with regard to retirement. Effective October 1, all Canada-based employees (excluding those represented by ACPA) are no longer required to retire at the age of 65 and should take note of the process changes specified in this message. Employees working and living in other countries remain subject to local legislation.
At least one pilot whose employment was terminated on the basis of age has now applied for the job posting for new pilots. Others applications are expected.
---------- ADS -----------
  

NEWACPILOT
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:29 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by NEWACPILOT » Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:44 am

Hi Ray,

As a new hire pilot at AC who after just getting hired learned that my career progression will stagnate due to people being allowed to stay past 60, find out the EMJs are leaving and now I hear you want to have pilots who retire prior to Dec 20th reinstated I would like to thank you on behalf of my wife and kids. While you have nothing to do with the change in scope you are affecting many more than just your band of people supplementing your retirement.

On a personal note, I have no idea why anyone would want to come back. If they were a Captain they will have to become FOs up until 65 and then for those that want to remain after 65 get the joy of becoming a narrow body FOs (or I think RPs as well). Seriously guys, take your pensions and run for the hills. One of the major reasons I am rather upset is my plan is/was to retire at 60 (or earlier). That ladies and gentleman should have been considered a benefit of the job rather than a human rights issue. But I digress.

I will withhold from any personal attacks, I know as a lawyer you are seeking the opportunity of profiting from this "cause" of yours. I'd hate to see the legal bill of one of your clients who will be fortunate enough to return as an A320 FO, that money is much better spent on the golf course.

I suppose the only benefit will be our pension. Having people literally fly until they die should ensure some people don't even touch the pension they have spent so much money on, perhaps their spouse may get part of it, but otherwise its gone. On top of that the last two classes don't even get a DB pension so I suppose it's a moot point.

Sincerely,
---------- ADS -----------
  

morefun
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:18 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by morefun » Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:34 am

Funny how other groups are treated within Air Canada, I guess pilots are just special :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
  

morefun
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:18 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by morefun » Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:42 am

To newacpilot , I don't think it is personal but I can understand how you feel as when you're junior it always seems like an up hill battle! I think all Ray wants is equal treatment and that just rubs some people the wrong way. Welcome to Air Canada enjoy the ride it is short or long if you hate the place :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Bede
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3082
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Bede » Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:30 pm

newacpilot,

Way to start a new job with a positive attitude! I mentioned this in another thread a while ago: I mentioned that Jazz is not much worse of a place to work than WJ. It's just that at WJ everyone has a positive attitude whereas at Jazz, people are always negative, no matter what happens. You need to ask yourself if you want to contribute to the negativity pervasive at AC. Given that you will spend the rest of your career there, you might want to consider your attitude. Not that I really care though, your sickouts, etc. have been providing a generous profit share cheque for me year after year.

I don't think Ray is seeing this "cause" as a $$ issue. I'm pretty sure he's putting in far more time than he's charging.

Legal question for Ray, I notice there is more legal counsel than you in this leave application. Is this because an appeal such as this requires a specialized skillset? What is the substantive difference between a SCC appeal and a Superior Court or Federal Court appeal? On a personal level, how do you manage not to be burnt out by this so far? It seems like an endless battle for one lawyer to do on his own.
---------- ADS -----------
  

North Shore
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 5338
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Straight outta Dundarave...

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by North Shore » Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:11 pm

NEWACPILOT wrote:Hi Ray,

As a new hire pilot at AC who after just getting hired learned that my career progression will stagnate due to people being allowed to stay past 60, find out the EMJs are leaving and now I hear you want to have pilots who retire prior to Dec 20th reinstated I would like to thank you on behalf of my wife and kids. While you have nothing to do with the change in scope you are affecting many more than just your band of people supplementing your retirement.
Give your head a shake, dude. This has been coming done the pipe for several years now - if you didn't see it coming, then how is that Mr. Hall's fault? Besides, no-one held a gun to your head to say 'work at AC' and no-one is forcing you to stay there - quit and find somewhere where the t&c's are more to your liking. :roll:

(Nice troll?)
---------- ADS -----------
  

Raymond Hall
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:45 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Raymond Hall » Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:00 pm

NEWACPILOT wrote:As a new hire pilot at AC who after just getting hired learned that my career progression will stagnate due to people being allowed to stay past 60...
New hire AC pilot. Right.

I don't think so.... I don't believe that you are who you say you are. People don't sign up with a new ID and make their very first post on this Forum the same day with words directed so narrowly at one portion of a huge topic such as this one.

In any event, even if you are who you say you are, if you are truly interested in getting an answer to the questions that you pose, go back through the archives of this Forum--the answers have already been posted on this Forum dozens of times.

