- Reaction score
- 1,006
- Points
- 1,060
CivU said:
Sort of ... equality and discrimination are questions of law, and our courts and tribunals have taken the attitude, in the spirit of Lord Denning "I'll be the judge of that!!" 8)
Cheers.
Employment Equity in the CAF ( merged )
- Thread starter Canuck_25
- Start date
Sort of ... equality and discrimination are questions of law, and our courts and tribunals have taken the attitude, in the spirit of Lord Denning "I'll be the judge of that!!" 8)
Cheers.
- Reaction score
- 1,006
- Points
- 1,060
Well, this is just fucking great, from the Ryerson article above:
Protecting his country is a duty Pte. Dich takes seriously, even if he doesn't consider himself 100 per cent Canadian.
â Å“I consider myself Chinese first and Canadian second, I guess, because I was brought up in Canada but my roots are Chinese,â ? he says.
This attitude does not surprise Lieut. Tremblay. "We're not like the Americans. We don't call ourselves Americans or Canadians first. We identify a lot by heritage," she says, citing the common use of terms like French-Canadian or English-Italian as examples.
Does the word Oath mean anything anymore?
Protecting his country is a duty Pte. Dich takes seriously, even if he doesn't consider himself 100 per cent Canadian.
â Å“I consider myself Chinese first and Canadian second, I guess, because I was brought up in Canada but my roots are Chinese,â ? he says.
This attitude does not surprise Lieut. Tremblay. "We're not like the Americans. We don't call ourselves Americans or Canadians first. We identify a lot by heritage," she says, citing the common use of terms like French-Canadian or English-Italian as examples.
Does the word Oath mean anything anymore?
D
Dreadnought
Guest
It's funny reading how all you complaining probably aren't from a visible minority.
N
NavyGrunt
Guest
Dreadnought said:
Im not complaining. I could care less. I make my own no matter what people say I have to acheive. However I do know an overwhelming number of Vis.Minorities who feel all there acheivements are undermined by the fact that they "only got the job because".....
And outside of that fact- of course the people complaining arent the visible minorities- besides the ones from my above statement, why would they complain?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I think most will agree that at some point in the history of the CF there was sexist or racist policies in recruiting(even if unwritten)however this thread seems to be leaning towards an argument of weather minorites are still being repressed or not.IMHO if the CF adopted a policy of basing their recruiting on the people interested and not targeting specific groups, there would be less problems.If you as an employer was blind and had every job applicant read off their capeabilities and qualifications, you would hire the people that could best do the job for you, not the person who fits into the category of smallest represented race/sex group.Maybee its as simple as certain race groups have different motivations towards a service in the military, be it a stronger or weaker aversion but in the end I believe its up to the Canadian themselve no matter what race or sex and noone should be preassured into service just to meet a quota.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
You can lead a horse to water.....I don't object to bringing the Forces to the attention of everyone, including those that aren't exposed to us, or those who aren't aware that there are opportunities available for them (notice...I didn't say minorities! There are people of all races that aren't aware of the opportunities we offer).
My concern is Reverse Discrimination. As working in a field that has been subject to it on the civilian side (that is a fact and was proven during inquiries in both Hamilton and Toronto Human Resources Depts.), we have to be careful. Sure, the majority in the military is currently Caucasian males. Then, after concentrating our efforts towards recruiting the â Å“Blue Quahogsâ ? (my invented race, done so not to directly offend anyone), eventually the Blue Quahogs will become the majority race. What will that bring? Reverse Discrimination...as the Caucasion male would now become a minority. What a vicious circle! My point being, regardless of our hiring process, one race will always be the majority. Yes, advertise and educate everyone on our opportunities (ie: the Lead a horse to water analogy). However, if certain races choose not to enroll, favouritism over others can't be given to those few of that race that do choose to enroll. In other words, as I believe SHELLDRAKE had already alluded to, may the best and most qualified â Å“Blue Quahogâ ? for the job, win (to say â Å“manâ ? would've been discriminatory in this case
).
