View cases - Stewart McKelvey

Page: 91industry to set the industry norm. In other words, paragraph 15(1)(c) allows a single private sectoremployer to determine the extent of the quasi-constitutional rights of an entire class of federallyregulatedemployees.[347] Air Canada and ACPA argue that a company’s role as a dominant industry player is not castin stone for all time, and that the “normal age of retirement” may change as companies come andgo. While this may be true, it also undermines one of the claimed salutary effects of paragraph15(1)(c) of the CHRA - namely the certainty that a fixed retirement age provides to employers,2011 FC 120 (CanLII)allowing them to plan for the flow of labour, and to manage wages and other financial obligations.[348] Also troubling is the fact that even in industries that are not dominated by a single player,age-based discrimination is permitted by paragraph 15(1)(c) of the CHRA, as long as thatdiscrimination is pervasive within an industry.[349] As a result, the Tribunal was correct in finding that the benefits that accrue from paragraph15(1)(c) of the CHRA are outweighed by its deleterious effects, when measured by the valuesunderlying the Charter.viii)Conclusion on the Charter Issue[350] I found in Vilven #1 that paragraph 15(1)(c) of the CHRA violates subsection 15(1) of theCharter, as it denies the equal protection and equal benefit of the law to workers over the normalage of retirement for similar positions.