Racism | Multicultural Meanderings

2020 brought ugly truths about inequity to the forefront — like how Ontario’s Medical Association still upholds structural racism

2021/01/09 Leave a comment

A bit of a meandering critique, ranging from the well-demonstrated disparities in health to the narrower focus on OMA fee structure for non-insured services. While one can argue the inequity aspects (like in so many areas, not convinced that this is necessarily structural racism:

2020 was an awakening in the ongoing struggle against inequity.
Race-based health inequities highlighted the persistence of structural racism in health care. The importance of diverse representation in medicine became glaringly obvious, and the need to address a status quo of inequality became more urgent. The Ontario Medical Association, a membership organization that ‘represents the political, clinical and economic interests’ of Ontario’s physicians’, from family doctors to specialists, is a powerful organization and a major government partner in administering health care.
In response to the 2020 awakening, the OMA released a year end communication stating it is committed to enhancing “equity, diversity and inclusion across all facets of the organization” and to promoting those concepts “including their importance at the societal level.”
But this statement is contradicted by their own actions and policies of the last several years.
Reconciliation, for example, is one of the most pressing matters of our time. Yet, in 2018, the OMA took a major step backward, as the Governing Council summarily defeated a motion submitted by the Ontario Medical Students Association requesting that OMA General Council Meetings open with an acknowledgment and reflection on relationships with Indigenous peoples in Canada. A shift in physician culture towards acknowledgment of Indigenous peoples rights is a fundamental step toward healing. Without this physicians will continue to operate in perpetual structures of racism and exclusion, and health care gaps will not close.
The 2020 pandemic also revealed the intimate links between race, income and health. Research shows that 87 per cent of Indigenous adults in Toronto live below the Low Income Cut Off. Black, Indigenous and other People of Colour (BIPOC) people made up more than 83 per cent of first wave COVID infectionsin Toronto, and they continue to be over seven times more likely to contract COVID than White Torontonians. BIPOC communities are also more likely to live in multi-generational, inadequate or crowded housing. Overcrowded and unsafe factories, employment in health services or personal support or delivery jobs that ensure those with privilege can stay home, account for much of the high prevalence of COVID in these neighbourhoods.
The OMA continues to perpetuate rules and policies which disproportionately impact racialized communities.
The OMA publishes the Physician’s Guide to Uninsured Services: a document that details fees that physicians can directly charge patients. Examples include transferring medical records, providing telephone advice, or phoning in prescriptions.
This 52-page OMA compendium is a remarkably detailed catalogue on how to bill for every conceivable service at a rate equivalent to 2.31 times the value of the 2014 OHIP fee schedule or $411 per hour. The OMA allots exactly 10 lines to the issue of patients’ ability to pay for uninsured services.
Doctors have no training in assessing the ability of patients to pay. The vast majority of doctors have had no experience with living on incomes below the low income-cut off or poverty line. Those who have experienced such poverty left that status long ago. Yet these same doctors are supposed to judge a patient’s ability to pay — patients whose annual incomes are in many cases a twenty-fifth or less of the physician before whom they sit. Patients are compelled to plead poverty in a humiliating interaction with their physician.
Who are these patients who must engage in such unequal bargaining with their physicians? Again, they are disproportionately BIPOC, including immigrants and refugees, who are massively overrepresented in the lower income classes. The OMA’s billing guide is a classic example of structural racism precisely because its effects are felt most by BIPOC communities.
Human rights vernacular is empty talk if the result is entrenched bias and its consequent harm. The OMA creates the culture within which Ontario’s physicians operate. It must tackle head on its own discriminatory practices.
Philip B. Berger is an Associate Professor in the Temerty Faculty of Medicine at the University of TorontoSuzanne Shoush is a Black and Indigenous mother, physician and Indigenous Health Faculty Lead for the University of Toronto Department of Family and Community Medicine. Semir Bulle is the outgoing co-president of the Black Medical Students Association at the University of Toronto and co-founder of Doctors for Defunding Police. Follow him at @SemirBulle.

Source: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2021/01/07/2020-brought-ugly-truths-about-inequity-to-the-forefront-like-how-ontarios-medical-association-still-upholds-structural-racism.html

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with fee structure, non-insured services, Ontario Medical Association

Association of Justice Counsel files grievance against Canadian Human Rights Commission, amid ongoing complaints of racism, discrimination

2020/12/23 Leave a comment

Of note and to watch:

The Association of Justice Counsel filed a grievance against the Canadian Human Rights Commission last week on behalf of its Black and racialized members, and, according to a number of sources with information about the commission’s operations, they say there is ongoing systemic discrimination and a disproportionate dismissal of race-based complaints at the commission.

The AJC, which represents around 2,600 lawyers employed by the federal government who work for the Department of Justice, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, and provide in-house legal services to various federal agencies, tribunals and courts across the country, also includes members who are lawyers with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

The AJC says it reactivated its policy grievance on Dec. 17, which it previously filed with the Treasury Board on behalf of their Black and racialized members at the CHRC, in October, after employees raised issues of system racism with CHRC management and after CHRC Chief Commissioner Marie-Claude Landry issued a statement on June 2 in support of Black Lives Matters.

The AJC says Black and racialized employees took the CHRC chief commissioner up on her statement in support of Black Lives Matters and provided the CHRC with a list of recommended actions to address “the complaints process, practices, and operations as well as shared Black and racialized employees’ experiences,” but said the CHRC responded by conducting a “unilateral, non-inclusive investigative process.”

The policy grievance argues that a contract has been breached. Following the filing of a policy grievance and when the employer responds, the parties involved negotiate to understand if compensation is possible. The Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board administers the collective bargaining process and the adjudication of grievances and complaints for the federal public sector and parliamentary employees.

“Together, the AJC and other bargaining agents representing Black and racialized members at the CHRC, have been pressing the CHRC to revisit its plans to ensure meaningful collaboration, transparency, fairness, inclusivity, credibility and psychological health and safety in their approaches,” according to the AJC’s Dec. 17 statement. “While the AJC and other [bargaining agents] have been engaging with the CHRC over the past few months, it’s apparent that trust in management’s ability to appropriately deal with the challenges before them has been put to the test as management appears to have lost the trust of those Black and racialized employees who have come forward.”

The AJC originally filed the grievance relating to racism and systemic discrimination at the commission in October, according to David McNairn, president of the counsel.

“We asked for that policy grievance to be held in abeyance while we tried to work on this issue, and recently, we’ve decided that it’s appropriate to move ahead with that,” said Mr. McNairn in an interview with The Hill Times last week.

“That policy grievance, unless it’s resolved, it would end up going directly before the board,” said Mr. McNairn, who also said that the AJC has had discussions with the management of the CHRC and have communicated about a number of items which they believe need to be done to address the situation.

“It’s a very sad and tragic story where the Canadian institution which is entrusted with protecting Canadians from racism and discrimination is itself, apparently, a source of racism and discrimination,” said Mr. McNairn. “There cannot be a greater tragedy than that, in my view. Obviously the commission has an incredibly important leadership role in setting standards for eliminating racism and systemic discrimination and has a mandate to protect Canadians.”

“So it’s extremely difficult to understand, but we have members who are employees there who are raising these issues with us, and we obviously want to stand behind our members and bring about some sort of meaningful change,” said Mr. McNairn.

According to the AJC’s website, earlier this year, employees at the commission raised issues of systemic racism with CHRC management and sought the assistance of their unions.

“When the CHRC issued a statement in support of Black Lives Matters, Black and racialized employees took the chief commissioner up on her invitation in that statement and provided the CHRC with a list of recommended actions to address the complaints process, practices, and operations as well as shared Black and racialized employees’ experiences,” according to the AJC’s website. “The commission responded by conducting a unilateral, non-inclusive investigative processes involving outside parties without consulting employees or their bargaining agents.”

‘The CHRC needs to be reformed’

Billeh Hamud, a lawyer who has represented clients at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court, the Federal Court of Canada, and the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, told The Hill Times that “as someone who has practiced in this area, [the CHRC] needs to be reformed.”

“Based on my experience, part of the problem with the commission’s complaint process is their application of the case law with respect to racial discrimination,” said Mr. Hamud. “The commission applies a stricter test of racial discrimination when reviewing complaints than the courts and tribunals. As a result, cases with merit are being rejected by the commission.”

“It’s always subtle,” said Mr. Hamud.

Mr. Hamud also said the current system is contrary to our adversarial system of justice in Canada and that specifically, complainants do not have direct access to a third party decision maker who has heard the evidence, the merits of the complaint and can make a decision.

“What’s happening with the commission right now is because you have people who do not understand the case law in terms of racial discrimination when it comes to employment, for example, and they’re making decisions [and] not referring it to the Tribunal when in most cases, they should,” said Mr. Hamud.

According to documents obtained by The Hill Times, which outline the complaints referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal by ground of discrimination from 2014 to 2020, 18 complaints were received from 2014-2017 on the grounds of race, with 56 referred between 2018-2020, for a total of 74.

Accepted complaints by grounds of discrimination from January 1, 2020 to November 11 2020, came to 261, with national/ethnic origin complaints coming in at 263.

Complaints referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal by grounds of discrimination between January 1, 2020, to November 11, 2020, came to 47. Complaints referred as a function of national/ethnic origin came in at 44.

The Hill Times requested an interview with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, a request which was originally granted with a scheduled discussion with Chief Commissioner Marie-Claude Landry shortly before spokesperson Véronique Robitaille informed our paper that “because of shifting circumstances around the litigation process, we are unable to provide an interview for you today.”

According to the CHRC’s statement, “more than two years ago, we began a commission-wide process of internal reflection to strengthen the commission and its processes. Like many organizations, we recognize that there is much work to do to fully achieve equality and inclusion. That is why the commission has been examining how racism may manifest itself within our organization and what steps might be needed to address it.”

“While we’re pleased that the Treasury Board Secretariat reported this year that the commission was the only public service organization of its size to meet or exceed the Government of Canada’s targets for representation of all employment equity groups, we are committed to doing even more. We recognize that the Employment Equity Act, which is the basis for the TBS evaluations, needs to be modernized, and the CHRC will continue to advocate for this,” according to Ms. Robitaille.

