Want To Be a Star?

[Raymond Hall]

A reporter for a very large Canadian newspaper is doing a feature story on the Air Canada mandatory retirement issue that will run this Saturday.

Edited: Looks like the other Tsunami will take priority and this story will get pushed back.

[yycflyguy]

HA! With the history of litigation threats, good luck with that one.

[yycflyguy]

Double post, must have hit the "send" button twice while I was giggling.

[cjbrown]

I am interested, check your email

[Rockie]

Are you saying it's not possible for someone to give a coherent opinion in favour of mandatory retirement without saying something libelous?

[Raymond Hall]

HA! With the history of litigation threats, good luck with that one.

The truth is an absolute defence to any claim of defamation.

[yycflyguy]

Are you saying it's not possible for someone to give a coherent opinion in favour of mandatory retirement without saying something libelous?

Absolutely it is possible.

Would I ever tie my name to something associated to this litigation-frenzy and its false cries of discrimination? Fahgetaboutit!

I would also warn against anyone considering involving themselves on a volunteer basis. Only bad things will come of it.

I will be interested to read about it in the funny papers this weekend and see the spin put on it.

[vic777]

I would also warn against anyone considering involving themselves on a volunteer basis. Only bad things will come of it.

Actually, if you can speak in sentences and your opinion is worth anything, it's an opportunity to influence thousands of voters.

[Rockie]

I would also warn against anyone considering involving themselves on a volunteer basis. Only bad things will come of it.

I have to agree with you there. I sure wouldn't want to put my name beside defending mandatory retirement either for a whole host of reasons that I won't bother going into.

[Raymond Hall]

Thanks to those who came forward.

[snag]

So he's been working on this "balanced" story for three months, and just hours before the story wraps, he resorted to this forum to get the other side of the coin?

Wow, can't wait to read this piece of work.

[Johnny Mapleleaf]

That's not my take on this story. When was the last time that you heard of a national reporter openly seeking input from anyone, ever? Have you personally ever before now been given an opportunity to express your views in any formal publication anything like the country's largest newspaper? Incredible openness, and you criticize it. No wonder you have a problem.

[Rockie]

This reporter has interviewed a number of proponents of the repeal of mandatory retirement, at least one representative of ACPA, and a representative from Air Canada.

I'm in favour of ending mandatory retirement, yet my input wasn't asked for and I didn't even know the story was being done. Should I be outraged?

[ack]

The Star!?!

I wouldn't believe anything I read in the Star even if I saw it myself.

[jazzbeat]

and where is Toronto again ???

[43S/172E]

One would never suggest that the Toronto Star has the same cerebral gravitas as the New York Times or The Times would we?

Makes me happy I renewed my online subscription to the above mentioned newspapers.

By the way was this part of the equation discussed:

"We have now received confirmation from the RCMP that the investigation of ACPA in reference to the Human Rights Act, has concluded in our favour. There will be no charges laid against either myself, ACPA or its committee members. This is further vindication of our conduct throughout the Age 60 issue.

On a related note, you may recall that ACPA filed a complaint with a provincial law society over the conduct of a lawyer representing the interests of a number of retired pilots. The result of their investigation was to issue a "reminder letter" to this lawyer reminding him of the terms of their Code of Conduct. It is unfortunate that this was necessary but we are pleased with the decision of the law society and consider the matter closed."

Time to have another long black

[Rockie]

For someone who scoffs at the Star you put an awful lot of faith in what ACPA says. Despite repetitive legal defeats you prefer no information save the odd platitude and regurgitation of "we are pleased with the presentation of our legal team in defending our contractual right to force people out of their job".

Why don't you ask ACPA how much this has cost the pilots so far? Good luck getting an answer. Why don't you ask ACPA what their legal advisors told them about winning the fight to keep mandatory retirement? Good luck getting an honest answer. Why don't you ask ACPA the unstated reason they are fighting this (hint: it probably has nothing to do with retirement) Again...good luck.

