# Alleged Institutional Racism/solutions in CAF (merged)



## the patriot

Hello,

Just an observation of things as they currently are within the system regarding Institutional Racism.  Nowadays, no one will be stupid enough to go up to someone‘s face and start insulting them with racial epithets or behaviour.  Instead,  they will make a soldier‘s life miserable by using the system against them.  Are there any troops out there that have noticed this happening among their units?  Furthermore, the Americans seem to have a better grasp on this.  For example, the head of their Army is of Oriental ancestry.  I am referring to General Shinseki.  He was recently on television awarding decorations to his soldiers on CNN.  I have yet to see someone other than an Anglophone or Francophone for that matter be promoted to  the Senior Officer or General Ranks within the Canadian Armed Forces.  Is this another politically correct commentary?!  Not really...  Everyone laughs at SHARP untill someone becomes a victim of someone‘s ignorance.

-the patriot-


----------



## Fishbone Jones

I don‘t go around with my eyes closed, but personally I have‘nt seen it in a long, long time. If you have proof it‘s happening, act like a soldier, step to the line and report it, don‘t complain about it. If your going to try stir that pot here, you‘ll need a bigger stick!


----------



## JRMACDONALD

Hey Patriot- got tired of getting kicked around with your FN vs C7 nonsense.    Recce guy - Hoo Rah!


----------



## spacemarine

Well I‘m sure he wasn‘t hired because he has chinese or japanese, he was hired because he could do the job. So if a white francophone or anglophone can do the job than anyone else, they also get it. I‘ve never seen people discriminated against because they‘re a visual minority. The reason there‘s no non-caucasian higher ups in the Canadian military probably because the command reflects the soldiers below them (except on the language issue)and there‘s not many negroes or mongols in the Canadian Forces.


----------



## Pikache

And the fact that they are senior officers, who joined CF when there weren‘t many minorities around.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

I owe Patriot an apology.  I used to yell at him for posting long articles with no comments of his own.  Now that I read what he‘s capable of when he thinks for himself, please let‘s go back to plagiarism.  It may be your only hope of looking intelligent.


----------



## cagomez

I‘ve been a reservist for several years now and am visible minority. I‘ll admit that the majority of my comrades are anglo/franco phone but I myself have never experienced any racism, prejudice or anything of the matter. I feel it simply reflects were you live and the people there. I‘m from a smaller town but go visit any unit in say Toronto and you seel a tone of personnel from all walks of life. In fact myself and the few other minorities feel quite proud serving a country that has been so good in welcoming our families we all share a strong comradeship with all the other members of the unit. As for promotions, I am granted the seniority and the respect that goes with it because I have earned it and because my NCOs and officers have the confidence in me that I am capable of leading the newer recruits.


----------



## the patriot

My Michael.... what‘s your opinion on this.  Looking intelligent includes taking an issue seriously.  I take racism very seriously.  Do you have any minorities under your command in the Calgary Highlanders?  If any of them felt that they were being systemically violated, how would you treat them?!  

-the patriot-


----------



## bossi

Once upon a time, I remember instructors shouting at candidates "SHAKE YOUR HEAD DOPEY!  DO YOU HEAR ANYTHING?  NO?  WELL, I‘M NOT SURPRISED - THERE‘S NOTHING BETWEEN YOUR EARS!!!"

Institutional racism?  For Pete‘s sake - give it a rest.
The Army has been self-flagellating itself long enough - let‘s move forwards (in other words, I‘m sick and tired of this " oh so politically correct McCarthyism").

In a good Army, all soldiers and officers will be treated as they deserved to be treated - no more, no less.
Furthermore, if one discovers evidence of racism or any other offence they should report it - to the police, to the Ombudsman, to their superiors, to their mommy ... whatever.
And, if there is no evidence of racism, let‘s get on with life - there are plenty of other problems to be tackled, without resurrecting bogus ones.

Okay?  I hope this inane thread will now die a silent death.

SIgn me "Somebody sick and tired of witch hunts".

