- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
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.”
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.
Just a hunch, but maybe most judges qualified to rule on an aviation case have at some point worked with some major carriers?
Okay, but being unbiased abd free of potential conflicts of interest are, to me, mitigating factors.
I don’t subscribe to justice via my hunches, and do not want my country to either.
Edit: is it your assertion that any other judge we’ve appointed, having been properly briefed with respect to the relevant facts in both parties, would be unqualified? If so, should your ire not be better directed at the glaring inefficiencies in our purportedly completely ineffective justice system?
No it’s not my assertion. I’m just offering an another way of looking at it. It’s still possibly a pure conflict of interest. I guess with limited information you never know
That’s CRTC logic!
Um, ok.