Air Canada union says flight attendants will continue strike, defy government

10 months ago by HellsBelle to c/canada

Air Canada flight attendants said on Sunday they will remain on strike and challenge a return-to-work order they called unconstitutional, defying a government decision to force them back to their duties by 2 p.m. ET (1800 GMT).

Air Canada had said it planned to resume flights on Sunday evening, a day after the Canadian government issued a directive to end a cabin crew strike that caused the suspension of around 700 daily flights, stranding more than 100,000 passengers.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees said in a statement that members would remain on strike and invited Air Canada back to the table to "negotiate a fair deal."

load all comments

streetfestival 54 points 10 months ago

American-owned Financial Post actually did some useful reporting around this issue. I guess whatever judge decided to quash the strike within hours is a former legal counsel of the Air Canada Corporation; i.e., there is very high apparent conflict of interest in that process and decision. Another bad look for the Carney government.

https://financialpost.com/...

save

path: 0 18846509, hotness: undefined, score: 54, children: 12

ryper 3 points 10 months ago

To be a little bit fair, the judge apparently last worked for Air Canada in 2004, and who really cares that much about a company they worked for 20 years ago?

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 11

kent_eh 28 points 10 months ago

who really cares that much about a company they worked for 20 years ago?

How much stock in the company did they aquire during those years working there?

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742 18848214, hotness: undefined, score: 28, children: 0

streetfestival 24 points 10 months ago

You might not (think you'd) be biased towards a company you worked for 20 years about. And the type of compensation you received (i.e., salary only, stock options, bonuses/gifts) might affect that.

However, being former employees (although technically this person was probably contracted) is often included in conflict of interest definitions and for good reason.

Your argument is a very non-corrupt way of looking at things. I'd support it if illegal lobbying and corruption weren't rampant in politics.

By the way, the House of Lords in the UK is in the process of striking down laws that they need to report their financial interests.

There's a reason why politicians' and high-ranking public servants' financial ties should be tracked, because they increasingly decide our current 'democracy' more so than votes, and without some transparency we're @#$%ed.

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742 18847001, hotness: undefined, score: 24, children: 0

MrQuallzin 18 points 10 months ago

You might not, but it's still a major conflict of interest.

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742 18846764, hotness: undefined, score: 18, children: 0

jaemo 16 points 10 months ago

Why even allow for the appearance of bias? Are we in a d drought of judges? Was there NO other judge with a lack of any attachments to Air Canada?

It strains credulity to breaking point, and as a member of the public, this is where our judgement is relevant. Ie: is our system working for us, or are some shitty people gaming things. I know where I land on this one; the lingering smell of influence and corruption hangs like a bygone fart near an overstuffed leather chair.

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742 18847222, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 5

lost_faith 6 points 10 months ago

Why worry about the Rogers/Bell/Telus/etc exec from 20 yrs ago working at the CRTC? It was 20 years ago, how could it ever affect his decisions today?

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742 18860978, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0

Tiger666 2 points 10 months ago

I do, she should recluse herself.

save

path: 0 18846509 18846742 18850190, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

Related Communities

Related Communities