Mandatory Retirement Repealed!!!

[Morry Bund]

Do you have even the slightest clue as to how liability works in a case like this? Call it shameless or whatever you like, but there's a zero percent chance that ACPA members are going to have a special assessment and have to pay for this.

I think I have a slight clue about how this liability thing works. The Federal Court of Appeal upholds the Federal Court decision on the constitutionality of the mandatory retirement exemption. It finds that the Federal Court was correct, it is unconstitutional. It issues the declaration that the Federal Court failed to issue for procedural reasons. The Tribunal will then be bound in law to find liability for all of the pilot complaints before it. The liability hearings for the 150 or so will take about one minute each, and the Tribunal will move directly to a remedy hearing for each.

It will then ask, "How much would these pilots have been paid had they not been wrongfully terminated?" It will find that out for each individual complainant, subtract the amount that he received in pension, then make a small deduction for any cases of failure to mitigate. It will come up with a dollar figure (around $150,000 per pilot, say, based on Air Canada's own testimony, but bearing in mind that the time frame is much longer now for these pilots than it was for Vilven and Kelly), multiply that times the number of pilots, then divide by 2, for the joint liability.

Yes, that's my clue as to how it will work, assuming that the Federal Court of Appeal doesn't find reason to upset the the Federal Court decision of the judge that used to be the head of the CHRT.

Zero chance? Does ACPA have $10 million in the bank? If not, where will it get the funds to pay its share, other than by a special assessment? Don’t forget that it already hiked the dues percentage, citing the increased cost of recent litigation, and that was just for the lawyer’s fees, not the damages.

May I make a suggestion? Keep flying airplanes, and stay out of the securities markets. You are going to need to preserve your cash.

[turbo-beaver]

Raymond:

Is that one bottle of scotch for each pilot that comes back?

I have been worried about my rapidly decreasing cognitive abilities and my decreasing reaction times as my age advances, so for the guys interested in improving some of their skills I would suggest this website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/ ... rsion5.swf

I practice it everyday and have managed to bring my average down from .29 seconds, to .21 seconds......that is the best I can do and hope it is enough to get through any testing they try and put this old fellow through. Can you recommend any further cognitive exercises? I am doing the online 777 course. I already passed a 340 ride last spring so my ifr is still valid.

Now, all I am really worried about is the guys not wanting to have a drink with me on the layovers......none of them really could ever keep up before so maybe I shouldn't be worried after all.

[Johnny Mapleleaf]

Is thatI practice it everyday and have managed to bring my average down from .29 seconds, to .21 seconds......that is the best I can do and hope it is enough to get through any testing they try and put this old fellow through.

Hey Turbo beaver-chaser. Why don't you make a suggestion to Flight Ops. They can replace the cog-screen test with the Sheep-screen test, and save themselves a pile of cash.

[Rockie]

The "Lottery" connotation describes this, at least in my mind. We all individually know many of the 150 complainants. Of the ones I know (which is quite a few) only one individual wants to return to flying status.They didn't want to miss out on a chance for a cash payout - period - regardless of the public persona.All done using the guise of; "you violated my Human Rights." This is what has made this so distasteful, nothing to do with "Human Rights" and everything to do with money.

Spite is a terrible basis to develop policy on and it will cost Air Canada pilots potentially huge money in liability that ACPA has finally realized, and has already cost us in ways most of our group is incapable of recognizing. Air Canada pilots and especially ACPA should have used their brains instead.

[DLurker]

As a outside observer. Why not say the pilots that want to return must fly for 2 years before they obtain
the CASH Settlement. No return, or not doing the 2 years No CASH Settlement.

[Rockie]

The most common mistake Air Canada pilots make is assuming they have any control over this. I frequently hear guys say things like "If we let them stay until 65" as if it were their decision to make. It demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding that persists still today despite all that's happened.

[turbo-beaver]

As a outside observer. Why not say the pilots that want to return must fly for 2 years before they obtain
the CASH Settlement. No return, or not doing the 2 years No CASH Settlement.


Hey DLurker....
Go back to school and get a law degree......then spend 30 or 35 years in the profession and become a judge or the head of the HRC and then just perhaps you can tell the pilots that want to return how long they might have to fly to get their settlement, should there be one. Monetary damages will not ever come close to making up for the years those of us who want to fly have all missed.
Not to mention the layovers, parties and girls.....

.....as an outside observer.....

[yycflyguy]

Monetary damages will not ever come close to making up for the years those of us who want to fly have all missed.

I got all choked up on that one. I guess the flying the Embraer, like what was offered, just wasn't flying.

I already passed a 340 ride last spring so my ifr is still valid.

Wont be valid when the dust settles.

Now, all I am really worried about is the guys not wanting to have a drink with me on the layovers......none of them really could ever keep up before so maybe I shouldn't be worried after all.