“We know that Indigenous, Black and other racialized people face many societal, institutional and structural barriers to equality. That is why work is underway to ensure that the views and perspectives of Indigenous, Black, and other racialized employees on barriers that may exist within the Commission are heard and addressed.”

Ms. Robitaille also told The Hill Times that regarding the commission’s complaints screening process, they have solicited advice from experts over the past year, including from racialized communities from across the country, on how we can improve our complaints processes.

“Based on this and staff feedback we are making significant changes to the complaints screening tools that we use. We have also brought in experts to train our employees and commissioners, including specialized training on handling of race complaints, and launched a project to collect disaggregated data on our race-based complaints, a key recommendation which has been put forward by staff and stakeholders,” said Ms. Robitaille. “Early indications are that these changes are having a positive impact on the treatment of race-based complaints.”

Current model of the commission as ‘gatekeeper’ of complaints should be eliminated, according to report

Former Supreme Court of Canada judge Gérard La Forest, who was appointed to the top court in January 1985 and retired in 1997, chaired a panel’s report called Promoting Equality: A New Vision in June 2000 that was tasked with reviewing the Canadian Human Rights Act, decades following its passage in 1977.

According to the Canadian Bar Association at the time, “the current model of the commission as a ‘gatekeeper’ of complaints should be eliminated.”

“Victims of discrimination should be able to pursue their complaints even if the Commission does not want to be involved. We suggest a model for individual complaints which gives less of a role to the Commission as an investigative body and more to the Tribunal as an adjudicative body. The Commission should be the first point of contact for a complainant, and the Commission should make a quick determination as to whether it wants to be involved,” according to the report.

Finally, according to the Coalition for Reform of the Ontario Human Rights Commission who were cited in the report, “the existing commission style model does not reflect this fundamental distinction between public and individual interests.”

“By forcing all individual complainants to pass through the gatekeeper, there is no opportunity to directly present evidence to a decision-maker with the power to issue an enforceable order. This model creates a system that is paternalistic, disempowering and ultimately discriminatory because the only people in Canada who are forced to go through the system are the ones who are already identified as disadvantaged,” according to the report.

Atong Ater, member of the Federal Black Employee Caucus’ (FBEC) core team, told The Hill Times that “given what we have been hearing from within the Commission, particularly over the past summer, we couldn’t necessarily, in good faith, continue to engage with them.”

Ms. Ater said they informed the commission that in September, they would be putting a pause on engagements until there was progress that adequately recognized and meaningfully addressed the concerns of their Black and other racialized employees that they were bringing forward.

The AJC’s resumption of the policy grievance comes on the heels of a proposed class-action lawsuit by 12 former and current Black federal public servants alleging that Black employees have been systematically excluded from advancement and subjected to discrimination within the government for decades.

The representative plaintiffs, who have or continue to work for a number of federal departments, are seeking $900-million in damages as well as a mandatory order to implement a Diversity and Promotional Plan for Black Public Service Employees related to the hiring and promotion of Black employees within the public service.

Source: Association of Justice Counsel files grievance against Canadian Human Rights Commission, amid ongoing complaints of racism, discrimination

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with Association of Justice Counsel, Black Canadians, Canadian Human Rights Commission, grievance, Public service

Germany: She Called Police Over a Neo-Nazi Threat. But the Neo-Nazis Were Inside the Police.

2020/12/22 2 Comments

Disturbing:

Traveling for work and far from home, Seda Basay-Yildiz received a chilling fax at her hotel: “You filthy Turkish sow,” it read. “We will slaughter your daughter.”
A German defense lawyer of Turkish descent who specializes in Islamist terrorism cases, Ms. Basay-Yildiz was used to threats from the far right. But this one, which arrived late one night in August 2018, was different.
Signed with the initials of a former neo-Nazi terrorist group, it contained her address, which was not publicly available because of the earlier threats. Whoever sent it had access to a database protected by the state.
“I knew I had to take this seriously — they had our address, they knew where my daughter lives,” Ms. Basay-Yildiz recalled in an interview. “And so for the first time I actually called the police.”
It would bring her little sense of security: An investigation soon showed that the information had been retrieved from a police computer.
Far-right extremism is resurgent in Germany, in ways that are new and very old, horrifying a country that prides itself on dealing honestly with its murderous past. This month, a two-year parliamentary inquiry concluded that far-right networks had extensively penetrated German security services, including its elite special forces.
But increasingly, the spotlight is turning on Germany’s police, a much more sprawling and decentralized force with less stringent oversight than the military — and with a more immediate impact on the everyday safety of citizens, experts warn.
After World War II, the greatest preoccupation among the United States, its allies and Germans themselves was that the country’s police force never again be militarized, or politicized and used as a cudgel by an authoritarian state like the Gestapo.
Policing was fundamentally overhauled in West Germany after the war, and cadets across the country are now taught in unsparing detail about the shameful legacy of policing under the Nazis — and how it informs the mission and institution of policing today.
Still, Germany has been besieged by revelations of police officers in different corners of the country forming groups based on a shared far-right ideology.
“I always hoped that it was individual cases, but there are too many of them now,” said Herbert Reul, the interior minister of North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, where 203 police officers are under investigation in connection with reported far-right incidents.
For Mr. Reul, the alarm sounded in September, when 31 officers in his state were found to have shared violent neo-Nazi propaganda. “It was almost an entire unit of officers — and we found out by chance,” Mr. Reul said this past week in an interview. “That floored me. This is not trivial.”
“We have a problem with far-right extremism,” he said. “I don’t know how far it reaches inside the institutions. But if we don’t deal with it, it will grow.”
It has been growing by the month.
The 31 officers in Mr. Reul’s western state were suspended in September for sharing images of Hitler, memes of a refugee in a gas chamber and the shooting of a Black man. The unit’s superior was part of the chat, too.
In October, a racist chat group with 25 officers was discovered in the Berlin police after one officer frustrated that superiors would not do anything about it blew the whistle. Separately, six cadets were kicked out of Berlin’s police academy after playing down the Holocaust and sharing images of swastikas in a chat group that had 26 other members.
In November, a police station in the western city of Essen was raided after images of ammunition and benches arranged to form swastikas were discovered in a WhatsApp chat. This past week, a violent far-right chat with four police officers in the northern cities of Kiel and Neumünster was discovered. Ammunition and Nazi memorabilia were found in raids of the homes of two officers.
Much focus has been on the state of Hesse, home to Ms. Basay-Yildiz, who lives in Frankfurt, and a number of other high-profile targets of neo-Nazi threats.
Ms. Basay-Yildiz is intimately familiar with discrimination in Germany.
When she was just 10 years old, her parents, guest workers from Turkey, took the young Seda to help translate when they went to buy car insurance. The salesman declined to sell it to them. “We don’t want foreigners,” he told them.
“So I decided that I want to know what kind of rights I have in Germany,” Ms. Basay-Yildiz recalled. She went to the library, found an agency to file a complaint and got her parents the insurance they wanted.
It was then she knew what she wanted to do with her life.
She rose to prominence as a lawyer when she represented the family of a Turkish flower seller who was shot at his roadside stand. He was the first victim of the National Socialist Underground, known as the N.S.U., a neo-Nazi terrorist group that killed 10 people, nine of them immigrants, between 2000 and 2007.
Police forces across Germany blamed immigrants, failing to recognize that the perpetrators were wanted neo-Nazis, while paid informers of the intelligence service helped hide the group’s leaders. Files on the informers were shredded by the intelligence service within days of the story’s exploding into the public in 2011.
After a five-year trial that ended only in July 2018, Ms. Basay-Yildiz won her clients modest compensation but not what they had most hoped for: answers.
“How big was that network and what did state institutions know?” said Ms. Basay-Yildiz. “After 438 days in court we still don’t know.”
Three weeks after the trial finished, she received her first threat by fax. They have not stopped since. Ms. Basay-Yildiz represents precisely the kind of change in Germany that the far right despises.
But she is not the only one. Police computers in Hesse have been used to call up data on a Turkish-German comedian, Idil Baydar, as well as a left-wing politician, Janine Wissler, who both received threats. The police president of the state failed to report it for months. He had to resign in July.
Most of the threats, including those to Ms. Basay-Yildiz, have come in the form of emails signed “NSU 2.0.”
In all, the state government has been looking into 77 cases of far-right extremism in its police force since 2015. This past summer it named a special investigator whose team is focused solely on the email threats.
When investigators discovered that Ms. Basay-Yildiz’s information had been called up on a computer in Frankfurt’s first precinct an hour and a half before she received the threat, the police officer who had been logged on at the time was suspended. The whole police station was searched and computers and cellphones were analyzed, leading to the suspension of five more officers. Later in the year, the number grew to 38.
Ms. Basay-Yildiz is not reassured.
“If you have 38 people, you have a structural problem,” she said. “And if you don’t realize this, nothing will change.”
Others, too, fear that the infiltration of police ranks poses special dangers for Germany, not least a creeping subversion of state institutions that are supposed to serve and protect the public.
“These far-right calls for resistance to public servants are an attempt to subvert the state from the inside,” said Stephan Kramer, head of the intelligence agency of the eastern state of Thuringia. “The risk of infiltration is real and has to be taken seriously.”
Like the military, the police have been aggressively courted by the far-right Alternative for Germany party, known by its German initials, AfD, since its founding in 2013. Four of the AfD’s 88 lawmakers in the federal Parliament are former police officers — nearly 5 percent compared with less than 2 percent in all other parties.
Penetrating state institutions, especially those with guns, has been part of the party’s strategy from the start. Especially in eastern states, a more extremist AfD has already made deep inroads into the police force.
Björn Höcke, a history teacher turned firebrand politician who runs the AfD in the eastern state of Thuringia, has repeatedly appealed to police officers and intelligence agents to resist the orders of the government, which he calls “the real enemies of democracy and freedom.”
Then, there is the question of whether the police force can adequately police itself. Despite strong evidence in her case, Ms. Basay-Yildiz notes, the perpetrators have not been identified.
The officer who had been logged into the work station that had been used to access Ms. Basay-Yildiz’s home address, and the names and birthdays of her daughter, husband, mother and father, turned out to be part of a WhatsApp group containing half a dozen police officers who shared racist, neo-Nazi content.
One image showed Hitler on a rainbow with the caption “Good night, you Jews.” There were images of concentration camp inmates and images mocking drowned refugees and people with Down syndrome.
The officers were suspended and interrogated. They offered multiple alibis — requests for information are so numerous, they could not recall accessing the information; many officers can use the same computer.
The investigation stalled.
“It was absurd,” Ms. Basay-Yildiz said. “I have to assume that they did not treat these suspects as they would treat other suspects because they are colleagues.”
More frightening than the threats, Ms. Basay-Yildiz said, was her growing sense that the police were shielding far-right extremists in their ranks.
She was never even shown photos of the officers in question, who remain suspended on reduced pay, she said.
The threats kept coming, sometimes every few months, sometimes weekly. She moved her family to another part of town. Her new address was even more protected than the old one. Ordinary police computers could no longer call it up. For 18 months, she felt safe.
But early this year that changed: Whoever was threatening her had identified her new address and made sure she knew it.
This time the police came back and said her address had not been accessed internally.
“The circle of those inside the security services with access to my details is very small,” she noted. One would think that would make it easier to find the perpetrator. But she is not optimistic.
“I live in Hesse,” she said. “We saw what happened here.”
Last February a far-right gunman killed nine people of immigrant descent in two shisha bars in the city of Hanau, near Frankfurt.
In June 2019, Walter Lübcke, a regional politician who had defended Chancellor Angela Merkel’s refugee policy, was fatally shot on his front porch two hours northeast of Frankfurt after years of death threats.
On Nov. 11, Ms. Basay-Yildiz received her latest threat. It opened with “Heil Hitler!” and closed with “Say hi to your daughter from me.”
When she reported it to the police, their assessment was that she and her daughter were in no concrete danger.
“But I can’t rely on that anymore,” Ms. Basay-Yildiz said. “It’s a great factor of insecurity: Who can I trust? And who can I call if I can’t trust the police?”

