ACPA Implodes !

[torx]

And how over 2600 pilots will benefit from opening the top end of their careers to pursue a full pension, a scant 30 years after the CHRT opened the bottom end.

And how the Defined Benefit Pension will thrive under career extensions for all 2900 pilots. That’s right, everybody. Once more. Everybody.

And how wage increases will not be further swallowed by Miserably Pointless Inept Litigation Strategies.

Act 1

Our Runaway Age 60 Nuthouse Train slammed head first into a rock face that was slid into position at the end of a blind-ass tunnel in February, 2011 by the Federal Court of Canada.

Act 2

The Hindenburg thundered in tail first after the top blew clean off its ill-fated TA, taking all hands into the dirt with it.

Act 3

Now the Lusitania floats out center stage in our Imax Theatre of the Absurd, in clear view of the entire slack-jawed North American Aviation Community, and the plank is down for boarding by a ‘New’ group.

Same Agenda?

Here’s what happens.

Circa mid-August, TA number 2 gets a stiff Volley of Torpedoes right square amidships.

The Lusitania upends and heads straight for the bottom like a polished crowbar.

Act 4

The last remaining Lusitania survivors dog-paddle their way over to the Titanic for pick-up.

Curtain.

You it make sound as if armageddon will be an imminent occurrence. What or who is the Titanic?

[the original tony]

I'm actually regretting not voting yes for the TA now.....
I 100% see the companies side of it and even the NC who thought of it. End the pension for new hires, lower wages in theory and all.
newbies take it in the ass again.
Our own government wants students to get educated and enter a workforce where jobs are non existent.
Our own pilots want to screw the younger pilots, our own government wants to as well.
why are we mad at Calin, he's the smartest one of us all!!!
God i love this country

[accumulous]

You it make sound as if armageddon will be an imminent occurrence. What or who is the Titanic

The Titanic is AC the Corporation pre-Federal Budget end of Mandatory Retirement in the Federally regulated sector.

If the Titanic, however, hits the Federal Budget Iceberg prior to the Lusitania blowing the TA-2 voyage to smithereens, it’ll be shark bait city for the Lusitania, because the Titanic will be long gone deep sixed on Mandatory Retirement.

If on the other hand TA-2 passes under the same agenda as TA-1 with a load of big concessions, before the Federal budget, the Lusitania drivers can still struggle up the ropes with their Ace Case full of losses onto the Titanic Steerage Deck just in time to sink under the weight of the entire ill-begotten partnership carrying an armload of concessions to the bottom like an anchor.

It’s just a simple matter of timing. They’re both going to the bottom. It’s just a question of who goes first. Ask anybody in the IAM or the CAW vis-a-vis the retirement issue.

The very last thing the next ‘Regime’ wants to do is get in bed behind the scenes for a Circle Jerk Promise of towing the line on Age 60 litigation because the net result will not only be the upending of the Lusitania on the Requisite Concessionary Gong Show, but when that sorry barge hits bottom, the Titanic will be close behind and land right on top of it.

If you concoct a type A Pilot Personality Program that runs on testosterone instead of brains, to get some seniority either through a dead as a doornail Seniority Arbitration or a dead as a doornail Age 60 scheme, and try somehow through slight of hand to tie it to a TA, well, Davy Jones’ Locker has about 2900 cold wet vacancies.

The only solution is to let 2600 pilots who simply can’t make any pension numbers on years of service go free to enjoy an open-ended career, with all the benefits that flow to Everybody – let’s try to focus and repeat that – Everybody, or try for a couple more months to keep a lid on a lost cause, and lose your shirt and your life-jacket in the negotiation process.

Right now we can trade Windfall Gains in Pay and Pension in Negotiations by embracing an open-ended career sans Mandatory Retirement, or we can ride a billion tons of boat to the bottom. The choice is clear.

It is hard to imagine how so many Type A’s can spend so much time, effort, and bargaining capital wiping themselves right off the face of the earth in front of every other Union on the Continent, who already know which way is up.

