Adamson v. Air Canada

Adamson v. Air Canada

The Court set aside the CHRT's finding on 'normal age of retirement' for having applied Justice Mactavish's Vilven factors conjunctively rather than disjunctively and remitted that issue for reconsideration; it dismissed Air Canada's judicial review of the Tribunal's rejection of Air Canada's BFOR (Tribunal's decision on employer BFOR reasonable) and allowed ACPA's application, finding the Tribunal erred by omitting material factors and applying incorrect legal principles to unions; the Court held unions may advance a BFOR defence, broadened the scope of factors relevant to s.15(2) beyond a narrow list, modified the Meiorin test into a four-step union-sensitive test (piggyback on employer...

Citation
2014 FC 83
Parties
Applicants: Robert Adamson et al (Fly Past 60 Coalition); Respondent: Air Canada; Respondent: Air Canada Pilots Association; Respondent: Canadian Human Rights Commission
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Decisions / Final Judgment and Remittal to Tribunal
Outcome
Mixed: complainants' application allowed in part, Air Canada's application dismissed, ACPA's application allowed in part; matters remitted to CHRT for redetermination with directions
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination, Mandatory Retirement, Normal Age of Retirement, Bona Fide Occupational Requirement (bfor), Undue Hardship, Collective Agreement, Pensions, Judicial Review, Comparator Analysis
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Human Rights Employment Law Labour Law Constitutional Law Age Discrimination Mandatory Retirement Normal Age of Retirement +6 more

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Adamson et al (Fly Past 60 Coalition)

Applicants

Air Canada

Respondent

Air Canada Pilots Association

Respondent

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Decisions / Final Judgment and Remittal to Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Standard of review for Tribunal decisions
  2. 2 Proper test for determining comparator group / normal age of retirement under s.15(1)(c) CHRA
  3. 3 Whether Air Canada established a BFOR defence (employer)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court set aside the CHRT's finding on 'normal age of retirement' for having applied Justice Mactavish's Vilven factors conjunctively rather than disjunctively and remitted that issue for reconsideration; it dismissed Air Canada's judicial review of the Tribunal's rejection of Air Canada's BFOR (Tribunal's decision on employer BFOR reasonable) and allowed ACPA's application, finding the Tribunal erred by omitting material factors and applying incorrect legal principles to unions; the Court held unions may advance a BFOR defence, broadened the scope of factors relevant to s.15(2) beyond a narrow list, modified the Meiorin test into a four-step union-sensitive test (piggyback on employer...

Court Disposition

Mixed: complainants' application allowed in part, Air Canada's application dismissed, ACPA's application allowed in part; matters remitted to CHRT for redetermination with directions

Orders

  • Application T-1428-11 allowed; CHRT decision on normal age of retirement set aside and remitted with direction to apply Vilven factors disjunctively and to base comparator analysis on what pilots actually do
  • Application T-1453-11 (Air Canada) dismissed