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/21/world/europe/germany-far-right-neo-nazis-police.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with Germany, neo-Nazi, police

Effective anti-racism strategies and conversations: Lessons from the literature

2020/12/21 Leave a comment

Not bad advice from Australia:

From racist tirades on buses and trains captured on camera phones, to genocide, deaths in custody, and race-based violence, there are many demonstrations of the need for good anti-racism interventions. One can’t help but look at instances of bigotry and wonder: could this have been prevented if prejudice had been targeted and challenged early on? Unfortunately, as psychologists one of the striking things we’ve found about studying anti-prejudice interventions is how frequently they backfire. Not only is it hard to lower other people’s prejudices, but sometimes our attempts to do so end up intensifying prejudice instead!
This insight and other findings from psychological research on racism and prejudice can dishearten those of us who have dedicated our studies to tackling the evils of racism in society. However, this research has also helped us to identify some important lessons to help to build resilience in this challenging area of behaviour change.

LESSON 1

Focus on change within your own group, not others

Racism interventions typically bring to mind mass media campaigns, tolerant organisational policies, and training in one-on-one interactions. Yet, all of these interventions can be ineffective if we don’t feel as though the anti-racism message comes from ‘one of us’ (a fellow group member). For instance, LNP party members are more likely to listen to and accept a message from Tony Abbott than one from Kevin Rudd. If people feel like someone from another group is judging them critically, it can make them reject the message (Hornsey & Imani, 2004) – and for an anti-racism intervention, it can make them intensify their prejudice. That’s why it’s so important that respected in-group members deliver the message and model the desired behaviour.
Sometimes, of course, this is not possible. Then, it can be helpful to stress that there’s a common identity that includes both sources and targets of discrimination (i.e., “We’re all Australians”). This approach comes with its own problems, however. For example, it can make people from more privileged backgrounds think the discrimination is ancient history that doesn’t need to be addressed anymore. Focusing only on the common in-group can also make advantaged group members expect forgiveness from disadvantaged groups without changing prejudiced behaviours, or increasing support for reconciliation (Greenaway & Louis, 2010).

LESSON 2

Portray tolerant behaviour as widely supported

Most activists have a strong instinct that emphasising the scale of the problem is important in a campaign (“Racism is everywhere, and must be overcome!”). However, psychological research suggests that this is not necessarily a good idea. People are most likely to accept a message of widespread discrimination if they don’t identify with the perpetrating group. If people identify with the perpetrating group (and after all, this is the group that anti-racism campaigns are targeting), then making salient the belief that discrimination is widespread may make people more likely to engage in the problem behaviour (Louis et al., 2007, 2012). Even the message “this behaviour is common but terrible and we need to change it” boils down to “this behaviour is common”, and people behave accordingly. We like to do what our group does, and if something is common, and characterises our group’s behaviour, we feel that that we should get involved (even with racism).
Therefore, it’s important to draw attention to alternative positive behaviours instead of increasing the salience of prejudice per se. In particular, one should focus on tolerant behaviour being expected, appropriate and morally right. For example, we suspect that recent news coverage featuring one person’s ranting racist diatribe on public transport followed by several people challenging the bad behaviour could have marked anti-racism effects.

LESSON 3

Friendship matters

Pointing out racial inequality is confronting for bigots, so the most effective ‘anti-racism campaigns’ may be indirect – those that provide positive portrayals of tolerant interactions between advantaged and disadvantaged groups without drawing attention to their anti-racism purpose. Putting forward racial minority group members as champions or leaders of a larger group may have powerful indirect effects, for example. There is also evidence showing that from toddlerhood onwards, having friends of different races reduces racism and increases intergroup warmth (Barlow et al., 2009). Even just seeing that intergroup friendships exist can lower prejudice, which is inspiring (Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe, & Ropp, 1997).
Therefore, if you’re from a more privileged background, you can make an effort to have a wide friendship circle and to talk openly about your intergroup friendships. Modelling and communicating inclusive attitudes and actions could be important to spread these norms. This concept of modelling can be extended to the use of high profile individuals in anti-racism campaigns. Seeing popular and respected in-group members engaging in tolerant behaviours can have powerful anti-racism effects.

LESSON 4

Break up the racist consensus, interrupt silences and claim the group!

What about directly confronting bigoted family, friends and co-workers? The first rule is, aim to break up the racist consensus – don’t be silent. A dynamic in which public racism goes unchallenged makes other people think racism is more socially acceptable than it is, which spreads the problem behaviour. Don’t let that happen – speak up!
Don’t leave it for minority group members either – often in a mixed-race group if someone says something racist, the other privileged group members freeze. They think only disadvantaged group members have the right to respond. But that can make it look like everyone’s racist, and put disadvantaged people on the spot. What’s more, when disadvantaged group members speak out they cop social flak (Kaiser & Miller, 2001). It’s often better for the most socially powerful non-racist person to speak up and show solidarity — that could be you!
When you talk, focus on the behaviour not the person, and say something like “No way. I reckon most people would think that …” and carry on from there articulating a positive, non-racist view. Or, “Whoa! What did you just say? We say x instead….” and so on. The good news is your intervention is more likely to be effective if you don’t make it part of a broader, hours-long conversation about your political differences. Ranters get tuned out. Express your anger later, with your non-racist friends. Short, warmly delivered, direct contradiction followed by a positive alternative could be the way to go.

LESSON 4a

Think carefully before calling someone racist

Calling someone racist or labelling their behaviour racist is good if it makes other bystanders less likely to copy them (e.g., children), or other disadvantaged group members feel like you’re standing by them passionately as an ally. But it puts the bigot on the defensive and may make them less likely to change. One on one, you’re better off talking about your personal experiences and what from your own life leads you to think whatever they said is not true. You also can appeal to common values (“Are you giving x a fair go?”; Louis et al., 2012) and to perspective-taking (“What would you do in their shoes?”). Acknowledging the basis for their views as valid (“You love Australia and want to protect what we have”) doesn’t mean accepting their view as valid. Listening and acknowledging what bigots say can be an important part of building the relationship trust that may subsequently allow them to hear what you’ve got to say in a non-defensive way.

LESSON 4b

Be in the minority without despondency

Finally, sometimes you’re trapped in a large group of racists whom you have no hope of changing. Should you still speak up? Yes! Take it lightly (you’re not going to change their views that day), but do take the opportunity to fracture their consensus. Briefly and warmly present a positive alternative belief or modelled behaviour. Stress the similarities between you, and then highlight your resistance to what they’re saying. Listen and acknowledge what they say, while continuing non-defensively but persistently to dissent. It may be tedious but it’s great karma – and it will make it easier for their views to change down the track.

LESSON 5

Politics matter

While we focus above on how individual APS members might confront racism successfully, coordinated political and social action is also critical for promoting legal and normative change (Louis et al., 2010, 2012). In the area of Reconciliation, supporting Indigenous groups and individuals is important. For example, APS members individually and collectively support AIPA (the Australian Indigenous Psychologists’ Association) and the APS Reconciliation Action Plan. Political advocacy by organisations like ANTAR (Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation) and Reconciliation Australia will always be important, along with voters urging their political parties to engage with and promote Reconciliation. This is especially true in an election year!
More broadly, we hope that readers combine personal and group-level support for anti-racism initiatives. Psychologists as well as other Australians can play a key role in promoting positive change by progressing personal friendships, taking stands in public, and supporting the interests of minority groups in workplaces, community organisations and political life.

Source: https://psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/2013/august/louis

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with anti-racism, Dr Fiona Kate Barlow, Stephen La Macchia, Winnifred Louis

Douglas Todd: B.C. Muslims rattled by confrontational Victoria imam

2020/12/18 2 Comments

Certainly hate speech, and interesting point about the impact of the Harper government’s repeal of provisions allowing citizens to launch civil actions against online hate speech:

A militant imam in Victoria who openly calls Jews, Christians, atheists and free-speech advocates “filthy” and “evil” is causing distress among Canadian Muslims, and there are calls for him to be prosecuted for hate speech.