Reality is going to hit Air Canada, ACPA and its members square in the face, and the chaos and damage that ensues is entirely their fault.

ACPA is not going to win this. ACPA KNOWS they aren't going to win this and has known from the very beginning, yet they continue to fight it and foster false hope among the pilots they have manipulated into supporting them. They throw untold funds down the drain fighting a useless and doomed to failure battle and drive the wedge into the pilot group ever deeper. For what?

Wouldn't you like to know?

[Lost in Saigon]

The Globe and Mail story.........
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-in ... le1939277/

A pilot’s quest to remain at the top
BRENT JANG — TRANSPORTATION REPORTER
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Mar. 11, 2011 7:30PM EST

[Raymond Hall]

Sixty? Time to come down to earth

Sometime in late April, Michael Ennis will climb into the captain’s seat of an Air Canada Boeing 777 for the last time. ...


http://www.thestar.com/news/article/952 ... n-to-earth

[Inverted2]

I'd be a wreck too if I had to retire and get a 120k a year pension!

[bush pilot]

GREED, not all but most!

[Norwegianwood]

GREED, not all but most!

Discrimination by MAJORITY is ok in your mind, right????? Sad.......

[broompusher]

Not being part of AC, I am just sitting in the peanut gallery watching. I can't help but wonder, how do the rights of the few supersede the rights of all those below them???

Not sure I would call this an equal sided piece....

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/952 ... n-to-earth

Sometime in late April, Michael Ennis will climb into the captain’s seat of an Air Canada Boeing 777 for the last time.

He’ll run through the check list, taxi to the runway, then smile at that magical moment when the giant bird takes flight and the ground gives way to clouds.

After 28,000 hours of flying everything from DC8s to state-of-the-art 777s, Ennis, 59, is adamant he’s at the top of his game.

But he’s being forced to close the cockpit door on a 39-year career with Air Canada because it’s one of just a few airlines left in the world where pilots must retire at the age of 60.

Ennis is so keen to keep flying, he’ll be leaving his wife in Oakville (they have two grown children) on May 1 and start “commuting” to Istanbul, where he’ll fly 777s for Turkish Airlines.

“I don’t want to leave Air Canada,” he says. “Being a pilot is what I am. Putting on the uniform, going to the airport and flying a big jet — that is what I do.

“This will be a lot of stress on myself and my family, but I don’t want to stop flying.”

Air Canada unwittingly finds itself at the centre of a nasty storm which some believe is about passenger safety and others say is really about ageism.

It has pitted junior pilots against senior and the pilots’ union against some of its oldest members in a bitter battle that is playing out in online forums and airplane cockpits and at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

If the complex case makes it all the way to the Supreme Court, as expected, it could strike down the last vestiges of mandatory retirement left in Canada.

That’s if a private member’s bill doesn’t do that first.

Bill C-481, which received third reading at committee on Tuesday, would repeal a section of the Canadian Human Rights Act which allows federally regulated businesses to terminate employees who’ve reached “the normal age of retirement” in their sector.

The section affects more than 800,000 employees in the Canadian Forces, Crown corporations and federally regulated sectors such as transportation, broadcasting, banking and marine shipping.

The bill will die if an election is called. But the committee hearings have shone a light on thousands of older workers — among them Air Canada pilots — who can still be forced out in their 60s, despite the fact mandatory retirement was outlawed in most other workplaces years ago.

“The federal government is the last jurisdiction in Canada to hold on to legislated age discrimination,” says Susan Eng, vice-president of advocacy for the Canadian Association of Retired People (CARP), which is pushing for passage of the bill.

“This is an abuse of peoples’ personal rights.”

A Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has agreed. Last November it ordered Air Canada to reinstate two pilots, George Vilven, now 67, and Neil Kelly, now 65, who argued they were unfairly forced out because of provisions in their union’s collective agreement.

More than 150 other pilots have launched similar complaints, and about a dozen Air Canada flight attendants, sales agents, baggage handlers and mechanics who were forced to quit at 65 are also fighting to get their jobs back.