I am not interested in getting in any debate on the substance of the issues that are currently before the Court. I made the original post here solely for the purpose of letting people know what is happening, procedurally, given that no-one else appears to be doing that.
---------- ADS -----------
  

vic777
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 421
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:00 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by vic777 » Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:45 am

NEWACPILOT wrote:One of the major reasons I am rather upset is my plan is/was to retire at 60 (or earlier).
You should grow up and maybe find another job.
---------- ADS -----------
  

MackTheKnife
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:54 am
Location: The 'Wet Coast"

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by MackTheKnife » Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:31 am

NEWACPILOT wrote:
One of the major reasons I am rather upset is my plan is/was to retire at 60 (or earlier).


What's stopping you from retiring any time you want ? You state you might have wanted to retire even before 60 so pension $$$ are apparantly not a concern to you.

At least now due to the intelligent actions of some brave souls, YOU will have a CHOICE when YOU want to retire.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Norwegianwood
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:16 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Norwegianwood » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:48 am

NEWACPILOT wrote: One of the major reasons I am rather upset is my plan is/was to retire at 60 (or earlier).
Sincerely,
So let me see now.... You joined AC because they were the only airline in Canada, no the world, that forced retirement at age 60 because you wanted to retire at or before 60................. "rather upset"............... sorry self centered and self serving would better describe your attitude.
Congrats on being able, now, to carry on after 60 (if and when YOU want)
You know where to find sympathy...................
---------- ADS -----------
  

Johnny Mapleleaf
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:42 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Johnny Mapleleaf » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:51 am

NEWACPILOT wrote:As a new hire pilot at AC ... I would like to thank you on behalf of my wife and kids.
So, you are pissed off because Air Canada now has been legally forced to comply with the same age restrictions that apply to all the other carriers in this country, such as WestJet and Jazz? And you didn't see that coming before you left your previous job? Maybe you should get a job in China or Singapore, where they still force flight attendants to retire at age 30.

Great start to a new career. You have been here only for a few weeks and you have already adopted this attitude? If you don't go to China, you should consider running for elected office at ACPA. You obviously have successfully acquired the requisite mentality.

Or maybe you already are in such a position at ACPA, and are not really a new hire after all?
---------- ADS -----------
  

cv990
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:08 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by cv990 » Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:33 pm

Or maybe he is just a troll winding everyone up.... :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
  

TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 641
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by TheStig » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:26 am

Or maybe they are a new AC pilot…My first post here wasn't well received by Raymond's supporters either. I've noticed most of the posters who have traditionally posted on this topic are no where in sight.

Some of the info posted above is incorrect. Pilots are allowed to stay in the left seat until 65, then either have to bid Wide-body FO or Narrow-body Captain.

Are pilots still hoping to rejoin aware of the changes that would be made to their pensions if they returned to work? It would be really unfortunate to return to work for a few years only to leave with a smaller pension than you have right now.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7694
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Rockie » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:45 am

TheStig wrote: I've noticed most of the posters who have traditionally posted on this topic are no where in sight.
Maybe because the inevitable is now a reality and continuing this argument is even more pointless than it was a year ago. Time to live with it.
---------- ADS -----------
  

TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 641
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by TheStig » Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:02 am

That's more like it!
---------- ADS -----------
  

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by 777longhaul » Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:09 pm

Employee Notice For Old People ...

EMPLOYEE NOTICE
**************************
Due to the current financial situation caused by the slowdown in the economy, the Government has decided to implement a scheme to put workers of 50 years of age and above on early, mandatory retirement, thus creating jobs and reducing unemployment.

This scheme will be known as RAPE (Retire Aged People Early).

Persons selected to be RAPED can apply to the Government to be considered for the SHAFT program (Special Help After Forced Termination).

Persons who have been RAPED and SHAFTED will be reviewed under the SCREW program (System Covering Retired-Early Workers).

A person may be RAPED once, SHAFTED twice and SCREWED as many times as the Government deems appropriate.

Persons who have been RAPED could get AIDS (Additional Income for Dependents & Spouse) or HERPES (Half Earnings for Retired Personnel Early Severance).

Obviously persons who have AIDS or HERPES will not be SHAFTED or SCREWED any further by the Government.

Persons who are not RAPED and are staying on will receive as much SHIT(Special High Intensity Training) as possible. The Government has always prided themselves on the amount of SHIT they give our citizens.

Should you feel that you do not receive enough SHIT, please bring this to the attention of your MP, who has been trained to give you all the SHIT you can handle.

