Flight Attendants’ Remuneration Act

Summary#

This bill changes the Canada Labour Code to make sure flight attendants are paid for more of the time they spend working. It says airlines must count pre-flight and post-flight tasks, mandatory training, and time spent at work during delays as paid work. Those hours must be paid at least at the attendant’s regular wage.

• Counts boarding, deplaning, cabin safety checks, and similar duties as paid time.
• Requires pay for mandatory training at no less than the usual hourly rate.
• Requires pay when attendants are at work and available to the airline, including during delays, even if the delay is not the airline’s fault.
• All of this time must be included when calculating daily, weekly, or pay-period hours.
• Sets a floor: the pay rate for these duties cannot be lower than the regular rate.

What it means for you#

• Flight attendants

  • You would be paid for boarding and deplaning, safety checks, and other pre- and post-flight work.
  • Time spent in required training would be paid at your regular wage, not a lower training rate.
  • If you are at work and on duty during a delay, that time would be paid.
  • More of your workday would count toward paid hours, which could increase your total pay and may affect overtime eligibility.
  • Clearer rules could reduce disputes over what time is paid.

• Airline employers

  • You would need to track and pay for pre- and post-flight duties, mandatory training, and on-duty delay time.
  • Payroll systems and scheduling may need updates to reflect the added paid time.
  • Labor costs for cabin crew could rise because more time is paid at the regular rate.
  • Policies and collective agreements may need review to ensure they meet the new standards.

• Passengers

  • Service levels and safety checks would not change, but airlines could adjust prices or schedules in response to higher labor costs.
  • You may see fewer disputes about boarding pay and delays, which could improve staff morale.

Expenses#

Estimated impact: would likely increase labor costs for airlines; minimal direct cost to the federal government.

• Airlines would pay more wages for time that is often unpaid today (boarding/deplaning, on-duty delays, and training).
• Some added administrative costs to track and document these hours.
• The federal government’s direct costs would be limited to enforcement under existing labor standards systems.

Proponents' View#

• Paying for all work done is fair. Safety checks, boarding, and training are real work and should not be unpaid.
• Recognizes safety-critical duties and could improve safety by valuing that time.
• Could improve morale, reduce turnover, and support better recruitment in a tight labor market.
• Clear national rule reduces confusion and disputes across airlines and bases.
• Paying for on-duty delay time respects workers’ time, even when delays are beyond the airline’s control.

Opponents' View#

• Airlines’ costs would rise, which could lead to higher fares, reduced schedules, or pressure elsewhere in budgets.
• Tracking every minute of pre/post-flight duties and delay time could be complex and create new disputes.
• Some airlines say they already compensate this time through other pay elements (like per diems), so this could duplicate or disrupt existing pay systems.
• Could prompt airlines to change pay structures (for example, lowering base rates or tightening hours) to offset the added cost.
• May affect competitiveness with carriers operating under different labor rules.