We are clearly inverted in reference to all the other airlines on the horizon, and the aileron cables have snapped.

[rudder]

If part of the preparation for round 2 is not a fact-based review of age 60 with comment from external sources, then no lesson will have been learned. One of the sins of those that have been shown the door is that they were only paying to hear what they wanted to hear from their high paid attorneys. Time to hear from a balanced range of experts on the subject matter, including a realistic explanation of what is coming down the pipe from parliament.

[What About Me?]

ELIMINATION OF THE MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE FOR FEDERALLY REGULATED EMPLOYERS

One of the most significant changes proposed in the Budget are amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canada Labour Code to prohibit federally regulated employers from setting a mandatory retirement age, unless there is a bona fide occupational requirement. The Budget proposes to review other acts to further this objective but does not indicate the specific amendments that would be made to the legislation or when the amendments would become effective.

While the proposal permits mandatory retirement in circumstances in which age is a bona fide occupational requirement, recent jurisprudence in the federal tribunals and courts in the context of federally regulated pilots suggests this may be a difficult standard to meet.

Our experience in advising employers following the elimination of mandatory retirement under Ontario's Human Rights Code is that the elimination of mandatory retirement gives rise to a multitude of significant practical and legal issues for employers.

Affected employers, both unionized and non-unionized, will want to review the terms and provisions of any collective agreements, employment contracts, pension plans, disability, insurance and other benefit plans to determine what distinctions are being made on the basis of "retirement age" to ensure that distinctions contained in those agreements comply with the proposed amendments.

Even those workplaces that no longer have mandatory retirement policies in place may be affected. Benefit plans and programs, such as long-term disability and life insurance, which typically incorporate age-based distinctions, will have to be reviewed in light of the amendments.

A Benefit Regulation under the Canadian Human Rights Act currently establishes a number of specific exemptions relating to an employee's participation in certain pension and benefit plans, the provisions contained in pension and benefit plans, and contributions to those plans. The Budget does not address whether these exemptions will remain in force.

The inclusion of this proposed change in the Budget is a clear indication that mandatory retirement will likely be eliminated in the future and would be re-tabled in the event that the Budget is not passed. We will closely monitor this change and provide further reports in future FTR Nows if, or when, the amendments are formally introduced.

[accumulous]

While the proposal permits mandatory retirement in circumstances in which age is a bona fide occupational requirement, recent jurisprudence in the federal tribunals and courts in the context of federally regulated pilots suggests this may be a difficult standard to meet.

Simply because it's a non-issue for every other Airline in North America. All of them.

[Understated]

While the proposal permits mandatory retirement in circumstances in which age is a bona fide occupational requirement, recent jurisprudence in the federal tribunals and courts in the context of federally regulated pilots suggests this may be a difficult standard to meet.

Simply because it's a non-issue for every other Airline in North America. All of them.

That statement show us why those guys fly desks and we fly airplanes. Rarely the twain shall meet.

[Rockie]

If part of the preparation for round 2 is not a fact-based review of age 60 with comment from external sources, then no lesson will have been learned.

The old guard had all the facts they needed but they ignored those facts in favour of personally moving up a number on the seniority list, and from what I've been hearing from the new guard that thinking hasn't changed. ACPA and its pilots are disappointingly incapable of thinking beyond the next higher seniority number.

[the original tony]

I don't believe the horse shit some people spew.
ACPA is unable to see past the next seniority number......
Sounds like they have the same sickness our seniors have, except now that
they have "said seniority number" they just don't want anything to change.
Pot calling the kettle black. I guarantee everyone of these greedy asses had no problem
watching those before them leave and their own number increase. But now, that the shoes
on the other foot, we cry foul??? Everybody retire till I'm number one, then F all of you, I ain't moving.
What a great country we live in. Student/ younger debt mounting due to previous generations admitted stupidities. And now we pay again.