P.S. Happy Valentine‘s Day


----------



## the patriot

Unfortunately for those who are victimized, it isn‘t "Politically Correct McCarthyism".  Granted, I agree, call the police and the ombudsman.  Report the behavior.   There are those who I know will resort to Reverse Racism.  I believe they are completely justified to do so.  How else are they to level the playing field with the white majority?!I‘m sorry to say, but the Canadian Military is guilty of systemic practices up and down the chain.  For those who take this issue seriously, you may browse the following site.

Ontario Network for Human Rights 

-the patriot-


----------



## spacemarine

"Level the playing field"??? You have some crazy ideas. The white majority does not have an advantage, there is no conspiracy against you. I would hazard to say that a non-white would be given preference in the application process that a white would not. Everyone is treated the same once in, and if they aren‘t, take it up the chain of command. You can‘t be justified in bieng racist against the majority.


----------



## Black6

PATRIOT - stop sniffing glue, lysol or whatever you have in that paper bag of yours. If you really knew anything about racisim, you would know that you cannot punish people for "the sins of the father". 

NO other country in the world bends over backwards to make all cultures "fit in" like Canada does. So zip it or go to whence you came from and try and sell them the same BS you are spearding here - and keep your head attached to your neck. Good Luck!


----------



## Paul Gagnon

> Originally posted by the patriot:
> [qb]Hello,
> 
> Just an observation of things as they currently are within the system regarding Institutional Racism.  Nowadays, no one will be stupid enough to go up to someone‘s face and start insulting them with racial epithets or behaviour.  Instead,  they will make a soldier‘s life miserable by using the system against them.  Are there any troops out there that have noticed this happening among their units? [/qb]


Are you making accusations or are you bucking for a new job as a sensitive news(and I use that word lightly) reporter?  An unfit soldier‘s life will be made miserable no matter what their ethnic background. All this touchy feely crap has gone way overboard.


----------



## Firefly

Hi, I'm planning to join the CF after I graduate from university.  I know this is a stupid question but being Chinese, would I face a lot of racism or be picked on?  I know most of you ain't racist, but racism exists and I was wondering to what extent in CF.  Thanks for the help.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

No, ......next!!!


----------



## ericorion

I am of mixed race with my mother being Caucasian and my father being Jamaican.  I am very interested in joining the Canadian Forces Reserves.  I know from personal experience (Toronto and Winnipeg) that Canada is a very diverse country and that people are accepting of each other for the most part.  The main target of racism that I have witnessed in Canada so far is against the Aboriginal peoples.  Has anyone here had any encounter of racial tension in the Canadian Forces?


----------



## HavokFour

Déjà vu, I feel like I've read this thread before.


----------



## ericorion

Thought so. Do you have a link to anything similar?


----------



## HavokFour

http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/35105/post-276720.html#msg276720

http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/315/post-2682.html#msg2682

The search function is your friend.


----------



## opcougar

This month being black history month, and with dnd having these big poster boards in certain building with pictures of black Canadian soldiers dating back from when till the 1990s, but with only 2 pictures of officers ( Capts ). I was wondering if anyone has come across a black CF member of African decent of the rank of LCol and above?

There are many Majs knocking around in the different elements and a few CWOs that I have seen. Also how many black have received the CDS commendation and other non-deployments medals?

It is true that the US does things differently, and I don't think we are going to see a Colin Powell like person here anytime soon. The Toronto police has a black deputy chief of police and Vancouver has a Chief of police that is of Chinese background, which is more than can be said for other cities and provinces


----------



## aesop081

opcougar said:
			
		

> It is true that the US does things differently, and I don't think we are going to see a Colin Powell like person here anytime soon. The Toronto police has a black deputy chief of police and Vancouver has a Chief of police that is of Chinese background, which is more than can be said for other cities and provinces



Wouldnt want the best person for the job now would we .....

