coldfinger Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 At the last snowmobiling meeting a discussion regarding the forced retirement of groomer operators at the age of 77 was discussed. It sounds to me from a very reliable source, high up in the district level that this is going to go through. The reasoning for this is because a certain club has an operator who is 80 years old and is unwilling to step down from their essentially life long grooming position. What are your thoughts on this forced retirement mandate? Merry Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackjack1 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 i think sometimes,to much information is a bad thing?stirring the pot also sucks.this seams to me to be personal?i never actually realized there was that great,or large of a difference between 77 and 80 year olds ?who knew...thanks for the insight... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 28 minutes ago, coldfinger said: At the last snowmobiling meeting a discussion regarding the forced retirement of groomer operators at the age of 77 was discussed. It sounds to me from a very reliable source, high up in the district level that this is going to go through. The reasoning for this is because a certain club has an operator who is 80 years old and is unwilling to step down from their essentially life long grooming position. What are your thoughts on this forced retirement mandate? Merry Christmas. Just like the government abolished mandatory retirement.... this is baloney. If the man is capable then he is capable regardless of age. When my father-in-law was 80 he was more active and more mentally there than some I knew at 65. Everyone needs to be looked at on their own merits. As for being unwilling to step down... if he isn't capable anymore just don't give him access to the groomer period. It may be a tough stance but a better solution than a blanket age requirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
signfan Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 Sounds like an internal district issue that has no place on a forum of this type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Saul Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 45 minutes ago, signfan said: Sounds like an internal district issue that has no place on a forum of this type. From what heard this is not a district thing. Ofsc decision. Province wide. Can affect a lot if guys that could help out alot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northstar Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 Curious how they can just thought a number out there and decide that you are incapable at a specific age and your services are no longer wanted . I can think of one groomer operator who is over 80 and the trails he groomed last year seemed to be in good condition every time I was on them . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutter Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 1 hour ago, signfan said: Sounds like an internal district issue that has no place on a forum of this type. x2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slomo Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 1 hour ago, signfan said: Sounds like an internal district issue that has no place on a forum of this type. Perhaps, but don't you require yearly testing for a driver's license once you reach the age of 80? How does this tie in with groomer operation - do you need to be a licensed motor vehicle operator? ? Thought it was an interesting topic and might provide information,. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northstar Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 1 hour ago, signfan said: Sounds like an internal district issue that has no place on a forum of this type. 14 minutes ago, Nutter said: x2 Is the OFSC a private club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 1 hour ago, signfan said: Sounds like an internal district issue that has no place on a forum of this type. I completely disagree. This is directly related and an integral part of snowmobiling; unlike many discussions on this board. My thoughts on this matter is that it should not be age but capability that determines if an operator be able to groom the trails. There is no fixed age to cut off the ability to drive a vehicle but there are guidelines/tests to do so. If there is a major concern in this area, the OFSC or District should establish guidelines/tests to determine if an operator is acceptable or not. These guidelines/tests would kick in at a certain age but could be used on any operator if there are concerns about their abilities. This probably would help identify anyone, regardless of age, that should not be driving a groomer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutter Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 7 minutes ago, gator said: I completely disagree. This is directly related and an integral part of snowmobiling; unlike many discussions on this board. My thoughts on this matter is that it should not be age but capability that determines if an operator be able to groom the trails. There is no fixed age to cut off the ability to drive a vehicle but there are guidelines/tests to do so. If there is a major concern in this area, the OFSC or District should establish guidelines/tests to determine if an operator is acceptable or not. These guidelines/tests would kick in at a certain age but could be used on any operator if there are concerns about their abilities. This probably would help identify anyone, regardless of age, that should not be driving a groomer. What I think he was saying is that this isn't coming from the OFSC (which it defiantly isn't) it's something happening in his district and is a personal gripe of some sort between district members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Pete Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 I agree with Nutter. This is not coming from the OFSC. It may be that the District is establishing policy around who can be an operator which they are within their right to do as long as it conforms to various legislative requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 I don't care where it comes from. It is definitely a snowmobile topic that could grow to affect more than just 1 district and should be discussed. Much more relevant than most topics. Also, maybe it is something that should be addressed by the OFSC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skidooboy Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 sounds like some people have a problem with a certain groomer operator but, don't have the balls to "ask him to leave". so, they make up some b.s. age limit to "feel good" about backhanding this guy out of their way. call a spade a spade, tell the guy why they don't want him around and be done with it. Ski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PISTON LAKE CRUISER Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 This relative info. from the Ontario Human Rights Commission The end of mandatory retirement (fact sheet) As of December 12, 2006, the Ontario Human Rights Code protects all persons aged 18 and over against discrimination in employment on the basis of their age. This means that employers cannot make decisions about hiring, promotion, training opportunities, or termination on the basis of an employee’s age. Prior to this date, the Code did not prohibit age discrimination in employment against persons aged 