It's nice to get input from Koach on this whole manner, as his/her avatar states that he/she is experienced in this manner (No, that's not meant in a sarcastic way).
As for the Ryerson report â Å“the Canadian Forces no longer represent the people they have sworn to defend.â ? That's funny, because I never once swore to defend the Caucasian Male. I proudly defend this whole Country and protect those in it from harm. As well as defend the interests of this Country, while operating abroad, within my given mandate
. That whole report is nothing but a â Å“blood boilerâ ? IMO.
My concern is Reverse Discrimination. As working in a field that has been subject to it on the civilian side (that is a fact and was proven during inquiries in both Hamilton and Toronto Human Resources Depts.), we have to be careful. Sure, the majority in the military is currently Caucasian males. Then, after concentrating our efforts towards recruiting the â Å“Blue Quahogsâ ? (my invented race, done so not to directly offend anyone), eventually the Blue Quahogs will become the majority race. What will that bring? Reverse Discrimination...as the Caucasion male would now become a minority. What a vicious circle! My point being, regardless of our hiring process, one race will always be the majority. Yes, advertise and educate everyone on our opportunities (ie: the Lead a horse to water analogy). However, if certain races choose not to enroll, favouritism over others can't be given to those few of that race that do choose to enroll. In other words, as I believe SHELLDRAKE had already alluded to, may the best and most qualified â Å“Blue Quahogâ ? for the job, win (to say â Å“manâ ? would've been discriminatory in this case
).It's nice to get input from Koach on this whole manner, as his/her avatar states that he/she is experienced in this manner (No, that's not meant in a sarcastic way).
As for the Ryerson report â Å“the Canadian Forces no longer represent the people they have sworn to defend.â ? That's funny, because I never once swore to defend the Caucasian Male. I proudly defend this whole Country and protect those in it from harm. As well as defend the interests of this Country, while operating abroad, within my given mandate
. That whole report is nothing but a â Å“blood boilerâ ? IMO.We have to face is, their is racism in canada. Growing up in a small town near a native reserve really lets you see what our goverment policies are.
Native students get paid for each day they attend highschool
Native students can enter a university with far lower GPA then any other student.
natives dont have to pay income tax
Its a bit of a joke, considering we have a charter of rights and freedoms that praises equallity.
Native students get paid for each day they attend highschool
Native students can enter a university with far lower GPA then any other student.
natives dont have to pay income tax
Its a bit of a joke, considering we have a charter of rights and freedoms that praises equallity.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Dreadnought: It may come as a surprise to you that there are "minority groups" on this forum, and think it's as much horse$hit as the average Caucasian Male. I'm considered a minority, and I still think that "affirmative action" is a load of crap. If you can't get in on your own merits, then you can't get in. No lowering the bar to meet HRDC-defined quotas saying we need 12% more recruits of Mongolian/Malaysian/Icelandic descent.
Remove all the bars, and don't deny qualified people the opportunity to serve, and let everyone compete. The most competitive people get in, whether they're a Polynesian Jewish Woman, or an Anglo-Saxon White Male.
Remove all the bars, and don't deny qualified people the opportunity to serve, and let everyone compete. The most competitive people get in, whether they're a Polynesian Jewish Woman, or an Anglo-Saxon White Male.
H
humint
Guest
There is more to the issue than this -- you need to be aware of the reasons for affirmative action beyond merely attracting and accepting visible minorities to right historical wrongs.
At its most basic level, affirmative action attempts to rectify disproportionate demographic representation. The theory behind it is that there are systemic barriers, such as a lack of access to quality education by low income wage earners in urban environments or a lack of access to support systems that are available in suburban high income areas, and that this lack of access limits a person's ability to compete.
By having affirmative action programs, you are providing an opportunity to someone that would not otherwise be able to participate due to systemic barriers, and are attempting to have proportionate representation.
It is impossible to get into all the issues in this limited means of comms.
Yes, in a perfect world, we would all compete against each other in an equal competition. However, this is not a perfect world. And, not all the solutions are perfect either.