 :


----------



## opcougar

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Wouldnt want the best person for the job now would we .....
> 
> :



Sure we would, but let's be serious here..........for the past god knows how many years, there hasn't been the odd black good enough to be a LCol, full Col or BGen?


----------



## aesop081

opcougar said:
			
		

> for the past god knows how many years, there hasn't been the odd black good enough to be a LCol, full Col or BGen?



I do know what the answer is to that but so f'ing what ?

If there has not been, what would you have the CF do? Promote one just to say we did ?

An individual gets promoted based on his/her own merit. Thats it.


----------



## Mudshuvel

opcougar said:
			
		

> This month being black history month, and with dnd having these big poster boards in certain building with pictures of black Canadian soldiers dating back from when till the 1990s, but with only 2 pictures of officers ( Capts ). I was wondering if anyone has come across a black CF member of African decent of the rank of LCol and above?
> 
> There are many Majs knocking around in the different elements and a few CWOs that I have seen. Also how many black have received the CDS commendation and other non-deployments medals?
> 
> It is true that the US does things differently, and I don't think we are going to see a Colin Powell like person here anytime soon. The Toronto police has a black deputy chief of police and Vancouver has a Chief of police that is of Chinese background, which is more than can be said for other cities and provinces



You have to look at it from a census point of view. Vancouver has a Chinese Chief of Police, Toronto a black one, rest of Canada, not so much. Well, Canada is a pretty diverse country, but censuses show that in smaller provinces, there are not the largest concentrations of different ethnicities. I have a first-hand perspective on it. My wife is Latin American and I swear she's the only one in my city of 150 000 people. For African Americans, a very very small populations and an even smaller one with other ethnicities. We have had a Colin Powell like person already, Michaelle Jean is black, Haitian-descended and pretty much the highest power of our country and technically the 'Commander-in-Arms' of the Canadian Forces.

The difference between the US and Canada (in the Military sense), you have to be a citizen to fight for Canada, my wife is was born in the US and is a former Marine, and she informed me of the US Military incentive that if you're an immigrant, illegal or otherwise, you can join the military and _earn _your citizenship. Of course, this isn't publicly advertised. Think of how many people at that point join just for that? Look as well at the numbers of minorities in the US compared to here in Canada. Have you thought that maybe the reason we don't have a lot of 'minorities' in our Armed Forces is just because they don't _want_ to be?


----------



## Journeyman

opcougar said:
			
		

> I was wondering if anyone has come across a black CF member of African decent of the rank of LCol and above......CDS commendation.....


Are you suggesting we increasingly promote, and give meritorious awards, to non-whites simply based upon skin colour?
 :

For posts like this to come across as anything other than uninformed pot-stirring, one would have to provide some numbers. What percentage of, say Majors, in the CF are Black (since that's your obvious focus). I would be surprised if it's even 1%. Yet, you're suggesting they be promoted to LCol...just _because_.

Since you obviously don't have any numbers to back your premise, take a look at military personnel on any parade square; how many non-caucasian are present? Yes, the overwhelming majority of CF members are white. It has absolutely nothing to do with the KKK or the Black Panthers or the Chinese Triads -- it's the current reality of Canadian demographics and the people who are drawn to CF service.



ps -- I happen to know several non-white pers who have CDS Commendations, GG Commendations, and even Wound Stripes. Good soldiers and leaders come in all shades, but we all bleed the same colour. Anyone suggesting otherwise a fucking idiot.


----------



## opcougar

I hear you an dthe US incentive you talk about is well known, there was a documentary on that on TV. You committed a cardinal sin in your post, refering to black Canadians as African Americans? A black in Canada might not have any connection to the US. Blacks in the US are called that because they were either born there and of African origin.