[duranium]

I don't believe the horse shit some people spew.
ACPA is unable to see past the next seniority number......
Sounds like they have the same sickness our seniors have, except now that
they have "said seniority number" they just don't want anything to change.
Pot calling the kettle black. I guarantee everyone of these greedy asses had no problem
watching those before them leave and their own number increase. But now, that the shoes
on the other foot, we cry foul??? Everybody retire till I'm number one, then F all of you, I ain't moving.
What a great country we live in. Student/ younger debt mounting due to previous generations admitted stupidities. And now we pay again.

It is my very humble opinion that if you stopped flapping your jaws for a short while and added something constructive, you would not seem to be so puerile. Be part of the solution versus part of the problem, your coworkers will thank you for it. FWIW

[Rockie]

Tony

There is always going to be people on top of the seniority list. Are they the only reason you don't want the system to change?

[the original tony]

duranium I appreciate your humble opinion and believe it's just that, an opinion. Which weighs nothing on the merit that this is pure selfishness. If they would atleast admit that I
wouldn't despise them as much as I already do.
if they want to change the age to 65 then great, get with the othe airlines and do it. For these clowns to have the audacity to say ANY age is discriminatory is plain horse shit and greed. As this have all generation realize the end of their pitiful wasteful reign at the top is over, all this BS comes to the surface. If the end result they want is I be like other carriers, firstly the pension is gone. The seniority system is gone and the organized labour is gone. Now we can resemble some of the overseas carriers we are so jealous of. Bow fly till you die, oh wait. They still retire at 65. So pure greed, like it or not. If you have nothing to do in retirement, I dont give a shit, not my problem. Move on and get over it.
The govt backs this simply as a way to pass the budget, not worrying about the future of anybody but their own means to an end. I can't help but notice govt pensions aren't at stake, progression isn't a big issue to them, so let's pass it and save on the CPP while we're at it.
I am truly worried for anybody who wants to get into a profession that bases compensation on yrs of service and seniority. you WILL be forced to stay longer If you want to realize even close to the pay your predecessors got.
Sounds like a great plan to me.

[Norwegianwood]

Which weighs nothing on the merit that this is pure selfishness.

Tony, might I say that selfishness goes in both directions and suggest you go take a long look at yourself in a mirror as your whole attitude reeks of a pure selfish attitude!

[MackTheKnife]

duranium I appreciate your humble opinion and believe it's just that, an opinion. Which weighs nothing on the merit that this is pure selfishness. If they would atleast admit that I
wouldn't despise them as much as I already do.
if they want to change the age to 65 then great, get with the othe airlines and do it. For these clowns to have the audacity to say ANY age is discriminatory is plain horse shit and greed. As this have all generation realize the end of their pitiful wasteful reign at the top is over, all this BS comes to the surface. If the end result they want is I be like other carriers, firstly the pension is gone. The seniority system is gone and the organized labour is gone. Now we can resemble some of the overseas carriers we are so jealous of. Bow fly till you die, oh wait. They still retire at 65. So pure greed, like it or not. If you have nothing to do in retirement, I dont give a shit, not my problem. Move on and get over it.
The govt backs this simply as a way to pass the budget, not worrying about the future of anybody but their own means to an end. I can't help but notice govt pensions aren't at stake, progression isn't a big issue to them, so let's pass it and save on the CPP while we're at it.
I am truly worried for anybody who wants to get into a profession that bases compensation on yrs of service and seniority. you WILL be forced to stay longer If you want to realize even close to the pay your predecessors got.
Sounds like a great plan to me.

Or maybe it's time you joined the 21st century.