That said, as historical disadvantaged groups gain greater access to services, you will see less affirmative action programmes. At this point, demographic proportion is maintained through direct recruitment initiatives based on fair competition.
At its most basic level, affirmative action attempts to rectify disproportionate demographic representation. The theory behind it is that there are systemic barriers, such as a lack of access to quality education by low income wage earners in urban environments or a lack of access to support systems that are available in suburban high income areas, and that this lack of access limits a person's ability to compete.
By having affirmative action programs, you are providing an opportunity to someone that would not otherwise be able to participate due to systemic barriers, and are attempting to have proportionate representation.
It is impossible to get into all the issues in this limited means of comms.
Yes, in a perfect world, we would all compete against each other in an equal competition. However, this is not a perfect world. And, not all the solutions are perfect either.
That said, as historical disadvantaged groups gain greater access to services, you will see less affirmative action programmes. At this point, demographic proportion is maintained through direct recruitment initiatives based on fair competition.
C
CivU
Guest
I think argylls touched on some of the barriers I mentioned earlier...
Affirmative action as a means to place every one on a level playing feel, so that they can compete fairly for positions in whatever aspect of the labour market, is both reasonable and necessary. Everyone can be treated fairly, but if their ability to achieve competitive skills is hindered by their income, race, location, etc. then they are at an unsurmountable disadvantage from the onset.
As for reverse discrimination, trying to eliminate the exploitative practices that have placed Caucasian males in their present position, and subordinated other groups, is hardly reverse discrimination, but an attempt to again level the playing field. You have to ask yourself how one came to be the dominant group, without dominating someone else...
As for the comments of Canuck on the treatment of Native Canadians...I suggest you review some of your Canadian history and ask yourself if our seemingly favourable actions of present could ever come close to making up for the effects and results of our abhorrent actions of the past...I think not.
Affirmative action as a means to place every one on a level playing feel, so that they can compete fairly for positions in whatever aspect of the labour market, is both reasonable and necessary. Everyone can be treated fairly, but if their ability to achieve competitive skills is hindered by their income, race, location, etc. then they are at an unsurmountable disadvantage from the onset.
As for reverse discrimination, trying to eliminate the exploitative practices that have placed Caucasian males in their present position, and subordinated other groups, is hardly reverse discrimination, but an attempt to again level the playing field. You have to ask yourself how one came to be the dominant group, without dominating someone else...
As for the comments of Canuck on the treatment of Native Canadians...I suggest you review some of your Canadian history and ask yourself if our seemingly favourable actions of present could ever come close to making up for the effects and results of our abhorrent actions of the past...I think not.
- Reaction score
- 9,308
- Points
- 1,260
Canuck 25, you're an idiot - your posts to date have been nothing but uneducated bashing on various topics that you know jack shit about (the military, recruitment, Natives). Unless you wish to present a point backed by evidence, keep it too yourself.
CivU:
Thanks for taking the time to spell out what you were explaining earlier.
Although it may fall under the definition of "affirmative action", I'm not sure that I'd classify what you underlined to be affirmative action in the "political" sense. Targeting different regions/groups of people with recruiting drives does not affect standards of enrollment or recruit competition, so it does not seem to fit into the "political" defintion of affirmative action - which means that standards or requirements are set at different levels for different groups of people; a practice I'm fundamentally opposed to.
Cheers,
Infanteer
CivU:
Thanks for taking the time to spell out what you were explaining earlier.
Although it may fall under the definition of "affirmative action", I'm not sure that I'd classify what you underlined to be affirmative action in the "political" sense. Targeting different regions/groups of people with recruiting drives does not affect standards of enrollment or recruit competition, so it does not seem to fit into the "political" defintion of affirmative action - which means that standards or requirements are set at different levels for different groups of people; a practice I'm fundamentally opposed to.
Cheers,
Infanteer
Infanteer said:
Evidence, you are saying everything i posted is false? Well your wrong. Its a fact that the military is trying to encourage minorities to join th military, and its a fact that the natives recieve unequal treatment as the rest of canadians.