Maybe "keeping up" wasn't the problem.

[vic777]

As a outside observer. Why not say the pilots that want to return must fly for 2 years before they obtain
the CASH Settlement. No return, or not doing the 2 years No CASH Settlement.

I don't think you understand what the "settlement" is. The "settlement" is the money that the Judge determines that the individual Pilot would have earned if he had not been illegally terminated by Air Canada, so the Pilot would already have had/earned that money. The Pilot should also get interest on that money and if the Judge so determines an extra "punitive" award. ACPA should pay a penalty for refusing to defend these dues paying Union Members.

[TheStig]

Apparently outside opinions/ideas are not welcome DL. The FP60 supporters are so quick to tear into someone with a differing opinion, but in reality, this could still unfold in several different ways. The FP60 supporters can only envision one resolution (something like Morry outlined above), so which side is being narrow-minded?

[Ah_yeah]

It must feel good to try and take money from Embraer F/O's. It's not enough to damn them into career stagnation they want part of their salary too. Classy bunch eh ?
But of course only your perspective counts and who gives a flip about the guy your fleecing, you'll never have to see him face to face. And you wonder why the membership's message is to fight this morally repugnant mission to the end ?
Dlurker, don't worry. It's not you, you'll never get these guys to compromise.

[Morry Bund]

It must feel good to try and take money from Embraer F/O's. It's not enough to damn them into career stagnation they want part of their salary too. Classy bunch eh ? But of course only your perspective counts and who gives a flip about the guy your fleecing, you'll never have to see him face to face. And you wonder why the membership's message is to fight this morally repugnant mission to the end ?

Condemned. Condemned to your fate. You just don't get it, sir. Your suggestion that anyone is getting fleeced demonstrates you lack of awareness of what is actually happening. The government just ended mandatory retirement. Those who you criticize do not control or influence the government's agenda. Those who you criticize
told you, five years ago that this was going to happen. When are you going to wake up? This is not about Air Canada pilots. This is not about ACPA. This is about the law of the land. Do not tell anyone here that you were not advised about what was going to transpire. You chose to ignore the message at your own peril.

You can either work with the change, or you can suffer the consequences, cursing the world for your own inability to see reality. Get over it. This is not about pilots. This is not about age 60. It is about the entire country and our ability to embrace the realities of the legal and political life in which our professional lives exist. Curse all you want. Slander all of us who stood up to say that the King has no clothes. But do not hold any of us responsible for your own inability to adjust to reality.

Impute whatever nefarious motive you deem appropriate. But accept one fact. Mandatory retirement ended. Then ask yourself. What did you do to adopt and integrate that inevitable change to your own benefit? Sit and curse the dark? Or light one small candle to provide some light?

[sepia]

Do you have even the slightest clue as to how liability works in a case like this? Call it shameless or whatever you like, but there's a zero percent chance that ACPA members are going to have a special assessment and have to pay for this.

I think I have a slight clue about how this liability thing works. The Federal Court of Appeal upholds the Federal Court decision on the constitutionality of the mandatory retirement exemption. It finds that the Federal Court was correct, it is unconstitutional. It issues the declaration that the Federal Court failed to issue for procedural reasons. The Tribunal will then be bound in law to find liability for all of the pilot complaints before it. The liability hearings for the 150 or so will take about one minute each, and the Tribunal will move directly to a remedy hearing for each.

It will then ask, "How much would these pilots have been paid had they not been wrongfully terminated?" It will find that out for each individual complainant, subtract the amount that he received in pension, then make a small deduction for any cases of failure to mitigate. It will come up with a dollar figure (around $150,000 per pilot, say, based on Air Canada's own testimony, but bearing in mind that the time frame is much longer now for these pilots than it was for Vilven and Kelly), multiply that times the number of pilots, then divide by 2, for the joint liability.

Yes, that's my clue as to how it will work, assuming that the Federal Court of Appeal doesn't find reason to upset the the Federal Court decision of the judge that used to be the head of the CHRT.

Zero chance? Does ACPA have $10 million in the bank? If not, where will it get the funds to pay its share, other than by a special assessment? Don’t forget that it already hiked the dues percentage, citing the increased cost of recent litigation, and that was just for the lawyer’s fees, not the damages.

May I make a suggestion? Keep flying airplanes, and stay out of the securities markets. You are going to need to preserve your cash.

Wow you get a gold star for ultra fear mongering.

Even if ACPA were to TRY and Impose a "special assessment", the pilots could de-certify the union the next day. (Did you think the pilots have forgotten this trick?) Have you absolutely zero concept of how liability works? {rhetorical question}

Speaking of special assessments, didn't ole ray just assess your team for some extra cash?