“Younus Kathrada is not taken seriously in our community. Somebody making those claims is not part of Islam. But I guess there is a fringe element that follows him,” says Haroon Khan, a trustee at Vancouver’s Al-Jamia mosque, which belongs to the B.C. Muslim Association and often holds interfaith events.

Kathrada — who leads an organization called Muslim Youth of Victoria that has more than 15,000 Facebook followers — recently referred to the French teacher who was beheaded near Paris for showing cartoons of Muhammad as “a cursed, evil-spirited filthy excuse for a human being.”The hard-line imam has also appealed to his followers in Victoria and beyond to “destroy the enemies of Islam, and annihilate the heretics and the atheists.” He has told members to not vote for “filthy” and “evil” political candidates who support homosexuality or “Zionism.”

Kathrada first made international headlines last year when he called Christmas a “false festival” and said it is worse for a Muslim to wish someone “Merry Christmas” than it is to engage in adultery or murder.And he is continuing with his online denunciations.

A Canadian human rights organization that has been tracking Kathrada’s online sermons for years has been pressing for him to be prosecuted for hate speech.

“There must be consequences for years of relentless hate and incitement against Jews and others,” said Michael Mostyn, chief executive of B’nai Brith Canada, a Jewish service and advocacy group.

This fall, Mostyn said, Kathrada delivered an online sermon that referred to Jews as “brothers of monkeys and khanzeer(pigs in Arabic).” He asked God to “tear them apart.”

B’nai Brith, which has warned the RCMP’s hate crimes unit about Kathrada’s video sermons, says Canada’s law-enforcement system has shown in the past few years that it is capable of prosecuting people who advocate hate.

In November, B.C. resident Arthur Topham was sentenced to a 30-day conditional sentence plus three years probation after failing to comply with the terms of his previous conviction in 2015, when a jury concluded he had wilfully promoted hatred against Jews, Mostyn said. Topham had described Jewish places of worship as “synagogues of Satan” and advocated forcibly sterilizing Jews.

The Victoria police department could not be reached for comment about whether Kathrada has been under investigation.

Vancouver human rights lawyer Aleem Harmal, however, said it’s become difficult to take legal action in Canada for hate speech made on the internet.The Conservative government of Stephen Harper repealed the part of the Human Rights Code that had allowed citizens to launch civil actions against online hate speech, said Harmal. As a result, hate speech on the Web is now treated as a criminal offence, which is much harder to prosecute.

A hate crime is generally defined as speech, writing or behaviour that uses pejorative or discriminatory language about a person or group on the basis of such things as their religion, ethnicity or nationality, Harmal said, adding he didn’t have the expertise to judge whether Kathrada’s actions amount to hate crimes.

Three leaders of the B.C. Muslim Association, which represents most Sunni Muslims, either did not return messages or declined to comment.

However, Khan, noting Kathrada’s group does not belong to the B.C. Muslim Association, said it makes some sense for people to push for the Victoria imam to be charged with a hate crime.

“He seems to be running amok. If he is defaming Christians and Jews, we strongly condemn that kind of language. We’re all brothers and sisters,” said Khan, who is in the pharmacy business when not overseeing the Al Jamia mosque.

Khan will be the MC of a Jan. 29, 2021, Zoom forum against Islamophobia, which will include Liberal Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, federal Diversity Minister Bardish Chagger, Vancouver councillor Christine Boyle, and RCMP hate crimes officer Anthony Statham.

Maintaining that Kathrada is “sidelined” among B.C.’s roughly 70,000 Sunni and Shia Muslims, Khan said he and other mainstream adherents will look further into what the sharp-tongued imam has been doing. “We’re very open-hearted and open-minded. He’s more of a fringe group.”

Kathrada’s Facebook page, which can be viewed by the public, has long featured running commentary in which he denounces perceived enemies of his intractable form of Islam, while his online followers, apparently using their real names, support and encourage him.

In recent weeks, France has been a key target of Kathrada’s attacks. He has joined calls by some Muslim leaders in the Middle East for a boycott of all French products in protest of President Emmanuel Macron’s defence of beheaded teacher Samuel Paty.

Paty was targeted close to his school near Paris for showing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in class. His killer, 18-year-old Abdullakh Anzorov, was shot dead by police. Macron said Paty was killed by an “Islamic terrorist” for standing up for free speech.

Top Muslim leaders in Egypt, Malaysia, Morocco and Pakistan have said freedom of expression does not apply to insulting Islam or Muslims — and they argued Macron, who has launched a major crackdown on Islamic fundamentalism in his country, is promoting Islamophobia.

Source: Douglas Todd: B.C. Muslims rattled by confrontational Victoria imam

Filed under Hate crimes, Multiculturalism, Racism, Religion Tagged with B'nai Brith, Douglas Todd, Hate speech, Muslim Youth of Victoria, Muslims, Younus Kathrada

Nicolas: Manque de vision (Quebec anti-racism strategy)

2020/12/16 Leave a comment

Good dissection of the weaknesses and lack of concrete action:

Des actions concrètes. Une approche pragmatique. À partir des constats déjà connus. C’est ce que nous avait promis le premier ministre François Legault en lançant en juin son Groupe d’action contre le racisme. On pourrait traduire : pas le temps de niaiser. Pas le temps de poser le problème auquel on s’attaque, d’expliquer comment il opère dans la société, et comment les mesures proposées pourront altérer positivement cet état de fait.
François Legault, Nadine Girault et Lionel Carmant nous disent qu’ils ne veulent pas parler de racisme systémique. Mais ils ne disent pas non plus de quoi ils veulent parler, eux.
Sur les 25 « actions concrètes » du rapport du Groupe d’action, une douzaine peut se résumer à des campagnes d’information et d’éducation. On veut former les policiers, les enseignants, les employés de l’État et les jeunes en âge scolaire, sensibiliser les ordres professionnels, informer les propriétaires et les locateurs et développer une campagne de sensibilisation qui ne vise rien de moins que l’ensemble de la population — et même, de manière étrangement spécifique, l’industrie de la construction, et cette industrie seulement. Les former, les sensibiliser à quoi ? Le racisme, c’est mal ? Le racisme, tolérance zéro ? Mais encore ?
Est-ce qu’on formera à l’impact des biais cognitifs sur les processus décisionnels, ou est-ce que les recherches en psychologie menées de front notamment par l’Université Harvard seront aussi considérées comme dangereuses pour le « consensus » québécois ? Est-ce qu’on formera à la réalité des Premières Nations et des Inuits en parlant de la colonisation des territoires autochtones notamment par le gouvernement du Québec, ou est-ce que ce serait aussi faire le « procès » de la majorité francophone ? Il semble qu’on a balayé en avant, avec ce rapport, tout le débat qu’on souhaitait éviter. On réalisera bien, en tentant de le mettre en œuvre, qu’il est impossible de lutter contre le racisme sans poser d’abord ce qu’il est.
Par exemple, les auteurs du rapport souhaitent s’en prendre au profilage racial des corps policiers en interdisant une fois pour toutes les interpellations policières aléatoires. Il faudra désormais que les policiers interpellent un citoyen en se basant sur des « soupçons raisonnables » et des « faits observables ». Très bien. Alors, si un agent scanne les plaques d’immatriculation des hommes noirs qu’il croise au volant et interpelle tous ceux qui conduisent une voiture enregistrée au nom de leur conjointe ou de leur mère (comme c’est parfois le cas), s’agit-il là d’un « soupçon raisonnable » de vol ou d’une pratique raciste ? Si un corps de police se met à pratiquer plutôt le « profilage criminel » en associant la criminalité à des traits et à des comportements qui sont plus communs parmi les Noirs, les Autochtones et les Arabes, est-ce là du racisme, du profilage racial, une interpellation non aléatoire ?
Les questions posées ne relèvent pas de la conjecture: c’est déjà souvent ainsi qu’on opère le déni de profilage racial au sein des corps policiers, malgré tous les rapports qui condamnent de telles pratiques. Une action efficace contre le racisme dans les corps policiers est une mesure qui anticipe le naturel qui revient au galop au fil des réformes, enveloppé dans de nouveaux prétextes politiquement corrects, et qui prévoit comment contrecarrer ces pièges.
Avec ce rapport, on est loin du compte. On déclare que l’on veut « rendre l’évaluation des compétences par les ordres professionnels plus rapide et flexible », ce qui est répété par tous les partis politiques au pouvoir depuis des décennies. On n’explique pas comment, cette fois, on réussira. On veut « augmenter, d’ici cinq ans, le taux de présence des membres des minorités visibles au sein de l’effectif de la fonction publique ». On ne précise même pas quel taux on souhaite atteindre, d’ici ces cinq années, ni avec quelles mesures.
C’est avec la comparaison qu’on voit le mieux le peu de substance qui nous est présenté cette semaine. Imaginons un plan d’action contre les changements climatiques dont près de la moitié des mesures pourraient être résumées à de la sensibilisation et à de l’information des individus, où l’autre moitié ne contiendrait aucun objectif chiffré, où le gouvernement du Québec parlerait simplement « d’inciter » certaines entreprises à agir et où on ne définirait même pas les changements climatiques, sous prétexte que chaque environnementaliste que l’on a rencontré a défini la notion en ses propres mots, que les climatosceptiques existent et qu’il y a donc absence de consensus social sur ce dont on parle. Pourrait-on aussi imaginer, en 2020, un plan de lutte contre le sexisme et la violence faite aux femmes où l’on garderait secrète la liste des organismes et des expertes rencontrés, et qui n’annoncerait aucuns fonds publics pour les organismes qui mènent la lutte sur le terrain depuis des décennies ?
Pour plusieurs observateurs mal avisés, le rapport ne semblera pas si mal, au premier coup d’œil. Ce sera parce que nos standards en matière de lutte contre le racisme sont extrêmement bas — ce qui n’est pas nécessairement la faute de la CAQ. Le rapport Racisme au Québec : tolérance zéron’est pas particulièrement plus faible que les documents fades auxquels les gouvernements libéraux qui ont précédé à M. Legault nous avaient habitués. C’est notamment que ceux-ci n’avaient rien à gagner, politiquement, à poser la question du racisme trop sérieusement : Montréal, où vit la majorité des personnes racisées, était considérée comme acquise, et on courtisait le vote francophone des régions.
Une CAQ plus ambitieuse pourrait chercher à convaincre des électeurs à l’extérieur de sa base actuelle. Ce n’est pas le choix qu’on a fait avec la stratégie annoncée cette semaine.

