AR program Did I read that right?

[MaxAuto]

Is the AR program ending November 1st

[nohojob]

I don't think so If I read it right. My guess is it is about different accommodations for AR pilots ?

[MaxAuto]

I don't think so If I read it right. My guess is it is about different accommodations for AR pilots ?

I read it as no more flying after 65, but offering other employment accommodations if available.

[nohojob]

It says : "the availability of any accommodated pilot work"

So if there no accomodated pilot work, company will look into other options.

[ThrustIdle]

Pathetic...Just GTFO

[JungleRiot]

They should change the name from AR to TFO, too fucking old. Time to start playing golf or bingo.

[Oleo 4]

Program ends Nov 1 2025

O

[flieslikeachicken]

It's a good thing that there's an airplane that flies WestJet colours and stays 95% within Canada.

[rudder]

Just curious.

AR is driven by:

- Charter of Human Rights (BFOR subject to duty to accommodate)
- Canada Labour Code
- ICAO
- CAR’s
- CBA

What changed at WJ? I presume the BFOR subject to duty to accommodate metric changed.

[daedalusx]

All they have to do to accommodate them is offer them Q400 DEC at Encore or flight attendant positions.

[cdnavater]

Just curious.

AR is driven by:

- Charter of Human Rights (BFOR subject to duty to accommodate)
- Canada Labour Code
- ICAO
- CAR’s
- CBA

What changed at WJ? I presume the BFOR subject to duty to accommodate metric changed.

I would think they have enough data to back up undue hardship, how much it costs them to accommodate vs non AR pilots on the same routes, just a guess of course.

[Me262]

If you are 65 GTFO and retire already. Enjoy your golden years. Everyone hitting 65 probably has a golden defined benefit pension to boot, so wtf would you even stay anymore? Just wow

[TeePeeCreeper]

If you are 65 GTFO and retire already.

Wow.

ME262 you seem to be able to talk the talk but for a relatively new guy in this industry you seem to have one hell of a chip on your shoulder.

Time flies or was it more recent? I can’t seem to remember

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 3#p1204713

[Inverted2]

I don’t see a problem with them being sim instructors after 65.

It does cost the company a lot of financial hardship with scheduling as well as additional fuel burn and less desirable alternates etc.

[JBI]

Every AR guy that I've flown with, save one, has been excellent. Even with a few years time on a Boeing and a few thousand hours 705 time, I learned lots. The pairings were genuinely enjoyable.

While the previous AR program at WJ was going to be unsustainable, I question the method which the Company has ultimately decided to end the program. There were plenty of solutions available and it'll be interesting to see what arguments the Company makes to show that before Nov 1, 2025 being under age 65 wasn't a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement, but now after Nov 1, it is.

Legally, under the Canadian Human Rights Act, it's easy to see that an international airline with a large number of pilots over 65 and unable to fly Internationally does create undue hardship for an airline. But unlike Air Canada where they've never had pilots over 65 AND have a much larger international route structure than WJ, WJ will have the onus on showing why it is a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement now.

[Airbrake]

Every AR guy that I've flown with, save one, has been excellent. Even with a few years time on a Boeing and a few thousand hours 705 time, I learned lots. The pairings were genuinely enjoyable.

While the previous AR program at WJ was going to be unsustainable, I question the method which the Company has ultimately decided to end the program. There were plenty of solutions available and it'll be interesting to see what arguments the Company makes to show that before Nov 1, 2025 being under age 65 wasn't a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement, but now after Nov 1, it is.

Legally, under the Canadian Human Rights Act, it's easy to see that an international airline with a large number of pilots over 65 and unable to fly Internationally does create undue hardship for an airline. But unlike Air Canada where they've never had pilots over 65 AND have a much larger international route structure than WJ, WJ will have the onus on showing why it is a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement now.

Who does WJ have to show the requirement to? Would it be an arbitrator or someone from the union or government?

[rudder]

Every AR guy that I've flown with, save one, has been excellent. Even with a few years time on a Boeing and a few thousand hours 705 time, I learned lots. The pairings were genuinely enjoyable.

While the previous AR program at WJ was going to be unsustainable, I question the method which the Company has ultimately decided to end the program. There were plenty of solutions available and it'll be interesting to see what arguments the Company makes to show that before Nov 1, 2025 being under age 65 wasn't a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement, but now after Nov 1, it is.

Legally, under the Canadian Human Rights Act, it's easy to see that an international airline with a large number of pilots over 65 and unable to fly Internationally does create undue hardship for an airline. But unlike Air Canada where they've never had pilots over 65 AND have a much larger international route structure than WJ, WJ will have the onus on showing why it is a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement now.

Who does WJ have to show the requirement to? Would it be an arbitrator or someone from the union or government?

WJ would have to file a response if an individual or class action complaint was filed with the CHRT.

WJ would also have to file a response if a grievance filed was as an individual or a group in relation to an alleged violation of the terms of the WJ ALPA CBA.

Given that AC has been successful in defending such challenges, one can reasonable presume that WJ would prevail provided it can supply accurate and verifiable data that a BFOR for line flying is sustained and that accommodation is either not possible or creates an excessive or unreasonable burden.

[Canadaflyer46]

WestJet has predictably used the Sunwing merger, and the increased international flying that brings, as the excuse it needs to rid itself of the expense of the AR program. No one is surprised, and many people saw this coming.