Air Canada spokesperson Peter Fitzpatrick declined to go into detail on the legal challenges, saying: “We are in full compliance with the law with respect to mandatory retirement, but as these issues are still before the tribunal and courts we are not able to comment further at this time.”

Air Canada and the Air Canada Pilots Association want to maintain the status quo, warning that the notion of what some call “fly till you die” could cripple the airline and doom younger pilots to the bottom rungs of the career ladder.

Some have even suggested that having senior citizen pilots could be risky for passengers. Yet pilots over the age of 40 face two medicals a year and regular competency testing in a flight simulator.

As well, pilots over age 60 are required, under the International Civil Aviation Authority’s (ICAO) so-called “over 60/under 60 rule” to have a younger co-pilot in the cockpit of any flights over international airspace.

That includes Air Canada flights between, say, Toronto and Halifax, which veer over U.S. airspace because it’s the shortest, most cost-effective route. In fact, 80 per cent of Air Canada’s flights go over international airspace.

The airline’s biggest concern is that a glut of over-60 pilots could wreck havoc with scheduling and force more reliance on Canada-only airspace, adding millions in fuel, staffing and other costs.

But older pilots point out that many U.S. airlines extended the retirement age to 65 years ago and have managed to deal with the scheduling issue. And Jazz, which operates regional flights for Air Canada, allows pilots to fly to 65.

Capt. Paul Strachan, 43, president of the Air Canada Pilots Association, counters that pilots know when they join Air Canada that theirollective agreement stipulates a retirement age of 60.

“This is an issue that’s very easy to see as black and white, yet it’s anything but,” he says. “The issue here is the equality of opportunity for everyone to advance in their career.”

The animosity between the pilots isn’t all that different from the “toxicity” and ageism CARP hears about from some its members, thanks to the recession, the end of mandatory retirement and discriminatory union contracts, says Eng.

Complicating the Air Canada situation is an archaic pay and seniority system based on years of service, the size of airplane pilots fly and what seat they occupy in the cockpit.

The most junior first-officer (co-pilot) on Air Canada’s Embraer regional jets makes just $39,000 a year. The most senior Boeing 777 pilot, such as Ennis, makes $239,000.

Problem is, there are just 162 of those top captain jobs but more than 3,000 Air Canada pilots.

Not every pilot wants to be a 777 captain, but most do want to move up the ladder to bigger airplanes and more senior postings that bring greater prestige and pay, better time off, and more choice over the routes they fly.

Most pilots like the current system because it gives them flexibility and allows constant progression to the top jobs: seventy-eight per cent of association members voted last year to keep the 60-and-out rule because it gives everyone a chance to maximize their pension, which is based on the last five years of earnings.

“These (older) guys didn’t earn their seats, they were given to them by the guys who retired before them,” says 33-year-old regional jet captain Cory Brown. “They have an obligation to move aside.”

By extending their time in the top jobs, the seniors pilots will hurt everyone else, says Brown. Even holidays are dictated by seniority: “I will have to fly a few more years before I can be with my son at Christmas. If these guys stay longer it will cost me money throughout my whole career.”

Neil Kelly, one of the two older pilots who were reinstated, had been hoping for two more years as captain of an Airbus A340 when he was forced out. Not only was the plane retired soon after he was, but his legal challenge took so long that when he finally returned to Air Canada in February, he was forced to take a demotion to first officer because ICAO stipulates captains must be under the age of 65.

George Vilven, the first Air Canada pilot to challenge mandatory retirement, had started retraining but is now on medical leave. He’s been deeply affected by the almost 8-year-battle and the vitriol from fellow pilots.

“It felt threatening at times,” he says. “Guys said they would meet me in the parking lot.”

Most hurtful was a “joke” at a group retirement party in Winnipeg a few years ago — an effigy of Vilven as a corpse-like mannequin sporting a bulbous nose and an Air Canada pilot’s uniform.