65 or older. As a result, policies requiring mandatory retirement at age 65 could not be challenged under the Code. This is now no longer the case. Persons aged 65 and older who believe that they have been discriminated against on the basis of age, including through mandatory retirement policies, may file a complaint of discrimination on the basis of age with the Ontario Human Rights Commission. This does not mean that employers cannot have retirement programs based on a certain age. Rather, it means that such programs cannot be mandatory, except for judges, masters, and justices of the peace under the Courts of Justice Act, for whom there is a specific exemption under the Code. In some rare cases, employers may be able to defend mandatory retirement programs on the basis that they are bona fide occupational requirements. In order to meet this test, employers must show that their mandatory retirement program was developed in good faith, is rationally connected to the nature of the work, and that it would be impossible to develop a non-discriminatory program without undue costs or health and safety risks. For example, an employer would be required to show that the objectives of its mandatory retirement program could not be achieved through individual testing and assessment of employees. Except in circumstances where mandatory retirement can be shown to be a bona fide occupational requirement, collective agreements that contain such provisions will be unenforceable. It should be noted that the provision of medical, dental, disability and insurance benefits to employees aged 65 and older will remain at the discretion of employers. Exemptions in the Code and the Employment Standards Act and Regulations mean that differential provision of benefits to employees aged 65 and older is not subject to human rights challenges. Similarly, age-based distinctions under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act are shielded from scrutiny under the Code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDette Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 My dad is 94 and lives at home alone. He drove his car right up to last spring. He could still drive it today but his hip is shot so his mobility is the issue getting in and out. Everyone is different and every situation is different. To make a blanket age would be wrong, and totally against human rights. I can also tell you that this is not coming from the OFSC. DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nith Valley Sledder Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 As most groomer operators are either unpaid volunteers or paid, part time, seasonal employees do they have any rights under provincial legislation re. forced retirement? At the end of the season your job is finished. Come the start of the next season it is up to both parties to decide if they wish to work together again and under what conditions. If the club in question doesn't want the old guy running the groomer any more they should have the balls/decency to let the guy know why. Asking the district to put some rule in place is a chickenhs!t way to weasel out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoso Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 1 minute ago, Nith Valley Sledder said: As most groomer operators are either unpaid volunteers or paid, part time, seasonal employees do they have any rights under provincial legislation re. forced retirement? At the end of the season your job is finished. Come the start of the next season it is up to both parties to decide if they wish to work together again and under what conditions. If the club in question doesn't want the old guy running the groomer any more they should have the balls/decency to let the guy know why. Asking the district to put some rule in place is a chickenhs!t way to weasel out. End of thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 42 minutes ago, zoso said: End of thread Not so fast. Age or any sex or race discrimination should just not happen period. Every decision should be based on merit only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoso Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, Wildbill said: Not so fast. Age or any sex or race discrimination should just not happen period. Every decision should be based on merit only. Temporary workers have zero expectations to be re hired and have no legal grounds to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 4 hours ago, Big Pete said: I agree with Nutter. This is not coming from the OFSC. It may be that the District is establishing policy around who can be an operator which they are within their right to do as long as it conforms to various legislative requirements. The tricky part now is that a groomer operator is a paid employee and therefore the Ontario labour laws need to be complied with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 1 hour ago, zoso said: Temporary workers have zero expectations to be re hired and have no legal grounds to be. Does the operator do the job well ? If yes why discriminate because of age? You may grow old one day is it your wish to be treated badly because of age without ability mattering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Pete Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 14 minutes ago, 02Sled said: The tricky part now is that a groomer operator is a paid employee and therefore the Ontario labour laws need to be complied with. I believe most of the Employment Standards, Health & Safety and Human Rights legislation applies to volunteers and paid employees. So yes, its getting very complicated and just how many District are equipped to handle all the requirements? Not many I would guess. But there is light at the end of the tunnel. Received the District/Club briefing notes for the BoG meeting coming up in January. There is a whole section on this issue which will hopefully provide training and guidance to Districts and Clubs. . Employment Standards and Health & Safety Training Modules The OFSC has developed a series of important training modules so all employees can better understand their rights and responsibilities. The modules are developed by one of Canada’s leading law firms specializing in labour issues and is intended to provide a high-level overview of a number of topics include the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, the Human Rights Code and the Employment Standards Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 4 hours ago, DooDette said: My dad is 94 and lives at home alone. He drove his car right up to last spring. He could still drive it today but his hip is shot so his mobility is the issue getting in and out. Everyone is different and every situation is different. To make a blanket age would be wrong, and totally against human rights. I can also tell you that this is not coming from the OFSC. DD Thanks for the factual clarification. Also, congratulations to your Dad for his longevity and 'active' and independant lifestyle. Can only hope that we can reach that age in that kind of shape!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoso Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Wildbill said: Does the operator do the job well ? If yes why discriminate because of age? You may grow old one day is it your wish to be treated badly because of age without ability mattering? I never expressed an opinion in that regard. I simply stated a simple fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.