TORONTO - The issue of mandatory retirement ages imposed on federally regulated companies and agencies comes under the spotlight today.
A ruling is expected in the case of two Air Canada pilots forced to retire due to mandatory retirement provisions of their collective agreement.
George Vilven, 67 and Neil Kelly, 65, were forced to leave in 2003 and 2005, but they challenged a section of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
It allows federally regulated industries to impose mandatory retirement ages if those ages are considered the normal time of retirement for individuals doing similar work.
The Canadian Human Rights tribunal ruled in favour of the pilots last August, 2009 and today it's due to release its decision on an appropriate remedy.
The legal counsel for the two pilots, Raymond Hall, says the tribunal's decision is a significant step in the larger fight to remove arbitrary mandatory retirement ages for federally regulated agencies.
The larger fight is to resume Nov. 22 when the Federal Court is to conduct a judicial review of the tribunal's 2009 decision.
The tribunal is expected to rule today on the reinstatement of the two pilots, including whether their seniority should be discounted for the period of their wrongful termination and on damages to be awarded to the two men.
The challenge to the tribunal decision was brought by the Air Canada Pilots Association, which wants to be able to negotiate a standard retirement age for pilots, which is currently age 60.
Hall says this particular case is being watched very closely by other federally-regulated bodies, some of which are already changing their policies to allow employees to work after previously imposed mandatory retirement ages.
