 |
| |
|
|
Shi Huangdi
|
 |
Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 1999
time: 00:22
|
|
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Toron...939636-sun.html
quote:
CRITICS ARE calling it "craziness" that the Correctional Service of Canada is disqualifying candidates for parole officer jobs because they're white. An Ontario job-seeker received a rejection letter recently, advising that only aboriginals and visible minorities need apply.
"Please be advised that effective immediately the Ontario region of the Correctional Service of Canada is no longer maintaining an inventory for parole officer applications from the general public," the Feb. 19 letter reads.
"Due to staffing resources we will continue to accept applications from aboriginal and visible-minority candidates only."
CSC is committed to having a "skilled, diversified workforce reflective of Canadian society," the letter continues, adding that future vacancies may be posted that are open to the "general public."
Conservative MP Myron Thompson called the policy "unbelievable" and "craziness" and suggested CSC is putting political correctness ahead of merit.
"I can't believe they would put that in writing," he fumed.
"What's happened to merit in this country -- abilities and skills? What's happened to training and expertise?
"Everyone should be on equal playing field when it comes to applying for a position like that and it shouldn't have a thing to do with ethnic background."
CSC spokesman Michele Pilon-Santilli said the pool was narrowed because a high number of applicants were competing for limited openings and it was proving "costly" to maintain the inventory. Aboriginal and minority candidates must meet all requirements for the job, she stressed.
"They are under-represented in both of those areas, so those are the only CVs they are maintaining right now," she said.
"We do have a diverse population and we need to serve Canadians.
"Representation is an integral part of today's public service, as is education, experience and linguistic capabilities."
|
Unbelievable. This can't be legal under Canadian law, can it?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:22
|
|
Actually it probably is legal. I haven't read the federal version lately but most human rights codes permit discrimination on behalf of a "disadvantaged group". In other words, affirmative action. Although my recollection was that such discrimination was usually supposed to be approved by the human rights commssion. I'm not up on the latest Charter caselaw to know if a Charter challenge could be successful.
I hate the absolutism of it. I can understand slight preferences in favor of groups that have been traditionally disadvantaged but I have always thought it goes to far when the very very best possible candidate can be excluded based on race.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:22
|
|
To follow up
7. It is a discriminatory practice, directly or indirectly,
(a) to refuse to employ or continue to employ any individual, or
(b) in the course of employment, to differentiate adversely in relation to an employee,
on a prohibited ground of discrimination.
BUT
16. (1) It is not a discriminatory practice for a person to adopt or carry out a special program, plan or arrangement designed to prevent disadvantages that are likely to be suffered by, or to eliminate or reduce disadvantages that are suffered by, any group of individuals when those disadvantages would be based on or related to the prohibited grounds of discrimination, by improving opportunities respecting goods, services, facilities, accommodation or employment in relation to that group.
So the Human Rights Act would appear to allow this and the only way such activity would be illegal would be if section 16(1) were struck down. This is unlikely since even the Charter allows affirmative action.
Equality Rights
Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Affirmative action programs
(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Admiral
|
 |
of the peace and coexistance movement
Feb 2001
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Donegeal
Anyone want to argue that white middle class males aren't being discriminated against? |
Ok. White middle class males aren't being discriminated against.
More seriously, it is obvious that something is wrong. At my college, among tenured faculty, 156 are white, and around 13 are some visible minority. Moreover, my college officially celebrates diversity, and at least among students, certainly encourages minorities to apply. Hence, the above disparity is symbolic of a problem with the way our society works. Now, affirmative action is not that good a solution. Negative discrimination is still discrimination. But, given the greater problem, it is at least a step in the right direction (though, really, we should be intervening at a lower level, and making sure there is equality of opportunity during primary/secondary school level).
So, my real response to your question is, anyone want to argue that white (middle class) males are not overrepresented in academia and higher-level jobs?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wezil
|
 |
Ontario, Canada
Nov 1999
time: 01:52
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Flubber
Equality Rights
Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Affirmative action programs
(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. |
This is the relevant bit - the Charter.
Yes, under our BS Charter such practices are allowed and as you know, the Charter trumps provincial (or federal) human rights legislation.
All animals are equal in Canada, but some animals are more equal than others. The Constitution says so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
So lets see, the Correction services have a field of equally qualified candidates (one assumes, unless people here are then going to start arguing that white cadidates are inherently better qualified, period), and have decide they will advantage certain candidates in order to fulfill other policy priorities....
Oh, yes, shameful- trully, trully terrible. |
what kuci said.
Personally I don't mind systems where they favor the equally qualified minority candidate. I don't even mind much if they give such a candidate a few points extra as part of the selection process. But in this case, the very best candidate with far superior qualifications would told "no" if they are white. (edit to clarify)
What I don't like is any system that says a white person need not apply. Because who it impacts is some very well qualified 22 year old who's having a tough time finding a job because he's white. You can talk all you want about past discrimination but this poor kid remains unemployed BECAUSE of his supposed "ADVANTAGED situation" . . . oh and the assumption that all white people led rosy lives is also a pretty pathetic sterotype.
Absolutes-- I hate them. I think this type of policy would be much more palatable if you said something like 50 or 75% of new hires will be minorities. That way you still get any of the very best candidates that happen to be white and you avoid a complete racial divide between the senior and junior officers.
Last edited by Flubber on 23-02-2005 at 21:52
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Oerdin
But we aren't just talking about the middle class are we? We also aren't talking about just males. It seems like poor white people are economically as downtrodden as poor people of other races yet they are also denied employment simply because of their race. |
Agreed. The assumption that all white peope are middle class or that a given white person may not have faced hardship is as offensive a sterotype as any other.
When affirmative action policies are applied as absolutes and for a long time, I think it goes too far. The result can be that white men, many of whom may have never had much in the way of "advantages " can be totally eliminated from some areas of employment.
The old white guys got the advantages and now the young white guys get the shaft-- I'm just curious where the supposed big advantage is anymore on some indicators. IIRC men are going to and graduating college less than women now.... I would also be curious to see income stats for the under 30 crowd to see how men do??
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-02-2005 20:31
|