In Canada, it's Canadian African, Canadian Jew, Canadian Italian et al




			
				Mudshuvel said:
			
		

> You have to look at it from a census point of view. Vancouver has a Chinese Chief of Police, Toronto a black one, rest of Canada, not so much. Well, Canada is a pretty diverse country, but censuses show that in smaller provinces, there are not the largest concentrations of different ethnicities. I have a first-hand perspective on it. My wife is Latin American and I swear she's the only one in my city of 150 000 people. For African Americans, a very very small populations and an even smaller one with other ethnicities. We have had a Colin Powell like person already, Michaelle Jean is black, Haitian-descended and pretty much the highest power of our country and technically the 'Commander-in-Arms' of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> The difference between the US and Canada (in the Military sense), you have to be a citizen to fight for Canada, my wife is was born in the US and is a former Marine, and she informed me of the US Military incentive that if you're an immigrant, illegal or otherwise, you can join the military and _earn _your citizenship. Of course, this isn't publicly advertised. Think of how many people at that point join just for that? Look as well at the numbers of minorities in the US compared to here in Canada. Have you thought that maybe the reason we don't have a lot of 'minorities' in our Armed Forces is just because they don't _want_ to be?


----------



## Sapplicant

opcougar said:
			
		

> In Canada, it's Canadian African, Canadian Jew, Canadian Italian et al



It's that need to seperate ones self from others that drives racism, you know. Why the hell can't we all just be Canadian? Who the frig cares what colour your skin is? Journeyman said it best, about bleeding the same colour. What does an abundance, or lack, of melanin REALLY have to do with anything? Seriously?


----------



## Michael OLeary

opcougar,

The irony here is that after decades of being told we shouldn't "see" colour when we deal with people, you can come here and expect that we can share detailed knowledge of who has received what and their ethnicity. I would suggest you start with an Access to Information Act request to DND to get your answer, and/or petition the GG website to add a "skin colour" field to their Honours and Awards page so that you can track the statistics you appear to be looking for.


----------



## Mudshuvel

opcougar said:
			
		

> I hear you an dthe US incentive you talk about is well known, there was a documentary on that on TV. You committed a cardinal sin in your post, refering to black Canadians as African Americans? A black in Canada might not have any connection to the US. Blacks in the US are called that because they were either born there and of African origin.
> 
> In Canada, it's Canadian African, Canadian Jew, Canadian Italian et al



It can go either way, America is a continent, not a country.

I'm just going to assume a "well the United States has black people in power including a black president" post is going to come up at some point here.

In Milwaukee, black people aren't known to vote. They see a black candidate they are ALL going to vote. I'm going to put this as bluntly as I can, this is not my opinion, but the opinion of people who live _in_ this situation. For a moment, its going to seem off-topic but its leading up to a point.

In a lot of States in the US, a lot of African Americans are on welfare, and they are pretty much born into it. A common mentality in some states (Wisconsin, for example) is that the government _owes_ them. My sister-in-law, Mexican American, was told she only got financial assistance because her son was half-black. In some laws for businesses there, a business is supposed to have a certain percentage of whatever ethnicity to avoid the 'you don't hire me because I'm _______'. I'm not insinuating that they have generals or what have you that are black just for that reason, but look at the size of their military and look at the size of ours. They have more black people in their military than we have _people_ in our military. Example: hypothetically we have 70 000 people in our military, lets say 10 people are black, and 3 of them are generals. Then WOW! 30% of all black people in the military are generals! Then we have 20 white generals out of 60 000 white people in the military, thats not good.. 3.3% of all white people are generals? Look at the military demographics. My above figures give it about 1/200 shot for a black person in the military to be promoted over a white guy, its not racism, but its just more white guys with the same qualifications applying for the same position or being given the promotion or whatever.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

opcougar said:
			
		

> In Canada, it's Canadian African, Canadian Jew, Canadian Italian et al



Wrong again. Here you're just Canadian. Period.

As for the rest of this moronic thread, I'll also stand by my original comment, up top, from years ago, being as nothing has changed.

However, I'll reiterate just to be clear. 

If you believe there is a problem, grow a pair and report it and get it dealt with. Don't come here crying in your skirt like a little girl and try stir up shit where none exists.


----------



## Neill McKay

opcougar said:
			
		

> Sure we would, but let's be serious here..........for the past god knows how many years, there hasn't been the odd black good enough to be a LCol, full Col or BGen?



