View cases - Stewart McKelvey

Page: 6[22] Both complaints were referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal by the Commission,and the two cases were heard and decided together.[23] In the course of the parties’ oral submissions, I was advised that the Tribunal has now held ahearing in relation to 68 additional complaints brought by former Air Canada pilots who wereforced to retire against their will. The Tribunal currently has its decision with respect to that caseunder reserve. I was also advised that there is another “large group” of former Air Canada pilots2011 FC 120 (CanLII)whose human rights complaints have been referred to the Tribunal by the Canadian Human RightsCommission, and still another “large group” of former Air Canada pilots who have agediscrimination complaints pending before the Commission.IV.Procedural History[24] In order to put the issues into context, it is necessary to understand the procedural historygiving rise to the applications currently before the Court.[25] The original hearing into Messrs. Vilven and Kelly’s complaints took place in 2007. ACPAwas granted “interested party” status before the Tribunal in relation to Mr. Vilven’s complaint. TheTribunal also granted interested party status to the “Fly Past 60 Coalition”, a group of current andformer Air Canada pilots who are united in their goal of eliminating mandatory retirement at AirCanada.