[accumulous]

duranium I appreciate your humble opinion and believe it's just that, an opinion. Which weighs nothing on the merit that this is pure selfishness. If they would atleast admit that I
wouldn't despise them as much as I already do.
if they want to change the age to 65 then great, get with the othe airlines and do it. For these clowns to have the audacity to say ANY age is discriminatory is plain horse shit and greed. As this have all generation realize the end of their pitiful wasteful reign at the top is over, all this BS comes to the surface. If the end result they want is I be like other carriers, firstly the pension is gone. The seniority system is gone and the organized labour is gone. Now we can resemble some of the overseas carriers we are so jealous of. Bow fly till you die, oh wait. They still retire at 65. So pure greed, like it or not. If you have nothing to do in retirement, I dont give a shit, not my problem. Move on and get over it.
The govt backs this simply as a way to pass the budget, not worrying about the future of anybody but their own means to an end. I can't help but notice govt pensions aren't at stake, progression isn't a big issue to them, so let's pass it and save on the CPP while we're at it.
I am truly worried for anybody who wants to get into a profession that bases compensation on yrs of service and seniority. you WILL be forced to stay longer If you want to realize even close to the pay your predecessors got.
Sounds like a great plan to me.

You need to take a look at the numbers - but you likely already know what they are. Well over 2600 of the 2900 currently active pilots can't come close to years of service at 60 - you know that - Everybody knows that - almost half of those can't even get the numbers at age 65. A lot of them can't even get the numbers at 70.

We all know the Charade here. Okay?

The Game.

The Musical Chairs Game.

Everybody knows it.

It's common knowledge.

Nobody is being fooled by it.

Not the CHRC, not the CHRT, not the Federal Court, nobody.

The Weeping,

the Wailing,

the Greed thing,

all that Extraneous Garbage is all part of the Charade.

Purge the list over you head then let's pack in the Mandatory Retirement. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink. We all get it - we all know it - Everybody knows it.

30 years ago the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled that it was illegal to hire pilots on the basis of age - consequently the average age of new hires is in their thirties, and in a lot of cases much later. Nobody can make the numbers at 60 any more.

The Charade to keep it that way is toast. You're going to get an open-ended career. Everybody is. The Charade is over. The Game is finished.

[vic777]

"the original tony", I suggest you,

Move on and get over it.

[FADEC]

Actually ("Original Tony") there were quite a few pilots who opposed mandatory retirement for years before their retirement. In fact, CALPA opposed any fixed retirement age till the mid eighties. There was no mention of 60 anywhere in "The Contract" when many of those currently retiring were hired; and their union officially opposed it. When TCA started, age 45 was the legislated maximum age for commercial pilots, and no women allowed. Age 60 came in 1958; put there by TCA sometime after legislated 45 went away. As mentioned, CALPA opposed a fixed retirement age. The history of this issue used to be on the ACPA website till it was removed when ACPA decided to fight this.

Also recall that those pilots paid for their flying training; no subsidised College programs. They also experienced 20 plus percent mortgages and much higher taxes than presently. They also voted for short hours (paycut) to avoid layoffs (of junior pilots) on at least three occasions. AC respected that a couple of times, then moved to layoffs for appearance sake; impress the investors even though it did not make financial sense. Those who worked for CP experienced repeated layoffs.

Every generation faces change; take it as a problem or an opportunity; the choice is yours. Retire when you want; just don't try to force your desires on others to advance yourself.

[Understated]

For these clowns to have the audacity to say ANY age is discriminatory is plain horse shit and greed. As this have all generation realize the end of their pitiful wasteful reign at the top is over, all this BS comes to the surface.

There was quite a bit of discussion on this topic about two years ago. Lately, it has diminished significantly, more or less because almost everyone is on hold waiting for the legal process to unfold.

Not that I have any great insight, but I believe that we will see dramatic changes in the coming weeks. Partly as a result of the ACPA implosion and its own internal strategic re-evaluation, and partly because the CHRT is finally starting to process the over 150 cases outstanding before it. All of IAM and CAW employees at Air Canada are now shielded from mandatory retirement, as a result of their union’s interpretation of the import of the Federal Court decision of February. CUPE will follow shortly. That leaves only ACPA in the void, fighting the inevitable.

I was informed by e-mail late today that the Coalition has filed an application with the CIRB for reconsideration of its recent decision to find that ACPA had not breached its duty of fair representation in regards to its refusal to file grievances on behalf of those whose employment was terminated last year as a result of the mandatory retirement provision. The CAW and the IAM gave up that point of law several months ago, and have already had a number of their members reinstated, as a result of “arbitration hearings” that were conducted, I am informed, on the telephone, with only three people on the call, the union lawyer, Air Canada’s lawyer, and the arbitrator.