I think the premise of your argument is nonsense and I'm not really interested in getting involved, but I will note that I have, in fact, met a black LCol.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Mudshuvel said:
			
		

> It can go either way, America is a continent, not a country.
> 
> I'm just going to assume a "well the United States has black people in power including a black president" post is going to come up at some point here.
> 
> In Milwaukee, black people aren't known to vote. They see a black candidate they are ALL going to vote. I'm going to put this as bluntly as I can, this is not my opinion, but the opinion of people who live _in_ this situation. For a moment, its going to seem off-topic but its leading up to a point.
> 
> In a lot of States in the US, a lot of African Americans are on welfare, and they are pretty much born into it. A common mentality in some states (Wisconsin, for example) is that the government _owes_ them. My sister-in-law, Mexican American, was told she only got financial assistance because her son was half-black. In some laws for businesses there, a business is supposed to have a certain percentage of whatever ethnicity to avoid the 'you don't hire me because I'm _______'. I'm not insinuating that they have generals or what have you that are black just for that reason, but look at the size of their military and look at the size of ours. They have more black people in their military than we have _people_ in our military. Example: hypothetically we have 70 000 people in our military, lets say 10 people are black, and 3 of them are generals. Then WOW! 30% of all black people in the military are generals! Then we have 20 white generals out of 60 000 white people in the military, thats not good.. 3.3% of all white people are generals? Look at the military demographics. My above figures give it about 1/200 shot for a black person in the military to be promoted over a white guy, its not racism, but its just more white guys with the same qualifications applying for the same position or being given the promotion or whatever.



Drop the tangent. This topic is stupid enough already.


----------



## brihard

opcougar said:
			
		

> I hear you an dthe US incentive you talk about is well known, there was a documentary on that on TV. You committed a cardinal sin in your post, refering to black Canadians as African Americans? A black in Canada might not have any connection to the US. Blacks in the US are called that because they were either born there and of African origin.
> 
> In Canada, it's Canadian African, Canadian Jew, Canadian Italian et al



I don't even think about it that way. I think a lot of us don't.

I mean, I am *aware* that one of my troops is Tamil, that another is Palestinian, that one of the other guys in the platoon is Korean, that one of my other buddies is black... I just don't care whatsoever, in that it in no way affects how I think about or interact with those people. It's of no more significance than knowing that so and so is francophone versus that other guy being of Italian descent. Maybe it's a generational thing, but I think more and more of us are growing up 'colour blind' as it regards working with people of other races. 

So no, I don't think of my troops or peers as 'Tamil-Canadian', or 'Palestinian-Canadian'. Generally their first names suffice when I feel some pressing need to identify them. Or rank and last name if I'm angry about something or at least need to play that role.  >


----------



## Rheostatic

This thread needs some facts.


			
				http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no3/jung-eng.asp said:
			
		

> Based upon the data available,9 the recruitment pool for the CF traditionally has been fit young men between the ages of 17 and 24, coming from rural areas or from urban areas with a population of less than 100,000. Recruits generally have been white males with previous familial CF ties, possessing a high school education or less. Since the majority of MAs, which constitute the bulk of the Canadian population, are not the traditional recruitment bases for the CF, it is questionable whether the CF has ever been truly reflective of Canada, even if one were to leave the visible minority issue on the sidelines. Therefore, since it is unlikely that the demographics, and perhaps the values, of the CF were ever truly reflective of Canada, the suggestion that somehow visible minorities should be recruited in a manner that represents the Canadian diversity is highly contentious. It is likely that the only time the Canadian Forces ever truly ‘reflected’ Canada was when conscription was in force during the two great global conflicts of the 20th Century. Thus, within a professional and volunteer force such as the CF, it is questionable if the CF can truly ‘reflect’ Canada.



[Wow, it is not easy to post a table.]