[vic777]

Even if ACPA were to TRY and Impose a "special assessment", the pilots could de-certify the union the next day.

It would in practice take more than six months to de-certify a UNION, have the information campaign and hold a vote etc. The massive payment could not be avoided, it would be far better for ACPA to distribute it's funds to the Pilots now, and get "de-certified". This would put money in the Pilot's pockets.

[duranium]

Wonder what the Courts would have to say to the future potential financial avoidance maneuverings of your association just before or aftet said courts impose that financial burden on you. I would bet every one of you would be in their crosshairs, BIG TIME. Would be fun to watch you diehards dangling in the breeze from the thinest of threads. As I wrote last year, intertainement at it's best, let the show begin ( or continue )

[Morry Bund]

Even if ACPA were to TRY and Impose a "special assessment", the pilots could de-certify the union the next day. (Did you think the pilots have forgotten this trick?) Have you absolutely zero concept of how liability works?

Simplistic assumptions can be very dangerous. You may wish to revisit that thought, after discussing the subject with one or more of your union reps that has access to legal advice on the subject. My sources tell me that a successor union that inherits the collective agreement would normally inherit the liabilities arising from the prior application of that agreement. It is unlikely that an organization could avoid liability for such a huge amount simply by changing its name.

In addition, I am told, unions cannot "de-certify the next day". There are significant legal constraints on the process of decertification, including the time period available. Decertification can be done only while the collective agreement is open, which usually is a very narrow period that occurs, in our case, only once every five years or so, depending on the length of the agreement signed.

[DLurker]

Boy it sure is nice to get ripped a new one for just voicing an opinion.
My feelings are YES it is wrong to tell someone they have to retire @ 60.
Yet it is also wrong for guys to collect a healthy settlement, when they had
no intentions of flying past 60 in the first place.
There is such a thing in law as precedence, maybe they will set a new one here.
But of course when you are riding on the LOTTO TRAIN your opinions tend to be a little bias.

[DLurker]

As a outside observer. Why not say the pilots that want to return must fly for 2 years before they obtain
the CASH Settlement. No return, or not doing the 2 years No CASH Settlement.


Hey DLurker....
Go back to school and get a law degree......then spend 30 or 35 years in the profession and become a judge or the head of the HRC and then just perhaps you can tell the pilots that want to return how long they might have to fly to get their settlement, should there be one. Monetary damages will not ever come close to making up for the years those of us who want to fly have all missed.
Not to mention the layovers, parties and girls.....

.....as an outside observer.....

My learned arrogant friend I think it is rather rude to make comments like that of someones opinion, when you know
absolutely nothing about them or their background. Nice to make your acquaintance too.

[morefun]

I think you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves.....age 60 is now dead but whether or not guys come back or get some sort of settlement is far from a done deal, we'll just have to wait and see where the chips fall..

[Ah_yeah]

It must feel good to try and take money from Embraer F/O's. It's not enough to damn them into career stagnation they want part of their salary too. Classy bunch eh ? But of course only your perspective counts and who gives a flip about the guy your fleecing, you'll never have to see him face to face. And you wonder why the membership's message is to fight this morally repugnant mission to the end ?

Condemned. Condemned to your fate. You just don't get it, sir. Your suggestion that anyone is getting fleeced demonstrates you lack of awareness of what is actually happening. The government just ended mandatory retirement. Those who you criticize do not control or influence the government's agenda. Those who you criticize
told you, five years ago that this was going to happen. When are you going to wake up? This is not about Air Canada pilots. This is not about ACPA. This is about the law of the land. Do not tell anyone here that you were not advised about what was going to transpire. You chose to ignore the message at your own peril.

You can either work with the change, or you can suffer the consequences, cursing the world for your own inability to see reality. Get over it. This is not about pilots. This is not about age 60. It is about the entire country and our ability to embrace the realities of the legal and political life in which our professional lives exist. Curse all you want. Slander all of us who stood up to say that the King has no clothes. But do not hold any of us responsible for your own inability to adjust to reality.

Impute whatever nefarious motive you deem appropriate. But accept one fact. Mandatory retirement ended. Then ask yourself. What did you do to adopt and integrate that inevitable change to your own benefit? Sit and curse the dark? Or light one small candle to provide some light?

Morry, read back through this thread. There are numerous posters constantly refering to how badly they are going to financially screw over each and every ACPA pilot. A large number of these victims earn one third of what a 777 retiree makes in pension a year. So if your morals can deal with that then there is not much more to say. Should be a big party waiting for you guys on your first layover.
What have I done to adapt embrace for the change ? What has FP60 ever done to show some couth or respect for the junior members ? I only ask to expose the fact that no one ever answers that one and I know you won't either.

