A recently released decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal indicates that the Tribunal will hear argument with respect to the "normal age of retirement" for 45 pilots reaching the age of 60 outside of the period considered in the earlier cases. The series of Air Canada cases which came before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and the Federal Court were founded on section 15(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act ("CHRA"), which permitted a federally-regulated employer to terminate an employee based on age if it was the "normal age of retirement for employees working in positions similar to the position of that individual". The Federal Court upheld the constitutionality of the section in 2012, and the leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was denied in 2013. This section of the CHRA was subsequently repealed by Parliament in December 2012 and Air Canada consequently ceased requiring retirement at 60.
In Alberta, and now, federally, following the change to the CHRA, the application of mandatory retirement policies will result in discrimination on the basis of age, a protected characteristic under human rights legislation. Unless the policy can be proven to be based on a bona fide occupational requirement, discrimination will be found, exposing the employer to a damages award, back pay, and potentially, reinstatement.
 There is no factual or evidentiary record before the Tribunal regarding the normal age of retirement from 2010 to 2012. Section 50(1) of the CHRA requires the Tribunal to “give all parties to whom notice has been given a full and ample opportunity…to appear at the inquiry, present evidence and make representations.” For the complainants in this matter who turned 60 after December 31, 2009, the CHRA compels us to give them the opportunity to be heard.