Line 1: "If an army does not reflect the values and composition of the larger society that nurtures it, it invariably loses the support and allegiance of that society." Of course we must balance this need with "the right person for the right job" not through unearned promotions (as was suggested above) but by eliminating institutional barriers to advancement, if they exist.


----------



## mariomike

Rheostatic said:
			
		

> This thread needs some facts.



Interesting article.
Lots of information about Diversity and Employment Equity in the CF:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=KjE&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&q=employment+equity+canadian+forces&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=g-v1&aql=&oq=

http://www.google.ca/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&source=hp&q=diversity+canadian+forces&meta=&btnG=Google+Search


----------



## patienttaxreceipt

Patriot, nobody among CFs can afford to be racist. Aside from getting court-martialed, the alleged cannot escape civil liability if done in the presence of other people.. The cops will arrest him, criminally charge him, and impose civil liability on him. I know of one who was charged civilly, was forced to mortgage his house and pay 2 million dollars as exemplary and punitive damages. Not committing racism is like not crossing  the street when the lights are red or not passing a red light. Why are you making a big deal out of it? I would like to know..


----------



## JesseWZ

patienttaxreceipt said:
			
		

> Patriot, nobody among CFs can afford to be racist. Aside from getting court-martialed, the alleged cannot escape civil liability if done in the presence of other people.. The cops will arrest him, criminally charge him, and impose civil liability on him. I know of one who was charged civilly, was forced to mortgage his house and pay 2 million dollars as exemplary and punitive damages. Not committing racism is like not crossing  the street when the lights are red or not passing a red light. Why are you making a big deal out of it? I would like to know..



You're responding to a poster from 9 years ago... who is no longer even a part of this forum. Not to mention, I think your arc markers might be set a little wide.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Right. It died almost ten years ago, as it should have.

This is getting dangerously close to being moved to Radio Chatter, where it belongs, with all the other tin hat bullshit.


----------



## ModlrMike

recceguy said:
			
		

> Right. It died almost ten years ago, as it should have.
> 
> This is getting dangerously close to being moved to Radio Chatter, where it belongs, with all the other tin hat bullshit.



Agreed! I recommend we lock it.


----------



## DirtyDog

This thread is completely ridiculous, yet I feel compelled to say a few things.

First off, if some people feel discriminated against, I would suggest that in some cases it has nothing to do with their skin colour or ethnicity but simply because they are whiny dolts.  As demonstrated by some in this thread.  I don't mean to downplay actual racial discrimination, which I've never  personally witnessed in the Forces, but I fully support discriminatory behaviour against idiots.

As far as representation....  If more minorities felt compelled to _actually_ serve this country (as they are well under-represented in the CF), maybe we would see more of them in senior positions.  Unfortunately, this is not the case.


----------



## Newapplicant78

I am going to speak from a person of color perspective.

As a young cadet I was a witness/victim of said racism. The commanding officer at that time was a person of color such as myself. His advice was to suck it up and report it racism was something we were going to have to face throughout our lives. 

Since then I have toyed with the idea of joining the CF. After experiencing said racism again as a civilian adult I decided I'm not getting paid enough in this life to handle this crap. I am now much more mature and I am hoping the individuals I come in contact with are the same (mature). 

It is not that people of color don't want to join they either lack the confidence to pass the CFAT, have a total disregard for authority and/ or have no greater aspiration to better their own lives. Add a lack of information regarding the CF and you have the answer.

I saw lots of persons of color speaking with recruiting officers when I was applying. However I have read that Toronto seems to have a greater pool of visible minorities than other group and I believe that to be true.

The bottom line is our lives are in each others hands and if I feel your attitude towards another is questionable then I would advise anyone to report inappropriate behavior as we ALL have to trust each other. 

As I would expect a non minority to report said racism and not laugh along or stay closed lips about the issue if they are  amongst an exclusive group when something is said.


As for the American way of doing things, they have so many other problems within their own system that it's difficult to comment. I have heard that immigrants are admitted to earn their citizenship. However, I have watched many a 20/20 and 60min programs regarding the USA army that I am speechless.