[DanWEC]

It's really interesting to see the types of personalities come to light on this thread.
It reveals those that are not only repugnantly selfish and entitled, but the same people who lack critical thought and the empathic, humanistic sense of self to comprehend that they may also be in that situation in a few decades, facing the expiring shelf life of your passion, with people behind a screen telling you leave so they can gain one spot.

I wonder, what will you think of those little jerkoffs then?

[mantogasrsrwy]

It's really interesting to see the types of personalities come to light on this thread.
It reveals those that are not only repugnantly selfish and entitled, but the same people who lack critical thought and the empathic, humanistic sense of self to comprehend that they may also be in that situation in a few decades, facing the expiring shelf life of your passion, with people behind a screen telling you leave so they can gain one spot.

I wonder, what will you think of those little jerkoffs then?

Face it, the vast majority of WestJet and AC pilots have lifes and the means to retire at 65. Most aren't going to be bothered. Stay butt hurt for those of us who aren't though.

[DanWEC]

Means are irrelevant, and everyone's personal situation is different, known only to them. And eventually "them", will be You.

It's baffling how little regard some of these guys give to their fellow pilots and people- but that's just their own trashy personality and thought process. Age and time will be quite the lesson, and boy, does reputation every travel quick in this industry eh?

[JBI]

Every AR guy that I've flown with, save one, has been excellent. Even with a few years time on a Boeing and a few thousand hours 705 time, I learned lots. The pairings were genuinely enjoyable.

While the previous AR program at WJ was going to be unsustainable, I question the method which the Company has ultimately decided to end the program. There were plenty of solutions available and it'll be interesting to see what arguments the Company makes to show that before Nov 1, 2025 being under age 65 wasn't a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement, but now after Nov 1, it is.

Legally, under the Canadian Human Rights Act, it's easy to see that an international airline with a large number of pilots over 65 and unable to fly Internationally does create undue hardship for an airline. But unlike Air Canada where they've never had pilots over 65 AND have a much larger international route structure than WJ, WJ will have the onus on showing why it is a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement now.

Who does WJ have to show the requirement to? Would it be an arbitrator or someone from the union or government?

WJ would have to file a response if an individual or class action complaint was filed with the CHRT.

WJ would also have to file a response if a grievance filed was as an individual or a group in relation to an alleged violation of the terms of the WJ ALPA CBA.

Given that AC has been successful in defending such challenges, one can reasonable presume that WJ would prevail provided it can supply accurate and verifiable data that a BFOR for line flying is sustained and that accommodation is either not possible or creates an excessive or unreasonable burden.

rudder is spot on on the process.

While the AC decision is definitely something that will be looked at closely and there's a very highly likelihood that it will ultimately rule the day, I think there are some key differences between WJ and AC when it comes to determining both if it's a BFOR or if accommodating pilots on the 737 is undue hardship.

Even though I have represented clients at the CHRT before, it's been over 10 years and I'm not up to date on the latest caselaw, so I'm not sure how the CHRT weighs accommodation in a person's main job (i.e. pilot) or if an entirely separate job (i.e. dispatcher) is sufficient. For as long as I've been at WJ/Encore, the Company has provided accommodation to those over 65 by having domestic only schedules. I think one of the key considerations would be why, now, doing those domestic only schedules has become undue hardship. At some point with more and more pilots over 65, there is a strong argument that making such schedules is indeed becomes undue hardship. Conversely, I'd say there's also an argument that for a limited number of pilots, the company has already shown that accommodations are possible.

While the Company deciding to create a deadline for pilots to retire doesn't surprise me, the manner in which they've done it all but guarantees a CHRT challenge. I would have preferred to see them take a more strategic approach of given options of a pay-out, limited time period of domestic only flying (Some airlines in Oceana/Asia do this - pilots can fly international until 65 and then domestic only until 67), opportunities to go to Encore as a DEC with their YOS or perhaps training roles. It would give pilots more opportunities to earn an income after 65 if they so choose and allows the company to both retain a certain amount of experience and, more likely, avoid years of CHRT applications.

For those putting out negative GTFO posts, while maybe ethically it's different, legally, it's the same thing as saying "ugh, why do women want to fly? If you're a woman you should be married, have kids and be supported by a husband and not fly for airlines. They need to take longer maternity leave anyways, why should we let them fly?" Age, like gender, race, religion and disability etc are protected grounds under the Canadian Human Rights Act.

[737Drver]

It's just sad seeing pilots who have benefited from mandatory retirement in this industry now try to take advantage of what is essentially a loop hole.

This is a seniority based industry. There is no fountain of youth. You get on the carousel and enjoy the ride knowing full well there will be an end.

It behooves you, and everyone around you particularly family, to get a fucking life which includes passions outside of a cockpit. Flying a plane is not a right. It is a privilege. Enjoy the ride and then GTFO

[DanWEC]

Lol, another pissy Jazz pilot.

Here's a suggestion. If you believe your livelihood and success is dependant on other people giving you something, maybe try another job. You have free will, no?

[JBI]

It's just sad seeing pilots who have benefited from mandatory retirement in this industry now try to take advantage of what is essentially a loop hole.

This is a seniority based industry. There is no fountain of youth. You get on the carousel and enjoy the ride knowing full well there will be an end.

It behooves you, and everyone around you particularly family, to get a fucking life which includes passions outside of a cockpit. Flying a plane is not a right. It is a privilege. Enjoy the ride and then GTFO

When has WJ had mandatory retirement?