My statements stand, im surprised one in the military is posting crap like this. I know enough, not all. If you say you know it all, and i know nothing, well, that is false also.
- Reaction score
- 9,308
- Points
- 1,260
Canuck_25 said:
You attempt to paint certain policies with broad, unsubstantiated statements. Unless you're going to prove it, STFU.
I've pointed out to you that your constant blabbing of hearsay, misconceptions, and unsubstantiated claims is in direct contravention of Forum policies here. If you want to keep this up, I'll bring the formal warning system into play.
Since you obviously ignored it the first time I gave the link to you, here it is again; this is your final warning.
http://army.ca/forums/threads/17343.0.html
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Going along with this topic has anyone ever heard of a program in place which encourages businesses dealing with the government to reflect the percentage of visible minorities in the Canadian populace. I've heard about it but can't quite place exactly where. For example, 5% of the population of Canada is black (not a real statistic) so a company dealing directly with the government would have to have 5% of their staff black, or not have to, but are encouraged to.
I have no idea how they would be encouraged, perhaps companies who reflect the population statistics would be higher on the merit list than those that don't??
Not quite affirmative action I think?
Does it even exist or is Che creating things again?
I have no idea how they would be encouraged, perhaps companies who reflect the population statistics would be higher on the merit list than those that don't??
Not quite affirmative action I think?
Does it even exist or is Che creating things again?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Canuck; I thinks its time you only worried about yourself, getting into the armed forces, instead of dipping your hands into other people's matter's. A major concern to governments is the unemployment issue, And unfortunately our native population, is having some problems. I wont deny that their are many well-off natives, but several of them are disenfranchised from there reserves, and have an awkward time entering the cities. So I believe the CF, is striving to advertise, Carreer opportunities to natives. To ensure they know there is a door open to them, to live a meaningfull and healthy lifestyle. I also doubt highly that they get any special treatment. But if they do, what can you really do about it, don't worry, your time will come, and no matter what colour you are, everyone has to pass BMQ.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
CivU - Reference your statement;
As for reverse discrimination, trying to eliminate the exploitative practices that have placed Caucasian males in their present position, and subordinated other groups, is hardly reverse discrimination, but an attempt to again level the playing field. You have to ask yourself how one came to be the dominant group, without dominating someone else
I just want to clarify that I never said that our current topic was reverse discrimination, I said "we have to be careful." In other words, as that which happened in the Toronto and Hamilton scenarios I mentioned on the 2nd page of this thread, we have to target ourselves (military) appropriately, so as to avoid reverse discrimination. I'm sure that both the Human Resources centres in the a/m cities never intended to do so, but without instilling appropriate measures, they ended up doing just that, and it hit them in the face.
Just wanted to clarify that, so as not to be taken out of context. I've noticed that you've eloquently explained yourself and your points, and I just wanted the same chance. Otherwise others will be led to believe that I've jumped the gun and started crying wolf (aka: reverse discrimination).
Cheers
Chimo!
As for reverse discrimination, trying to eliminate the exploitative practices that have placed Caucasian males in their present position, and subordinated other groups, is hardly reverse discrimination, but an attempt to again level the playing field. You have to ask yourself how one came to be the dominant group, without dominating someone else
I just want to clarify that I never said that our current topic was reverse discrimination, I said "we have to be careful." In other words, as that which happened in the Toronto and Hamilton scenarios I mentioned on the 2nd page of this thread, we have to target ourselves (military) appropriately, so as to avoid reverse discrimination. I'm sure that both the Human Resources centres in the a/m cities never intended to do so, but without instilling appropriate measures, they ended up doing just that, and it hit them in the face.
Just wanted to clarify that, so as not to be taken out of context. I've noticed that you've eloquently explained yourself and your points, and I just wanted the same chance. Otherwise others will be led to believe that I've jumped the gun and started crying wolf (aka: reverse discrimination).
Cheers
Chimo!
Similar threads
