CUPE v. Canadian Airlines

Federal human rights legislation makes it discriminatory for an employer to pay different wages for men and women performing work of equal value in same "establishment."

The flight attendants' union (CUPE) launched a complaint against their employer, Canadian Airlines, arguing that they violated the Canadian Human Rights Act. They claimed that the employer discriminated against flight attendants, a predominantly female group, by paying them differently than mechanics and pilots, who were predominantly male. Under section 11, it is a discriminatory practice for an employer to establish differences in wages between male and female employees employed in the same "establishment" who are performing work of equal value. According to section 10 of the Equal Wages Guidelines, employees of an establishment include all employees subject to a "common personnel and wage policy."

Addressing a preliminary question, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found that the wages of the flight attendants could not be compared to the wages of the other two groups since they were not in the same "establishment." It emphasized that the vast majority of the employer's wage and personnel policies applicable to the employees in the three groups were found in separate collective agreements and in manuals specific to each group. Given the differences between the policies as reflected in those agreements and manuals, the Tribunal concluded that the flight attendants had failed to prove a common personnel and wage policy, and dismissed the complaint. The Federal Court of Appeal also ruled that the appeal should be dismissed.

Do you think flight attendants should receive pay equally to mechanics and pilots? Why or why not? In your answer, try to consider the roles each person has with regard to flight safety and comfort.