“They were definitely laughing at me, not with me,” he recalls.

Ennis is so sensitive to the simmering outrage over mandatory retirement, he avoids discussions about his looming 60th birthday or the reasons he wants to stay.

“This has nothing to do with greed,” says Ennis. “We have a good pension. I could stay at home and live quite comfortably. But I’m much too young to just play golf all day.”

Instead, Ennis will fly between Istanbul and Toronto with regular layovers at home and eight days off per month. He’ll be making about two-thirds of his Air Canada salary — on top of his $130,000 pension.

“Pilots ask (on online forums such as avcanada.ca), ‘Why weren’t you talking about this 25 years ago?’ Well, back then it was unthinkable for a pilot to go past 60 years old.

“Medical science has advanced and we live so much longer now. Five or six years ago other airlines in the world started changing (to extend retirement age) and I thought, ‘Why should I have to leave Air Canada if I can fly somewhere else?’ ”

On Friday, Ennis and two other pilots filed a complaint against his union with the Canada Industrial Relations Board in a last-ditch effort to hang on to their jobs. Ennis thinks it’s inevitable the 60-and-out rule will die, but unlikely in time for him to stay at the airline.

He harkens back to the end of a long flight from Santiago, Chile, to Toronto last month.

“I was flying a perfect approach. I made a perfect landing and I thought, “Geez, in two months Air Canada is not going to let me do this anymore.’

“I’m the best I’ve ever been. I don’t look 60 and I certainly don’t feel it. I’m not going to just stay home and get old and do nothing.”

Susan Pigg focuses on issues around aging and baby boomers, spigg@thestar.ca

[flyinhigh]

From an outsider point of view,

I just read this in the globe. If the 60 boys were hoping for sympathy from the public for age discrimination by posting this into the media, sorry guess again.

When you state that you make 230K, going to retire at 10K a month. You say you pick your flying etc. Especially when so many in this country are starving due to being laid off etc or are making min wage at walmart now after loosing there good jobs. You actually put this there, the public(already say it happen when I showed this to my god mother) will go to fing bad, your the reason I pay $..... to fly to _______. All this is going to do is enrage the public as to me it is a show boat of what I got, but whine its not enough.

Just my opinon from a guy that already saw someone go, are you Fing kidding me.

[bush pilot]

Norwegianwood said

Discrimination by MAJORITY is ok in your mind, right????? Sad.......

Discrimination!! Ha

Let's look at some numbers. if we get to go to 65, which will not happen it will be fly till you die because 65 is just as discriminating as 60, and I still decide that I would like to enjoy freedom 60 I lose out on $380,000 not to mention my best 5 would be on a less played aircraft so my pension would drop from $127,000 to 96,000. If I live to see my 85th year I will have lost $775,000 in pension and $1,155,000 total. If I stay till 65 I will earn an additional wait for it $33,000. Thanks for those extra five years of service just to get a measly $33000.

Now let's look at the GREED. As I mentioned not all have the green eyed envy some got hired on later in life and are not going to be able to reach that top aircraft which gets them the top pay and top pension so I can see the fight they are fighting. however most of the crowd is not in that boat. These guys like Ennis got hired on at the age of 21 and have enjoyed 39 years in this business (a year at #1 and 4yrs in the top 10) all without having to go up north and dig sh%t holes or fly in -40 without the front heater working and drag their family from sh&t pay to sh&t pay to finally make it to Air Canada to make a grand total of $38000 the first year and $43000 the second with a wife 2 kids and a mortgage. No he did it sitting in mom and pops place rent free till he had enough money to buy a place on his own which only cost an average of $90,000 not $300,000 which is today's rate.

He also had the benefit of all the other guys leaving in front of him so he could get this #1 spot for as long as he did. Now that they are all gone these guys think that they can have their cake and eat it too as well as mine!!!! and stagnate my career be god knows how much. These guys want to eat their young all because they think a contract that they have signed to year after year and said nothing about till it's their turn to go is discriminating.

Your sad sir.