First Reference Talks

Business, Payroll, Employment Law, Internal Controls & You!

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Free Updates

Hearings scheduled to decide retirement ages of Air Canada pilots

Author: Christina Catenacci

Posted on Friday, August 6th, 2010 at 10:00

Tweet
air-canada-pilot-retirement-age

Image taken from: www.fraport.com

Between November 22 and November 25, 2010, the Federal Court of Canada will hold hearings and then decide whether the mandatory retirement age of 60 years should stand for about 3,000 Air Canada pilots.

I reviewed the case history and found that this saga has been going on for years.

It seems to revolve around one subsection of the Canadian Human Rights Act: 15(1)(c) states that it is not a discriminatory practice if an individual’s employment is terminated because that individual has reached the normal age of retirement for employees working in positions similar to the position of that individual.

This section has created some controversy. In fact, it has been questioned in the courts, and there may be a final answer about its effect on pilots’ retirements after these hearings take place.

The story is that two Air Canada pilots were required to retire at the age of 60 years pursuant to Air Canada’s policy. Although they retired pursuant to the policy, they both filed human rights complaints in 2005 alleging that the mandatory retirement policy was discriminatory.

In August 2007, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found that Air Canada was permitted to require both pilots to retire at 60 years because subsection 15(1)(c) of the Act permitted the airline to have a policy of mandatory retirement as long as it was consistent with the retirement age of similarly placed employees. Indeed, the retirement age for most pilots working for major international carriers was 60 years. What’s more, this section of the Act was not contrary to section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (equality provisions).

The pilots appealed to the Federal Court.

In April 2009, the Federal Court concluded that the tribunal had incorrectly analyzed the application of the Charter to section 15(1)(c) of the Act, and referred the matter back to the tribunal for further consideration.

In August 2009, the tribunal released a second decision; this time, it found that section 15(1)(c) of the Act was actually inconsistent with section 15 of the Charter. Further, the tribunal found that previous Supreme Court of Canada decisions on the matter were distinguishable based on current circumstances, including the fact that many provincial jurisdictions had since abolished mandatory retirement. They no longer set the precedent.

It is not over yet. The judicial review of the tribunal’s second decision is about to be decided. Time will tell what will come of mandatory retirement ages for Air Canada pilots, and how other federally regulated employees will be affected by the decision.

Christina Catenacci
First Reference Human Resources and Compliance Editor

Tags: 60 years, age, age of retirement, Air Canada, canadian charter of rights and freedoms, Canadian Human Rights Act, discrimination, equality, Federal Court of Canada, mandatory retirement, mandatory retirement policy, Pilot's Association, pilots, retirement age

This entry was posted on Friday, August 6th, 2010 at 10:00 and is filed under Human Resources, Human Rights. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Note that some comments may be moderated. If you have not had an approved comment here before, your comment will be held for approval. We are glad to publish comments that address issues raised in the post or other comments on it and that contribute to a fruitful discussion. We do not publish comments that seek to promote commercial products or that seek personal legal advice. Although we do not require it, we ask that in making a comment you use your full name. You must supply a valid email address, which will not appear with your comment.




Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

  • Get Free Updates

    RSS and Email

  • 2012 Annual Ontario Employment Law Conference

    2011 Canadian Law Blog Finalist

    2010 Canadian Law Blog Finalist

  • Categories

    • Accessibility Standards
      • Integrated Accessibility Regulation
      • Standard for Customer Service
      • Standard for Employment
      • Standard for Information and Communications
      • Standard for the Built Environment
      • Standard for Transportation
    • Announcements
    • Conferences
    • Human Resources
      • Corporate Immigration
      • Employee Relations
      • Employment Standards
      • Health and Safety
      • HR Analytics
      • HRMS
      • Human Rights
      • Privacy and Security
      • Recruiting and Hiring
      • Training and Development
      • Union Relations
    • Internal Controls
      • Environmental Law
      • Finance and Accounting
      • IT, Privacy and Security
      • Not-for-Profit
    • Payroll
      • Benefits
      • Compensation
      • Source Deductions and Reporting
  • Recent Comments

      CommentLeslie D Foreman:
      I agree with the court decision. Granting a full 52 weeks leave for an adoptive...

      CommentDr. Mike Michael:
      While there are many factors associated with depression, a main cause is the...

      CommentAndrew Taillon:
      Thanks Chris. I would suggest that the confusion arises from the way damages were...



  • First Reference:
    @firstreference

    Yosie Saint-Cyr:
    @yosie23

    Adam Gorley:
    @agorley

  • Like us on Facebook!



  • Links

    • First Reference
    • HR eSource
    • HRinfodesk
    • HRtrack
    • Human Resources Advisor
    • PolicyPro
  • Blogroll

    • All About Information
    • Chambers on the Profession
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Governance & Risk Management Blog
    • Corporate Reporting to Stakeholders
    • Daniel A. Lublin Employment Law Blog
    • Doorey’s Workplace Law Blog
    • Employment & Human Rights Law in Canada
    • Human Right in the Workplace
    • International Corporate Governance
    • Leech Talks Risk
    • Marks on Governance
    • Osgoode Labour & Employment Law Society
    • SBH Lawyers blog
    • Slaw
    • Thoughts from a Management Lawyer
  • Post Archives

    • February 2012 (9)
    • January 2012 (26)
    • December 2011 (27)
    • November 2011 (24)
    • October 2011 (22)
    • September 2011 (34)
    • August 2011 (27)
    • July 2011 (25)
    • June 2011 (35)
    • May 2011 (29)
    • April 2011 (28)
    • March 2011 (27)
    • February 2011 (20)
    • January 2011 (22)
    • December 2010 (23)
    • November 2010 (23)
    • October 2010 (22)
    • September 2010 (24)
    • August 2010 (28)
    • July 2010 (26)
    • June 2010 (29)
    • May 2010 (32)
    • April 2010 (24)
    • March 2010 (22)
    • February 2010 (9)
    • January 2010 (11)
    • December 2009 (11)
    • November 2009 (14)
    • October 2009 (16)
    • September 2009 (11)
    • August 2009 (1)
  • Questions?

    Email us:
    editor[at]firstreference.com

Copyright © 2012 - First Reference | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Twitter | Facebook

WordPress theme designed by web design