Source: https://www.ledevoir.com/opinion/chroniques/591727/manque-de-vision?utm_source=infolettre-2020-12-15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=infolettre-quotidienne

The more neutral news article:

A task force of three ministers and four Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) backbenchers is calling for action by the province to crack down on racial profiling, and on discrimination in hiring and housing affecting Quebecers of colour, Indigenous peoples and other minority groups.
The province will pursue 25 anti-racism goals, which the CAQ task force detailed in a report released on Monday.
The first target is racial profiling by police, who have been known to stop minority young people in parks or to pull over cars driven by racial minorities without legal cause.
Junior Health Minister Lionel Carment explained that police will now be required to give someone stopped the reason why they are being stopped, and this will allow someone who has been stopped to make a complaint if a reason is not given.
Quebec’s government also plans to train teachers and other public sector employees about racism and how to correct it.
Immigration Minister Nadine Girault said the proposed goals are ‘’measured’’ and there will be follow-ups on their progress.
‘’We’re an action-oriented government,’’ Girault said, adding that the Quebec government has not had a campaign against racism in 20 years.
To ensure their report, commissioned by Premier François Legault in June, would live up to its commitments, Girault called for designating a minister responsible for its implementation.
Legault named the task force at a time when when the Black Lives Matter movement was vocal in Quebec, following police abuses in the United States, notably the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer after Floyd had allegedly tried to use a counterfeit bill. The premier insisted then there was no parallel between racism in the United States and the situation in Quebec.
But in September, when Joyce Echaquan, a 37-year-old Atikamekw mother of seven died in a Joliette, Que., hospital, she was called by many “Quebec’s George Floyd.”
Echaquan’s suffering in hospital, and racial insults she received from hospital staff, were recorded because her cell phone was on and broadcasting her treatment on Facebook.
Legault refused in naming the task force to accept the term “systemic racism” and he did not change his mind when there was an outcry in reaction of Echaquan’s death.
The premier did say the treatment she received was “unacceptable” and changed his Aboriginal affairs minister at the time, replacing Sylvie d’Amours with Ian Lafrenière, a former Montreal police force spokesman.
Legault has said applying the term “systemic” could suggest Quebecers are racist, which he rejects.
The premier says instead that there is racism in Quebec and naming the task force was his way of indicating he wants the problem to be dealt with.
Fabrice Vil, a lawyer from Montreal’s Black community, said proposals by the task force to raise awareness about racism are essential, but expressed dismay that the term “systemic racism” was avoided.
“We should call a cat a cat,” Vil said. “Words are important.”
Ghislain Picard, Assembly of First Nations chief for Quebec and Labrador, was also disappointed.
“They haven’t identified the causes and dealt with the causes,” Picard said.
At the news conference on Monday, Lafrenière said he is moving to implement the Viens report, sparked by reports of abusive treatment of Indigenous women in Val d’Or, a northern Quebec mining town. Justice Jacques Viens concluded there was “systemic discrimination” affecting Indigenous peoples in the province.
Lafrenière has announced funding for better training for Indigenous police and with the City of Montreal, a program to house homeless First Nations and Inuit people living in Montreal.
Girault said the approach of the task force was to avoid victimization, without downplaying the real consequences of racism in the province.
Asked about avoidance of the “systemic’’ label by the task force, Girault, who is Black and says she has faced racial discrimination in Quebec, said that in discussions with Quebec’s minorities the same themes came up. She noted that Quebec’s public sector will be recruiting more minorities.
As well, starting in 2022, the ethics and culture program taught in Quebec schools will also deal with racism.
The task force also recommended that professional corporations establish equivalencies to make it easier for doctors and other professionals to practise in Quebec. Immigrants to the province who qualified in their home countries in medicine, engineering and other professions currently face hurdles seeking access to the same professions in Quebec.

Source: Quebec task force sets markers for ‘significant impact’ fighting racism

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with Emilie Nicolas, Groupe d'action contre le racisme, Quebec

Study: Structural racism has material impact on health of ethnic minorities, immigrants

2020/12/16 Leave a comment

Medical study:

Structural racism can lead to discrimination in many aspects of life including criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education. A new study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine examines the impact of structural racism on health and confirms that chronic exposure to stressors leads to a marked erosion of health that is particularly severe among foreign-born Blacks and Latinx. Investigators say largescale structural policies that address structural racism are needed.

Structural racism is defined as laws, rules, or official policies in a society that result in a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race.

There is evidence that structural racism has a material impact on the health of racial/ethnic minorities and immigrants. Comparing allostatic load–a multidimensional measure of the body’s response to stressors experienced throughout the life course–between immigrants and non-immigrants of different racial/ethnic backgrounds can help shed light on the magnitude of health differences between groups.”

Brent A. Langellier, PhD, Lead Investigator, Department of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University

Investigators examined patterns in allostatic load among US- and foreign-born Whites, Blacks, and Latinx. Using data from the 2005-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), they collected data on a 10-item measure of cardiovascular, metabolic, and immunologic risk.

Measures of cardiovascular risk included systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Metabolic risk indicators included body mass index (BMI), blood sugar (HbA1c), urinary albumin, and creatinine clearance. Immunologic measures were white blood cell count and current or previous asthma diagnosis.

Based on the literature suggesting that, for many outcomes, immigrants have paradoxically good health that declines with time in the US, investigators examined aging gradients in allostatic load for each group. They also assessed whether allostatic load in each group changed across NHANES survey cycles. Their analyses were conducted in March 2020.

Results showed that allostatic load increased with age among all groups, but the increases were much steeper among foreign-born Blacks of both genders and foreign-born Latina women. The difference between the first and last survey cycle was most pronounced among US-born Black women (from 2.74 in 2005-2006 to 3.02 in 2017-2018), US-born Latino men (from 2.69 to 3.09), and foreign-born Latino men (from 2.58 to 2.87).

Aging gradients in allostatic load were steepest among foreign-born Blacks of both genders and foreign-born Latina women, and flattest among US-born and foreign-born Whites. Notably, foreign-born Latina women had among the lowest allostatic load at the youngest ages but among the highest at the upper end of the age distribution.

“Our findings add to the evidence that structural racism has a material impact on the health of racial/ethnic minorities and immigrants – and that this effect accumulates throughout the life course,” noted Dr. Langellier. “They further suggest that the disadvantage experienced by racial/ethnic minorities is compounded among minorities who are also immigrants, which erodes the health advantage that many immigrants have at early ages.”

These findings highlight the magnitude of the disparities in health that are produced by inequities in exposure to these risk and protective factors. “Collectively, our findings and evidence in the broader literature suggest that reducing these disparities will require big, structural policies that address structural racism, including inequities in upstream social determinants of health,” concluded Dr. Langellier.

Source: Study: Structural racism has material impact on health of ethnic minorities, immigrants

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with health, racial disparities, structural racism, USA

Black public servants’ lawsuit will force public service ‘to look deeply inside its structure,’ says former senator who’s fought for diversity in the PS for decades

2020/12/15 Leave a comment

While the concerns are legitimate, this focus on Black public servants as being unique and thus needing unique measures downplays the fact that other visible minority groups also are under-represented and some more so than Black public servants (yet again, see my What new disaggregated data tells us about federal public service …). Without situating these concerns in relation to other visible minority (and Indigenous) groups, and with minimal data to support these claims, an opportunity is missed for a more evidence-based and fulsome discussion:

Plaintiff Kathy Ann Samuel, who has worked within the department of public prosecutions as a legal assistant for the last 19 years, said she’s ‘tired of being tired’ and that ‘change has to start from the top, it has to start with the government.’

Former Senator Don Oliver, who has argued for decades that the government needs to appoint more Black judges, deputy and associate deputy ministers, and chiefs of staff in government offices, says he was not surprised to read about a planned class action lawsuit on behalf of current and former Black employees within the public service, and that he had “predicted and warned about one for 20 years.”

Twelve plaintiffs are involved in the proposed class-action lawsuit by former and current Black federal public servants, which alleges that Black employees have been systematically excluded from advancement and subjected to discrimination within the government for decades. They are seeking $900-million in damages.

“It’s happening now,” said Mr. Oliver. “I am not part of the lawsuit. But having fought hard for 22 years while a Senator to teach diversity in the public service to ‘simply accept difference,’ I was often a lone voice in the wilderness. But given what facts in the planned suit we know to be true, because they are backed by data, I accept and support that.”

“I have deep respect for the public service of Canada,” said Mr. Oliver. “Over two decades I have worked very closely with several eminent deputy ministers and clerks of the Privy Council trying to find ways to change the culture of some 300,000 employees and root out systemic black racism.”

Mr. Oliver said that the class action lawsuit immediately reminded him of a class action lawsuit filed by current and former African American employees against Coca Cola in the United States, something which Mr. Oliver addressed in 2000 in a major speech to the Senate.

“As in the Canadian suit, they alleged racial discrimination that produced lower pay, less promotions, and poor performance evaluations,” wrote Mr. Oliver in an emailed statement to The Hill Times. “The Black employees won the largest settlement ever in a corporate racial discrimination case, $192-million.”

Mr. Oliver also said he’s warned that given the systemic racism that exists in our largest corporations and institutions in Canada, the same thing could happen here. The former Senator now chairs the Black North Initiative committee on public relations and the public sector.

“I can state that the clerk [of the Privy Council], Ian Shugart, has been extremely open and forthcoming in helping us meet our 3.5 per cent targets looking to the future,” said Mr. Oliver. “That is most encouraging. The planned lawsuit looks to actions in the past.”

In regards to the highly publicized death of George Floyd, a Minnesota man who was killed by a police officer who pinned him down with a knee to his neck in June 2020, Mr. Oliver called it a “pivotal moment” that “brought to light the insidious but painful truth in Canada about white privilege.”

