Air Canada Strike: Comparison of US (RLA) and Canadian Labor Laws
October 1, 2025 — Air Canada Flight Attendants, standing in solidarity in their union (Canadian Union of Public Employees - CUPE) inspired workers around the world with their strike for a fair contract and pay for time on the job, especially while with passengers or performing safety functions. We supported their strike with efforts to house strikers, provide transportation, general financial support, joining their picketlines, and preparing other actions to support their strike. There is no doubt the actions of Air Canada Flight Attendants were not only good for demonstrating the power of Flight Attendants and the current issues we are taking on around unpaid work, but also the fight of the working class worldwide.
In the U.S. we have taken strike votes, typically over 99%, demonstrating we are ready to strike to back up our demands. So why haven’t we hit the streets like Air Canada and what’s the status of their agreement now?
The Strike
The power of the strike was unbreakable solidarity - action by all Flight Attendants to take part in the strike, support by their international union and other unions across Canada, the U.S. and around the world, and support from the flying public who identified with the fight for fairness at work. It’s important to always remember that the strike is our tactic, solidarity is our power.
There are two key differences between labor law for aviation workers in the United States and Canada:
- Aviation workers negotiate under the same labor law as other Canadian workers from industries outside transportation and the right to strike is Constitutional in Canada, not just a provision of labor law.
- Aviation contracts expire in Canada and the union can call a strike after the expiration with 72 hours notice, as opposed to our labor law where our contracts do not expire and the government decides when and if we have the right to strike by releasing the parties from mediation into a 30-day-cooling off period before a strike deadline.
The key distinction to understand about how the process works in the U.S. versus how it works in Canada is in the timing and the authority to end the negotiations/mediation process.
Similarities between Canadian labor law and the Railway Labor Act
- Labor laws in both countries have the following similarities:
- A right to strike is recognized subject to certain limitations.
- Elaborate procedures for collective bargaining.
- Government mediation and supervision of the process.
- Legislature can dictate terms of a settlement if all else fails.
- Fines and penalties.
Differences between Canadian labor law and the Railway Labor Act
- Different timelines for negotiations.
- In the US, the National Mediation Board (NMB) has exclusive control over how long mediation continues (although unions can strategically make a difference in the way we approach negotiations). In Canada, the parties to the negotiations control when the process ends.
- Contracts have set expiration dates in Canada but only become “amendable” in the US.
- Different notice requirements
- Canada has no status quo requirement like the US has in the RLA.
- Canadian law is focused on promoting agreement between the parties; US law, while stating it promotes ‘prompt settlement of disputes’ has been applied by Administrations and the Courts to focus on avoiding/preventing strikes.
Air Canada Strike and Workers Rights Compared to U.S. Bargaining Under the RLA
Under the RLA, collective bargaining agreements do not have a specific expiration date after which the contract is no longer in effect. Rather, the contracts become “amendable” on their “amendable date” and remain in full force and effect for the duration of negotiations, mediation, and any cooling-off period. This provision of the law was intended to maintain labor peace by preserving the status quo during negotiations, but in practice this removes the time pressure that drives the negotiations toward a conclusion under other systems like that in Canada.
Under the RLA, once the parties are in mediation, the NMB has sole discretion to determine whether and when further mediation would be futile and thus offer a proffer of arbitration and start a 30-day cooling-off period to strike a deadline. Either party may request a release from mediation, but this typically requires the negotiations to only have a handful of unresolved issues and an assessment that the negotiations could practically be resolved within 30 days. Once the NMB releases the parties from mediation, the oversight of the negotiations transfers to the President of the United States and ultimately Congress. While the NMB typically remains involved in the negotiations, their statutory oversight is subordinated to the President’s authority.
By contrast, in the Canadian system, labor contracts have a specific expiration date which can only be extended by mutual agreement. Absent mutual agreement the contract drops dead on the expiration date. In the recent Air Canada negotiations, flight attendant bargaining had been ongoing for just eight months before the strike, with government supervised mediation for the final five of those eight months. CUPE, on behalf of the flight attendants, triggered the end of mediation unilaterally by giving the required 72-hours’ notice before striking. Under the RLA there is no similar right to end the process simply by giving notice.
Because of these dissimilarities, strikes and work actions in the two countries are also not the same. Any strike, and the strategy and tactics associated with the strike, needs to be undertaken based on the specific rights and requirements of the law in the country of the strike. Under the RLA, for example, intermittent strikes, targeted strikes, and other creative tactics are possible, and offer unique opportunities to maximize leverage and minimize risk. While the Air Canada flight attendants were at great risk in defying government orders to end their strike, they were banking on an assumption that the ruling Liberal government would hesitate to escalate the dispute by imposing fines and jail time. In the end, that analysis proved correct, at least for long enough that the parties were able to reach a settlement. A strike in the U.S. requires first the right to strike initiated by the government. Strategy and tactics by the union should be adapted based on the current political and policy environment.
What did the Flight Attendant win through their strike and what is yet to be determined?
Air Canada Flight Attendants forced management to reach agreement to end their three day strike (August 16-19) on these key four issues in order to resolve the strike:
Key Elements of the Tentative Agreement:
- Pay Increases: The deal includes wage increases over several years, with different percentages for junior and senior members.
- Ground Pay: Flight attendants will receive pay for ground time starting 60 minutes before departure on narrow-body aircraft, with the paid percentage gradually increasing in the years to come.
- On-Call Duty: The duration of reserve (on-call) status was reduced from 24 hours to 16 hours.
- Vacation and Benefits: Terms for pensions, health benefits, vacation, and other benefits were also finalized as part of the agreement.
All of the terms went into effect except the wages that the members voted to reject by over 99%. The union has requested final and binding arbitration to argue before a neutral arbitrator what the wages should be. As of October 1, 2025, the parties are still waiting on dates for the wage arbitration.