If the federal government follows through with its stated intent to reintroduce the previous budget with few changes, the repeal of mandatory retirement will become law within the next year, regardless of the issues before the Tribunal and the Courts.

So, regardless of our thoughts about the impact, our duty, as professionals, is to focus on managing these changes, not wasting our scarce resources and dividing ourselves internally by expending those resources on futile objectives. That may be a hard pill to swallow, given all of the emotion surrounding the issues, but we must accept reality and move on. Our very survival is dependent on our cohesion and our long-term strategic strengths; we must face the challenges, accept what we cannot change, and focus our energies where they are effective.

[MackTheKnife]

So, regardless of our thoughts about the impact, our duty, as professionals, is to focus on managing these changes, not wasting our scarce resources and dividing ourselves internally by expending those resources on futile objectives. That may be a hard pill to swallow, given all of the emotion surrounding the issues, but we must accept reality and move on. Our very survival is dependent on our cohesion and our long-term strategic strengths; we must face the challenges, accept what we cannot change, and focus our energies where they are effective.

[TAT]

Tony, Tony, Tony your wasting your breath these guys have no retirement plans in fact they have no plans for their days off that's why they are here shooting down your opinion. They want to get rid of retirement age we just have to make it work more for us like socialized blocking for all, status pay, a current pension snap shot not one in 2014.... No grandfather rights.....

[Johnny Mapleleaf]

Tony, Tony, Tony your wasting your breath these guys have no retirement plans in fact they have no plans for their days off that's why they are here shooting down your opinion. They want to get rid of retirement age we just have to make it work more for us like socialized blocking for all, status pay, a current pension snap shot not one in 2014.... No grandfather rights.....

Tit for Tat:

You really owe it to yourself to come out of your cave, get a newspaper to find out what is going on here outside, and face reality. The world has changed. Get it?

[Rockie]

Tony, Tony, Tony your wasting your breath these guys have no retirement plans in fact they have no plans for their days off that's why they are here shooting down your opinion. They want to get rid of retirement age we just have to make it work more for us like socialized blocking for all, status pay, a current pension snap shot not one in 2014.... No grandfather rights.....

So what you're suggesting TAT is that ACPA should manage the issue rather than waste even more resources fighting it. Funny, that's what we've been saying for about six years now...but it makes so much more sense when you say it.

[bcflyer]

Good lord I can't stand this crap about all us pilots that won't make their max years and therefore should embrace the fly till you die theory. I'm one who won't make my max years. I knew that when I came here, I planned for it and I'll be quite happy to retire on my 65-70 thousand a year. (which is more than most of my friend make working full time by the way.) You want to fight to fly till you fall out of the seat? Fine, but don't hide behind the premise that you're doing it to help me out!!!

[Rockie]

I knew that when I came here, I planned for it and I'll be quite happy to retire on my 65-70 thousand a year.

When you retire you will be able to say that, but for now it is only an intention subject to change due to a couple hundred possible reasons you haven't planned for.

[MackTheKnife]

Good lord I can't stand this crap about all us pilots that won't make their max years and therefore should embrace the fly till you die theory. I'm one who won't make my max years. I knew that when I came here, I planned for it and I'll be quite happy to retire on my 65-70 thousand a year. (which is more than most of my friend make working full time by the way.) You want to fight to fly till you fall out of the seat? Fine, but don't hide behind the premise that you're doing it to help me out!!!

Thats fantastic news for YOU BCFlyer. Glad you got it all figured out. Congratulations !

In the interim though, I sure hope LIFE doesn't get in the way before you actually retire. Oh wait, you won't have to worry because all the ground work will have been done for you by then and YOU will have a CHOICE to put your perfect plan into action.

What I can't quite grasp is how exactly does that give YOU the right to tell ME what do do with MY life?