“The ‘perk’ that white people get by virtue of their colour,” said Mr. Oliver. “The lawsuit is a logical and natural next step after the necessary data has been secured.”

“The lawsuit will force the Public Service to look deeply inside its structure and systems to find ways to eradicate white privilege in performance evaluations and all other known forms of systemic Black racism,” wrote Mr. Oliver. “It must start with some profound personal soul searching that will require all white managers to learn to accept some uncomfortable truths.”

“The machinery of government, i.e., getting a new government department, is something directed from PMO and when that directive comes to PCO one way or another, the Clerk of the Privy Council and all the deputy ministers must fall in line. The ongoing work we are doing in the Black North Initiative to find ways to break down systemic Black racism is going well,” wrote Mr. Oliver. “We have been working with a number of senior bureaucrats of good will. This will continue.”

Nicholas Marcus Thompson, who works for the Canada Revenue Agency as a collections contact officer and a plaintiff in the suit, told The Hill Times that the lawsuit started with the Canada Revenue Agency, calling it a “focal point” of this issue last week.

As a union president in Toronto, representing 800 workers in two offices, Mr. Thompson said he’s been advocating around this issue for years.

“In one of my buildings I have 1,100 workers, and there’s 20 Black people,” said Mr. Thompson. “I asked them to address this issue, to provide developmental opportunities to Black people so when staffing processes come out, they have the experience to apply.”

“They are giving the experience to other visible minorities and Caucasian employees, who are getting that opportunity,” said Mr. Thompson. “So that’s why we say ‘Black employee exclusion,’ and that’s why it’s not about visible minorities, because by far, they are allowing other visible minorities to move ahead and get into the management program and into the executive program.”

Duane Guy Guerra, a full-time employee at the Department of National Defence as a heavy equipment technician for more than 20 years, told The Hill Times that the class action lawsuit “is the next step in doing what I can do, and what seems to be happening now is that people are actually listening.”

Mr. Guerra said that when he first began working for the department in 1999, he was very excited and happy to be there and considered it the next step in his automotive career.

“I worked at General Motors for 13 years, I was proud of that, and I was really good at my job, and I figured, why not take my skills to the next level and try to do something better to serve my country?” said Mr. Guerra. “So I moved to [DND], and I was well received there until I started to try and advance, even though I had the support of my military supervisors.”

Kathy Ann Samuel, who works within the Department of Public Prosecutions as a legal assistant for the last 19 years, said she’s “tired of being tired.”

“Throughout the years, we have marched, we have come together, we have asked, we’ve begged, we’ve done different actions, and no change has been done,” said Ms. Samuel. “The change has to start from the top, it has to start with the government and the law has to be changed.”

“It’s just time, it’s the right thing to do,” said Ms. Samuel.

When asked about the brutal death of George Floyd in the summer, an event caught on video that galvanized thousands of people in Canada and in the United States, Ms. Samuel said the spirit of that moment is still alive.

“For what other people think, it may have passed for them,” said Ms. Samuel. “For us, for the Black community it has not passed. I have children—I have a Black son and I have a Black daughter, and anything can happen—they can be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and it’s very troubling.”

“When it happened with George Floyd, every single video made me cry, because I put my son in that situation, I put my nephews in that situation, and it could be anybody, and it’s disheartening that in 2020, the Black community is still going through these types of incidents that have happened in the past,” said Ms. Samuel.

Courtney Betty, a Toronto-based lawyer involved in the proposed class action suit, told The Hill Times that “immediately, we would like to see the government prepared to enter into a dialogue with the parties to come up with a resolution.”

“It would avoid litigation and what I would say, is also some incredibly embarrassing stories of the pain and suffering that so many individuals [have experienced], and I think it would be a public embarrassment for Canada internationally when these stories become public,” said Mr. Betty. “It is just really beyond description in terms of the pain and suffering that these plaintiffs have faced.”

The Prime Minister’s Office declined to comment for this story.

Source: Black public servants’ lawsuit will force public service ‘to look deeply inside its structure,’ says former senator who’s fought for diversity in the PS for decades

Erica Ifill also misses this opportunity for a more informed discussion:

If the makeup of an organization is such that Black employees are ghettoized at the lower ranks with a mostly white managerial class, that’s not equity; that’s segregation, intentional or not. And yet, for months, we’ve seen many such institutions perform the equivalent of just taking a knee – proclaiming their commitment to resolving anti-Black racism generally without admitting its existence within their structure or committing to concrete action.
But for some institutions, chickens are coming home to roost. That includes Canada’s federal government, which is quick to crow about diversity but apparently needs to clean up its own coop first.
Last week, 12 Black public servants launched a class-action lawsuit against the federal government, claiming it “failed to uphold the Charter rights of Black employees in the federal public service, shirking its responsibility to create discrimination- and harassment-free workplaces, and actively excluding Black bureaucrats”.
Systemic racism has become the new buzzword, one that many leaders are happy to throw around, but few actually know how to define. That includes RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, who said earlier this year that she was “struggling” with the term and had denied its existence in her organization. It should be no surprise that the RCMP is named among the departments accused in the lawsuit.
To fill folks in, systemic racism is discrimination perpetuated by a system that produces disparate outcomes based on race, despite the racial composition of those within the system, or whether the participants themselves are racist or not. Diversity does not resolve racism. Rather, without equity, it’s just an act of glorified window-dressing. Claiming diversity as your strength – as the organizations named in the lawsuit are wont to do – is not a get-out-of-jail-free card against the possibility of perpetuating systemic racism, just like having a Black friend does not permanently absolve someone of any act of racism.
A spokesperson from the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat insists the federal government has taken steps to address anti-Black systemic racism across the country, citing that “the fall economic statement committed $12-million over three years toward a dedicated centre on diversity and inclusion in the federal public service. This will accelerate the government’s commitment to achieving a representative and inclusive public service.” However, recruiting more Black people will not solve the systemic problem of anti-Black racism in the public service. Effectively, the government has offered a solution to the wrong problem.
The government’s response makes clear only that no attempt has been made to review the existing structures and systems of accountability that prevent the promotion of Black people to the senior ranks, where other racialized groups are more represented. Treasury Board Secretariat’s own data show that Black employees’ salary ranges coalesce at the lower ends of the spectrum compared to those of other racialized groups and white employees, with miniscule representation at the higher ends, which would indicate management levels. The problem is the distribution of Black employees, who tend to occupy more administrative roles than analytical ones, which would enable them to move into management positions. Black executives make up only 1.6 per cent of the executive class (96 out of 5,887) yet comprise nearly 5 per cent of the administrative support staff (971 out of 19,900). This indicates that Black people are either not recruited at higher levels or they are not promoted into higher levels.
Dismantling systemic racism necessitates a genuine and effortful cultural shift in organizations that are stubbornly reticent to change. Expecting change from those who have benefitted from the existing structure is a near-impossible feat, which is why much of the work is usually left to a racialized third party.
The way forward includes anti-racism training that features critical race theory and leadership development, instead of the kind of vanilla anti-bias and diversity training that is mostly focussed on reducing legal liability. According to Harvard Business Review, that kind of training has been offered for decades with little effect: “laboratory studies show that this kind of force-feeding can activate bias rather than stamp it out.” Policies, procedures, processes and accountability systems need to be audited for equity and remedies executed. As well, internal communications must be overhauled – not to hedge against liability, but to speak to employees with the intention of transparency and accountability.
Without a systemic and systematic makeover, businesses and organizations all over the country will face a reckoning that could have them spending more time and money in a courtroom, instead of the boardroom. If the federal government can be sued, anyone can, making inaction on dismantling systemic racism a potentially expensive liability.

Source: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-ottawa-claims-diversity-is-our-strength-so-why-is-it-being-sued-by/

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with Black Canadians, Don Oliver, employment equity, Erica Ifill, lawsuit

Our attitudes to race are complex. Our response to racism should be complex too

2020/12/08 Leave a comment

Indeed. Interesting findings from detailed interviews:

Is a mass-produced jerk chicken burger a symbol of cultural appropriation or a celebration of British multiculturalism? This is an old debate that periodically resurfaces and so it was a couple of weeks ago when McDonald’s launched its latest festive offering.

In this case, a story that got echoed across much of the tabloid press was constructed out of a few random comments criticising McDonald’s on social media; it was journalists who built and amplified this narrative. But occasionally, others who should know better get drawn in, such as the MP who picked a fight with Jamie Oliver over his jerk rice.

I have long thought that reducing debates about racism to flippant questions about fast-food burgers and supermarket curry kits is damaging to the antiracist cause. But new research on public attitudes to racism by the Runnymede Trust and Voice4Change England helps us understand why.

The study is all the better for shunning mass polling as the primary way of understanding how the public thinks about race. Instead, researchers undertook two one-hour conversations with 60 people from a range of backgrounds. What emerges is both good and bad news for those of us who care deeply about ending racism. The good news is that the weight of public thinking is that racism matters, that it is something that is learned and education has an important role to play; also, that racism is part of our national history.

The less good news is that some people buy into the idea that racism is “natural”, that we all have an affinity with people who look more like us. There is a lack of understanding about the nature of structural racism; public thinking gravitates towards the idea that racism is about individual actions and responsibilities. There is a strong sense that there is no going backwards and that things will inevitably get better over time.

Yet in the 20 years since the Macpherson report, black people have gone from being five to nine times more likely to be stopped and searched by police than white people. And there is a strand of zero-sum thinking: the worry that tackling racial discrimination will inevitably mean majority groups giving things up.

Importantly, researchers found people hold beliefs that would be considered both warm and hostile to antiracism campaigns: it is possible for someone to believe both that racism is ingrained in human nature and will never change, but that we are making progress as a society, or that it is important we all do something about racism while at the same time worrying about the consequences for themselves.

The populist right is very good at activating the more hostile strands of thinking by stoking this idea that if a minority benefits, the majority must lose. When Conservative MP Ben Bradley calls the education of white, working-class boys a “taboo” subject, he implies that white, working-class children have been unfairly overlooked by people more interested in promoting the interests of minority children; if it were Asian or black children, “heads would roll”, he says (the lack of accountability for institutional racism in the Met suggests they wouldn’t).

