Nedelec et al v. Air Canada and Air Line Pilots Association, International

Nedelec et al v. Air Canada and Air Line Pilots Association, International

Because Air Canada employed a majority of pilots across the relevant sub‑periods (over 50% in each period), the normal age of retirement for employees in similar positions was 60; accordingly s.15(1)(c) applied and the mandatory retirement rule did not constitute unlawful discrimination.

Citation
2023 CHRT 26
Parties
Complainants: Coalition Complainants; Complainant: Eric William Rogers; Complainant: Robert James McBride; Complainant: John Charles Pinheiro; Complainant: Patricia Clark (on behalf of the estate of William Clark); Complainant: Stephen Norman Collier; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Air Canada; Respondent: Air Line Pilots Association, International
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint (age Discrimination) / Final Decision (dismissal)
Outcome
Complaints dismissed
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination, Mandatory Retirement, Comparator Group Methodology, Bona Fide Occupational Requirement, Statistical Determination of Normal Retirement Age
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Employment Law Administrative Law Age Discrimination Mandatory Retirement Comparator Group Methodology Bona Fide Occupational Requirement Statistical Determination of Normal Retirement Age

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coalition Complainants

Complainants

Eric William Rogers

Complainant

Robert James McBride

Complainant

John Charles Pinheiro

Complainant

Patricia Clark (on behalf of the estate of William Clark)

Complainant

Stephen Norman Collier

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Air Canada

Respondent

Air Line Pilots Association, International

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint (age Discrimination) / Final Decision (dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which airlines meet the Vilven comparator factors for the relevant period
  2. 2 Whether Air Canada employed the majority of pilots during the relevant periods and thus defined the normal age of retirement
  3. 3 Whether s.15(1)(c) of the CHRA applies as a defence

Ratio Decidendi

Because Air Canada employed a majority of pilots across the relevant sub‑periods (over 50% in each period), the normal age of retirement for employees in similar positions was 60; accordingly s.15(1)(c) applied and the mandatory retirement rule did not constitute unlawful discrimination.

Court Disposition

Complaints dismissed

Orders

  • Style of cause amended to reflect ALPA as successor union
  • Complaints dismissed