[Rockie]

Morry, read back through this thread. There are numerous posters constantly refering to how badly they are going to financially screw over each and every ACPA pilot. A large number of these victims earn one third of what a 777 retiree makes in pension a year. So if your morals can deal with that then there is not much more to say. Should be a big party waiting for you guys on your first layover.What have I done to adapt embrace for the change ? What has FP60 ever done to show some couth or respect for the junior members ? I only ask to expose the fact that no one ever answers that one and I know you won't either.

Who cares. This is about an inevitable change in law that Air Canada pilots refused to deal with in part because they were pissed off at what they perceived as the motivation behind the FP60 group. How about dealing with the facts instead? Did anybody, anywhere, at any time consider that?

Even if ACPA were to TRY and Impose a "special assessment", the pilots could de-certify the union the next day. (Did you think the pilots have forgotten this trick?) Have you absolutely zero concept of how liability works? {rhetorical question}

It is particularly disappointing that this sleazy idea is even considered by my peers who at the same time demand respect from other people.

[Morry Bund]

Morry, read back through this thread. There are numerous posters constantly refering to how badly they are going to financially screw over each and every ACPA pilot. A large number of these victims earn one third of what a 777 retiree makes in pension a year. So if your morals can deal with that then there is not much more to say. Should be a big party waiting for you guys on your first layover.

What have I done to adapt embrace for the change ? What has FP60 ever done to show some couth or respect for the junior members ? I only ask to expose the fact that no one ever answers that one and I know you won't either.

As long as your focus is on the individuals rather than on the issue, you will be hurting only yourself. I am aware just as much as anyone else of the disparity in wages between the top end and the bottom end. As I read the hundreds of posts here, and as I read the hundreds of prior posts on both the old and the new ACPA Pilots Forum, there were clear messages from our group warning of this impending change, and of the need to address the underlying issues related to the disparity.

Addressing the fundamental issues underlying the human rights was something that left few if any options. The law is the law. I can’t change it any more than you can. But I can accept it, and work within its constraints, just as I can work within a constraint like the airport workers are on strike, the runways are not going to be cleared, and my flight is going to be cancelled so I am not going to make it home tonight, tomorrow or maybe even the next day. Those are facts. How we deal with them is up to us.

Just as I don’t have any influence over the law, I apparently don’t have much influence over your opinion, either. I cannot understand why you are so bitter at any of us for giving you a clear message so long ago about what was going to happen. Would you be happier with us if we had simply let you get blind-sided by saying nothing? Couth or respect? What would you like me to say or do to show that couth or respect? Repeal the repeal that Parliament just passed? Not within my power. Sorry. Tell all those before the Tribunal that they should just waive any financial claim against ACPA or Air Canada? I don’t have any influence. Sorry again.

As bad as things are now, your disrespect for me and for my peers is likely going to get even worse, when the chickens finally do come home to roost, financially speaking, and for the wrong reasons again. When the Tribunal order for damages hits the MEC and the cheques become due and payable, there won’t likely be anyone there remembering that we told them in 2006 that this all wasn’t necessary, that there was a zero-cost option, that ACPA could actually have profited from embracing the impending change and adjusting the collective agreement to make it work for everyone.

Condemn us all you like. Censure us. Ostracize us. It will be your loss. The outcome that you are seeing is not what we would have preferred. We clearly did not need to wind up this way.

[vic777]

I think you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves.....age 60 is now dead ...

After Dec 15th 2012 I would bet that well over half the Pilots due to retire every month stay on in their current Position. When do you think ACPA will form a plan to accommodate this NWO? Or will ACPA not participate in the planning and just comply with whatever AC dictates? What does past history suggest? ACPA is certainly not "way ahead of itself".

By 2017 over Ten percent of the Union will be over age Sixty, with another large percentage over Fifty, that's a large voting block .... the times they are a changing.

[twolowflaps]

I think you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves.....age 60 is now dead ...

After Dec 15th 2012 I would bet that well over half the Pilots due to retire every month stay on in their current Position. When do you think ACPA will form a plan to accommodate this NWO? Or will ACPA not participate in the planning and just comply with whatever AC dictates? What does past history suggest? ACPA is certainly not "way ahead of itself".

By 2017 over Ten percent of the Union will be over age Sixty, with another large percentage over Fifty, that's a large voting block .... the times they are a changing.

Yeah and the times are changing into the new Air canada LCC. Except the over 60...sorry it happened to you guys, but get over it and move on. now it"s time to save the Lagacy!

[Raymond Hall]

What has FP60 ever done to show some couth or respect for the junior members ? I only ask to expose the fact that no one ever answers that one and I know you won't either.

Exactly what would you suggest that I or anyone else do in that regard? Give me one or more concrete suggestion(s), taking into consideration the actual legal and factual situation, and I will do my best to answer you. Honest.