By confecting this into a conflict between white and non-white children, he conveniently obscures the role of class. Far from being taboo, the class attainment gap for poor children, the vast majority of whom are white, was one of the key drivers of Labour education policy, which on any objective measure was far better than what followed, including Conservative chancellors slashing thousands of pounds a year in tax credits from parents in low-paid work and Tory education reforms that have done little to address the fact that working-class children remain far less likely to attend a good quality school.

The intellectual underpinnings of this zero-sum thinking lie in notions of “white identity” from academics such as Eric Kaufmann. Kaufmann argues that the rise of right populism is primarily the product of white communities’ opposition to increasing racial diversity. He attacks the notion that structural racism exists at all and encourages politicians to promote the need to maintain “white culture”.

But this is to take far too simplistic and patronising a view of the way white, working-class communities think about race. It cannot account for all the historical examples where a predominantly white labour movement built solidarity and common cause with campaigns for equality.

The Runnymede research shows that there are strands of public thinking that the right can activate to achieve its ends of sowing division. But there are also positive ways of thinking about race that antiracist campaigners can connect with and build on, sometimes in the same person and certainly within the same community. In particular, antiracism campaigners need to find ways to explain the often counterintuitive idea that racism is not just about individuals but systems. “We need to communicate to people that racism is something that’s designed into our system, which means we can design something better,” says Sanjiv Lingayah, the lead author of the research.

But there are also traps. Certain ideas risk playing into the damaging idea that majority white and minority interests are directly in conflict, which antiracism campaigners need to challenge. Cultural appropriation often fits into that category, as do terms such as “white privilege” and “white fragility”. Yes, there is an overall structural advantage to being white compared with being non-white, but, no, it does not build solidarity to imply that if you are white, you are automatically “privileged”. Yes, men who went to Eton may have to loosen their grip on the levers of power, but that would, frankly, be good for all the rest of us.

This research gets us away from reductivist, static accounts of public attitudes to race. It shows that, while there are aspects of public thinking that antiracists need to challenge, there is also a lot of positive stuff to work with. But to get lured into giving the impression that this is a fight between “them” and “us” is only to serve the agenda of the populist right.

Source: Our attitudes to race are complex. Our response to racism should be complex too

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with public opinion research, Runnymede Trust, Sonia Sodha, Voice4Change England

Black civil servants allege discrimination in proposed class-action lawsuit against Ottawa

2020/12/05 Leave a comment

EE - Disaggregated Data, Representation and PSES.010

EE - Disaggregated Data, Representation and PSES.013

There is a real disconnect in the proposed class action lawsuit in its broad assertions regarding widespread assertions regarding systemic racism and the reliance on the disturbing personal experiences of 12 Black public servants to justify such broad assertions.

The statement of claim uses no data beyond these personal experiences to justify their claims, surprising given the availability of data from the Census and more recently, TBS employment equity reports and Public Service Employee Surveys as seen in my analyses What new disaggregated data tells us about federal public service … and What the Public Service Employee Survey breakdowns of visible minority and other groups tell us about diversity and inclusion, selected data tables above.

The former shows that overall Blacks are over-represented in the public service but that a number of other minority groups have comparable under-representation to Blacks among executives, i.e., the issues are not unique to Black employees.

On the other hand, Black public servants are more likely to experience discrimination than other groups but even these differences are relatively small.

There are, of course, likely wider variations at the departmental level.

None of this is to discount the experiences of the 12 public servants but underline that calls for systemic change should be evidence-based, not just examples and anecdotes, no matter how strong:

A group of current and former Black civil servants has issued a proposed class-action lawsuit against the federal government alleging it discriminated against Black employees for decades.

They claim the government has excluded Black federal employees from being promoted.

“Our exclusion at the top levels of the public service, in my view, has really disenfranchised Canada from that talent and that ability and the culture that Black workers bring to the table and that different perspective,” said Nicholas Marcus Thompson.

Thompson is one of 12 former or current employees from multiple government departments who are representative plaintiffs in the class action. Lawyers representing them say the suit could ultimately cover tens of thousands of people who have worked in the federal public service since 1970.

The lawsuit comes at a time of heightened awareness about systemic and anti-Black racism.

In June, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said systemic racism “is an issue across the country, in all our institutions.”

The plaintiffs in the proposed class action are asking for $900 million in damages, a declaration from the government that it infringed on the group’s charter rights and a plan going forward to promote more Black employees.

It was filed in the Federal Court of Canada on Thursday and is awaiting certification. The government is expected to be served in the coming days.

Lack of representation

The lawyers representing the civil servants say the suit is likely the first of its kind in Canada involving Black public servants at the federal level. The statement of claim names more than 50 departments and agencies as comprising the public service.

Last year, two Black Ontario government employees sued the Ontario Public Service, among others, alleging discrimination because they were Black women.

In an interview in Toronto with CBC News, Thompson said that when he joined the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) six years ago, something felt off to him.

“When I became a Canadian citizen many years ago, I remember the citizenship judge saying that Canada is a place where freedom abounds and opportunities are endless. But when I joined the CRA, that was my expectation that I could join, start at any position and climb the ranks. And my goal was really to serve Canadians,” he said.

“I quickly realized that the agency was not, you know, as I thought it would be: all inclusive and diverse.”

Thompson, who was a collections officer, said a lack of Black representation in the agency caused his morale and confidence to suffer. He also said the work environment was toxic and led to illness.

When his doctor gave him a prescription for a “workplace accommodation,” Thompson said he was told to clean closets because no other work was available.

The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, which is the employer of the federal public service, said it could not comment on the allegations in the suit because it was before the courts.

“Systemic racism and discrimination is a painful lived reality for Black Canadians, racialized Canadians and Indigenous people,” said spokesperson Bianca Healy in a statement.

“The government has taken steps to address anti-Black racism, systemic discrimination and injustice across the country.”

Read the full Treasury Board Secretariat statement

She said that includes a recently announced $12 million for “a dedicated Centre on Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Public Service.”

The CRA referred CBC News to the Treasury Board statement.

Complaints in multiple departments and agencies

Bernadeth Betchi is another representative plaintiff who also worked for the CRA off and on for several years.

In a Skype interview, she described a toxic workplace where she said she experienced microaggressions and had to go on sick leave. She had to work twice as hard as her non-Black colleagues to get noticed, she said.

Betchi ended up leaving the CRA and eventually found work at the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) — a federal organization that handles complaints about discrimination.

“Everything that they are about was everything that I am about, you know, it resonated with my values. It’s there to help Canadians — Canadians who have been discriminated against, you know, on different grounds. And so I knew that this is where I needed to be,” said Betchi, who’s on a maternity leave from the CHRC.

But her views quickly changed.

“When I started working there, I saw that, unfortunately, what the mandate says and what’s being done inside of the organization is completely different. Black folks within the Canadian Human Rights Commission, my Black colleagues, are suffering. They’re being — there’s a lot of adverse differential treatment.”

When asked to comment on the allegations, CHRC said it “is committed to meeting the highest standards of equality, inclusion and representation” and that it has been “examining how racism may manifest itself within our organization and what steps might be needed to address it.”

“We know that Indigenous, Black and other racialized people face many societal, institutional and structural barriers to equality,” said spokesperson Jeff Meldrum in an email.

“That is why work is underway to ensure that the views and perspectives of Indigenous, Black and other racialized employees on barriers that may exist within the Commission are heard and addressed. ”

Proposing solutions

“There is a grave injustice that’s taking place,” said Courtney Betty, a Toronto lawyer involved in the class action.

“I think every Canadian should be troubled.”

Betty and his colleague, Hugh Scher, decided the lawsuit’s time frame would start in 1970, the year Canada ratified the United Nations international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.

In a joint interview, Betty and Scher spoke about possible solutions they hope will stem from the lawsuit if it’s certified.

“There needs to be a third-party audit undertaken by an independent body, whether that’s a former Supreme Court justice, whether that’s a Black equity commission,” Scher said.

That third party should do a thorough review “to see what are the barriers to true equality and access and inclusion for Black employees, and what can be done about them,” he said.

Scher said another key element would be amending the federal Employment Equity Act.

Its stated goal is “to achieve equality in the workplace so that no person shall be denied employment opportunities or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability.”

The legislation is also designed “to correct the conditions of disadvantage in employment experienced by women, Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities.”

But the lawyers argue that because Black employees are grouped together with all non-white and non-Indigenous people as “visible minorities” under the act, they’ve suffered by not moving up in the public service — and the unique racism they have to deal with has been ignored.

Betchi agrees. “There’s not a lot of Black women or Black men at the executive level,” she said. “Our experience has been completely invisible and put aside.”

The Treasury Board has data that breaks down the “visible minority” category in the public service based on self-reporting by employees. It shows that in 2019, Black workers made up a smaller proportion of those in top-level executive positions than those doing administrative support.

Thompson said he’s optimistic the lawsuit will spark change.

“I’m very hopeful that this issue will be addressed in a forthright manner by the government of Canada,” he said. “The government has shown signs that it is prepared. It has done the first major part by acknowledging that this issue exists.”

Source: Black civil servants allege discrimination in proposed class-action lawsuit against Ottawa

Text of proposed class action suit: 486848991-NICHOLAS-MARCUS-THOMPSON-ET-AL-v-HER-MAJESTY-THE-QUEEN

A longer more in-depth account of the experiences of the 12 employees can be found here:

The Canadian government has failed to uphold the Charter rights of Black employees in the federal public service, shirking its responsibility to create discrimination- and harassment-free workplaces, and actively excluding Black bureaucrats, allege plaintiffs in a proposed class-action lawsuit.

“There has been a de facto practice of Black employee exclusion throughout the public service because of the permeation of systemic discrimination through Canada’s institutional structures,” said the statement of claim filed with the Federal Court in Toronto on Dec. 2.

The class action, which has not been certified, is being led by 12 former and current Black public servants, who have been employed in a variety of federal departments and agencies, including the RCMP, Canadian Revenue Agency, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Armed Forces, Statistics Canada, Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada, and Employment and Social Development Canada.