Sincerely,

The Committee for Economic Value of Individual Lives (E.V.I.L.)
---------- ADS -----------
  

TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 641
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by TheStig » Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:14 am

Funny, but didn't the exact opposite happen?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Fanblade
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Fanblade » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:19 am

Stig,

I was thinking the exact same thing.

In my opinion the net result of a changing retirement age (let's face it pilots are late to the game on this) is having a very negative impact on 20 something employment. Look no further than the many articles of concern about a lack of employment opportunities for graduating students. Student concern over debt and no jobs. Teachers in Ontario with up to 10 years of subbing still without full time employment for example.

I am in no way saying 65 year olds owe those students to retire. That has been declared a human rights issue. As it should.

What I am saying is that the callus nature in which those same people reject the legitimate concerns of the young makes me shake my head. None of us live in a vacuum. All change comes with collateral damage. It is simply life. Do you see any attempt at mitigation around us? Any at all? We are just told to sit down and shut up. Wait your turn. No wonder so many kids are still at home in their thirties. They are doing what they have been handed. Waiting their turn to start a life. When will that be?

I would like respect for my concerns if you wish me to respect you. Your generation is the wealthiest ever. And the most in debt. You can't afford to retire. In a perfect world your choices would not impact me. That is simply not how things work.

I am of course speaking in generalities.
---------- ADS -----------
  

MackTheKnife
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:54 am
Location: The 'Wet Coast"

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by MackTheKnife » Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:31 pm

Fanblade wrote:Stig,

I was thinking the exact same thing.

In my opinion the net result of a changing retirement age (let's face it pilots are late to the game on this) is having a very negative impact on 20 something employment. Look no further than the many articles of concern about a lack of employment opportunities for graduating students. Student concern over debt and no jobs. Teachers in Ontario with up to 10 years of subbing still without full time employment for example.

I am in no way saying 65 year olds owe those students to retire. That has been declared a human rights issue. As it should.

What I am saying is that the callus nature in which those same people reject the legitimate concerns of the young makes me shake my head. None of us live in a vacuum. All change comes with collateral damage. It is simply life. Do you see any attempt at mitigation around us? Any at all? We are just told to sit down and shut up. Wait your turn. No wonder so many kids are still at home in their thirties. They are doing what they have been handed. Waiting their turn to start a life. When will that be?

I would like respect for my concerns if you wish me to respect you. Your generation is the wealthiest ever. And the most in debt. You can't afford to retire. In a perfect world your choices would not impact me. That is simply not how things work.

I am of course speaking in generalities.
Some further reading on the subject.


http://theairlinewebsite.com/index.php/ ... sztor-wsj/


Also:

http://theairlinewebsite.com/index.php/ ... be-pilots/
---------- ADS -----------
  

Fanblade
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Fanblade » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:37 pm

Mack,

I was referring to society in general. The impact on the young is harsh.

As for aviation? How many times have you heard that before. :-)

The assumptions made to come up with these predictions are based on aircraft orders. Even aircraft manufacturers have expressed concern whether the amount ordered can be absorbed by the market place.

Considering the economies of the EU, the US, the slow down in China and an eventual deleveraging here at home? ( debt to income ratio)

I'm thinking likely no. The jobs that are created, like everywhere else in this economy, will be at pennies on the dollar.
---------- ADS -----------
  

duranium
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 1:45 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by duranium » Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:53 am

TheStig wrote:Or maybe they are a new AC pilot…My first post here wasn't well received by Raymond's supporters either. I've noticed most of the posters who have traditionally posted on this topic are no where in sight.

This short interlude is to give you a heads up. I am, one of aforementionned posters, not in sight because there is nothing on the subject, at the moment, to discourse about but you can rest assured that when the time comes, I shall be front and center.

Some of the info posted above is incorrect. Pilots are allowed to stay in the left seat until 65, then either have to bid Wide-body FO or Narrow-body Captain.

Are pilots still hoping to rejoin aware of the changes that would be made to their pensions if they returned to work? It would be really unfortunate to return to work for a few years only to leave with a smaller pension than you have right now.
---------- ADS -----------
  

777longhaul
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:25 pm

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by 777longhaul » Sat Feb 02, 2013 2:27 pm

JR scheduled for the end of May 2013.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Raymond Hall
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:45 am

Re: Leave to Appeal Application Filed at Supreme Court of Ca

Post by Raymond Hall » Mon Mar 25, 2013 8:57 am

We have just been informed by the Registry of the Supreme Court of Canada that the decision on our Leave To Appeal application will be released Thursday, March 28th, at 10:00 AM Eastern time.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”