The representative plaintiffs, seeking $900-million in damages on behalf of public servants since 1970 and their families, claim Black employees have been systemically excluded from advancement within the public service and that the court should impose on the government a mandatory order to implement a “Diversity and Promotional Plan for Black Public Service Employees, related to the hiring and promotion” of Black bureaucrats.

“Canada owes Black employees a duty of care,” the 45-page statement of claim said. “This duty entails an obligation to promote Black employees based on merit, talent, and ability, as is the case for any other employee.”

The suit alleges that Canada’s application of the Employment Equity Act violates the Charter equality rights of Black employees. The act designates women, Indigenous people, persons with disabilities, and visible minorities as requiring special measures and accommodation in the public service.

“In particular, the act fails to break down the category of visible minorities and thus ignores the unique, invisible, and systemic racism faced by Black employees relative to other disadvantaged groups that are covered by the categories established by the act,” the statement of claim said, adding that decisions on hiring and promotions are governed by enabling legislation for the public service, and not subject to union grievance.

By not hiring and promoting Black employees in a manner proportional to their numbers in the public service or the overall population or to a degree consistent with the treatment of other visible minority or white public servants, “Canada has treated Black employees in an adverse differential manner and has drawn distinctions” between Black bureaucrats and those of other races.

Requests for comment from the federal Attorney General’s Office were referred to the Treasury Board Secretariat.

“As this matter is currently before the courts, the Treasury Board Secretariat cannot comment on this suit at this time,” said an email from a department spokesperson.

“The government has taken steps to address anti-Black racism, systemic discrimination, and injustice across the country. Most recently, the fall economic statement committed $12-million over three years towards a dedicated Centre on Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Public Service. This will accelerate the government’s commitment to achieving a representative and inclusive public service,” the email said, also highlighting the September Throne Speech where the government “announced an action plan to increase representation and leadership development within the public service.”

“Early in its mandate, the government also reflected its commitment in mandate letters, in the establishment of an Anti-Racism Strategy and Secretariat, in the appointment of a minister of diversity and inclusion and youth, and in the creation of the Office for Public Service Accessibility,” said the Treasury Board Secretariat statement.

In February, Treasury Board President Jean-Yves Duclos (Québec, Que.) told The Hill Times that “the fact that Black employees tell us they are unable to be at their full potential is something of great concern to us. I will certainly address those concerns and make sure that every federal employee, including Black employees, has the ability to make the fullest impact on our society.”

NICHOLAS MARCUS THOMPSON ET AL. v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN by Charelle Evelyn on Scribd

Plaintiffs outline alleged mistreatment, exclusion

One of the representative plaintiffs, Nicholas Marcus Thompson, a union leader who was named activist of the year in January by the Public Service Alliance of Canada in Toronto, works for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Mr. Thompson has “repeatedly been denied promotions as a consequence of his race and due to his advocacy on behalf of other Black employees,” the statement of claim alleges.

One of the representative plaintiffs, Nicholas Marcus Thompson, says in the statement of claim that ‘merit was not a guiding principle for project assignment or advancement’ of Black public servants.

Mr. Thompson, who ran as an NDP candidate in Don Valley East, Ont., in 2019, said in the statement of claim that Black employees “were ghettoized in the lower ranks” of the public service and that “merit was not a guiding principle for project assignment or advancement.” Prejudice and indifference that “made the world polite, cool, and lonely to the point of permanent exclusion” are “Canadian-style systemic racism,” the claim said.Jennifer Philips has worked for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for more than 30 years, during which she has only been promoted once, according to the claim. “She watched as fellow non-Black colleagues, some of whom she had trained, climbed the ranks and enjoyed the benefits of a system designed to lift them up while holding her down.” The claim said she and other Black colleagues were also subject to “explicit and demeaning comments” made about their race, national or ethnic origin, as well as “attitudes and comments dismissing their ability to carry out their duties because of their race and ethnicity.”

Shalane Rooney was one of two Black employees in a roughly 300-person Statistics Canada office. Ms. Rooney began working for the agency in 2010, and in addition to being denied promotions and raises, said, according to the statement of claim, she was subject to comments “regarding [her] hair, [her] skin being too fair to have two Black parents, [colleagues] confirming with [her] if it is okay to say the ‘N’ word,” and more.

Other plaintiffs, such as Yonita Parkes, said that after complaining about race-related treatment by co-workers, the perpetrators were shuffled out laterally instead of being held accountable, while she was ostracized.

Daniel Malcolm highlighted in the statement of claim that Black employees like himself can be overlooked for permanent roles, despite acting in them for some time, because management can set their own criteria to make their preferred appointments from candidate pools, despite qualification or competition score.

Alain Babineau—a 28-year RCMP veteran who served on the protection detail for prime ministers Jean Chrétien, Stephen Harper, and Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) before leaving the force in September 2016—alleges in the statement that his first attempts to join the force in the early 1980s included being asked “What are you going to do if you get called a ‘nigger?’” during his recruiting interview, and later being racially profiled and falsely characterized as a drug dealer. Once he made it into the force, he was referred to as “Black man” instead of his name by the head of the drug section in which he worked. “This is the type of microaggression we endured as Black officers, but we shut our mouths and endure, on the belief that we can help to bring about change,” he said in the statement.

Bernadeth Betchi, who at one point was employed by the Prime Minister’s Office as a communications assistant to Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, alleges in the statement that her employment at both the CRA and the Canadian Human Rights Commission ultimately caused her stress, anxiety, and trauma. “As a consequence of the experiences of mistreatment and Black employee exclusion, [Ms.] Betchi lost faith in the commission’s ability to execute its mandate, seeing as it could not even promote equity within its own teams.”

Liberal MP Greg Fergus chairs the Parliamentary Black Caucus, which highlighted ‘systemic discrimination and unconscious bias’ in the federal public service in its June 16 statement and recommendations.

Repeated calls for change

The hiring, promotion, and overall treatment of people of colour within the public service, specifically Black people, has been a long-standing issue.

A 2000 report by the Treasury Board-created Task Force on the Participation of Visible Minorities in the Public Service noted that the federal public service, “which can be inhospitable to outsiders, can be particularly so to visible minorities,” and recommended, among other things, that the government set a benchmark for one-in-five “for visible minority participation government-wide” within the next five years.

The most recent report on employment equity in the core public service, covering the 2018-19 fiscal year, said that of the 203,286 employees tallied in March 2019, 54.48 per cent were women (compared to an estimated workforce availability of 52.7 per cent), 5.1 per cent were Indigenous persons (against an estimated workforce availability of four per cent), 5.2 per cent were people with disabilities (compared to nine per cent workforce availability), and 16.7 per cent were visible minorities (compared to 15.3 per cent). According to the report, 19 per cent of those who identify as a visible minority in the public service are Black.

Since its establishment in late 2017, the Federal Black Employee Caucus has been pushing to get disaggregated employment equity data collected so that employees, employers, and policy-makers can all understand the landscape for Black federal bureaucrats, and to provide an element of support and unity for Black employees who are facing harassment and discrimination in the workplace.

Former senator Donald Oliver has long championed the idea of a new federal government Department of Diversity headed by a Black deputy minister, and former Liberal-turned-Independent MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes introduced a private member’s bill in the dying days of the last Parliament to change the Employment Equity Act. The bill called for a requirement of the Canada Human Rights Commission to provide an annual report to the minister “on the progress made by the Government of Canada in dismantling systemic barriers that prevent members of visible minorities from being promoted within the federal public service and in remedying the disadvantages caused by those barriers.”

There are so few people of colour at the deputy and associate deputy minister level that the government won’t release numbers, for privacy reasons. Caroline Xavier, became the first Black woman to work at that level of the public service when she was appointed associate deputy minister of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada in February.

In October, the government awarded a contract worth $164,415 to executive recruitment firm Odgers Berndtson to “establish and maintain on an ongoing basis an inventory of qualified and interested Black people and other racialized groups, Indigenous people, as well as persons with disabilities, from outside the federal public service for the Government of Canada to consider for the deputy minister and assistant deputy minister cadre.”

In its June 16 statement, the Parliamentary Black Caucus also highlighted “systemic discrimination and unconscious bias” in the federal public service. Signatories called for measures that included improving Black representation in the senior ranks of the public service, implementing anti-bias training and evaluation programs, and establishing an “independent champion for Black federal employees through the creation of a national public service institute.”

Source: ‘Canadian-style systemic racism’: Black public servants file suit against federal government

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with Black Canadians, employment equity, lawsuit

← Older posts

Newer posts →

Multicultural Meanderings

2020 brought ugly truths about inequity to the forefront — like how Ontario’s Medical Association still upholds structural racism

Association of Justice Counsel files grievance against Canadian Human Rights Commission, amid ongoing complaints of racism, discrimination

‘The CHRC needs to be reformed’

Current model of the commission as ‘gatekeeper’ of complaints should be eliminated, according to report

Germany: She Called Police Over a Neo-Nazi Threat. But the Neo-Nazis Were Inside the Police.

Effective anti-racism strategies and conversations: Lessons from the literature

LESSON 1

LESSON 2

LESSON 3

LESSON 4

LESSON 4a

LESSON 4b

LESSON 5

Douglas Todd: B.C. Muslims rattled by confrontational Victoria imam

Nicolas: Manque de vision (Quebec anti-racism strategy)

Study: Structural racism has material impact on health of ethnic minorities, immigrants

Black public servants’ lawsuit will force public service ‘to look deeply inside its structure,’ says former senator who’s fought for diversity in the PS for decades

Our attitudes to race are complex. Our response to racism should be complex too

Black civil servants allege discrimination in proposed class-action lawsuit against Ottawa

Lack of representation

Complaints in multiple departments and agencies

Proposing solutions

Plaintiffs outline alleged mistreatment, exclusion

Repeated calls for change

Follow Blog via Email

Follow Me

Multiculturalism in Canada: Evidence and Anecdote

Translate

Facebook Page

Archives

Categories

Subscribe

Tag Cloud