I know where I stand within the Canadian system that is all I need to know.


----------



## SevenSixTwo

I haven't seen any racism in the CF. But then again I come from the most culturally diverse unit in Canada (Caucasian is the minority).

The only racism I have ever witnessed from possible members of the CF are on these boards where people can say things anonymously.


----------



## DirtyDog

SevenSixTwo said:
			
		

> The only racism I have ever witnessed from possible members of the CF are on these boards where people can say things anonymously.


I've never seen it here and I know for a fact it wouldn't be tolerated.

As for being anonymous, I know I will choose my words much more carefully *here* then I would in the actual workplace since you are putting it as a matter of public record.  I may be a stranger to most people on here but it wouldn't take much to track me down in the system if I commit a serious infraction.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

SevenSixTwo said:
			
		

> I haven't seen any racism in the CF. But then again I come from the most culturally diverse unit in Canada (Caucasian is the minority).
> 
> The only racism I have ever witnessed from possible members of the CF are on these boards where people can say things anonymously.



That is the largest load of bovine scatology I've witnessed in ages. And here's a warning for being a shit disturbing idiot.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Infanteer

Rheostatic said:
			
		

> This thread needs some facts.



Important thing to note is that the information in those statistics is drawn from the CF Self-Identification Survey which was instituted in the early 00s (2002 I believe).  More importantly, Part A - which is basically your tombstone data - is the only mandatory part of the survey.  Part B, self-identification (ie: I'm a blind, one-legged green-skinned woman), is competely voluntary.

In essence, this data shouldn't be taken as 100% accurate.


----------



## Halifax Tar

HALIFAX—In 2001, with a wife and her three children in tow, Private Wally Fowler, an African-Nova Scotian, was assigned to Traffic Tech training at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Esquimalt, on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. It was not an auspicious match by any account, and since then Fowler has clung tirelessly to the assertion that he and his family were the frequent victims of racism and discrimination in Esquimalt. 


More at link -> http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/4385

Its interesting that Mr. Fowler never seems to state he was the victim of racism by a CF member until he he cant get posted back to NS.

Then again he does make it sound as if his career shop was out to get him because of his race... I don't know what to make of this...


----------



## fraserdw

Sounds like it might be very much and it sounds like maybe members of the military covered something up with the removal of file documents although they failed to destroy the email trail which means the cover up was local and small time.  A good departmental wide cover up would have got those emails.  In these types of cover ups, with this much time passed, you will never know who really organized it or who participated.  Usually, the participants are willing dupes afraid of the rank and political power of the lead conspirator and just trying to hold on to their own careers.  I am sure everyone involved retired with honour and pension and a few medals to boot.  A man's life is destroyed because he really believed all that stuff about ethics and the fairness of our system.  Now he will most likely get a pension but that is little comfort.


----------



## jollyjacktar

A strange tale indeed.  I'm not sure on how much of it is accurate, how much speculation, how much innuendo.  I have no doubt that circumstance became a vicious circle after time. There seems to be some indication that "something" was happening.  Don't know how or if it could get ironed out after all this time.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

I won't speculate. I'll wait until the investigation is complete and all the details are released..........from both sides.


----------



## Furniture

Until they come up with something substantial from either side I'm going to have to say they system is likely correct. The people running the show aren't idiots (all the time), and given the sensitive nature of the situation I highly doubt that anybody in their right mind would actively block a legitimate investigation. I'm sure every one of us on here has dealt with missing paperwork from time to time, and I highly doubt our CoC is out to get all of us.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

WeatherdoG said:
			
		

> Until they come up with something substantial from either side I'm going to have to say they system is likely correct. The people running the show aren't idiots (all the time), and given the sensitive nature of the situation I highly doubt that anybody in their right mind would actively block a legitimate investigation. I'm sure every one of us on here has dealt with missing paperwork from time to time, and I highly doubt our CoC is out to get all of us.



You're 'assuming' and you know what they say about that


----------



## medicineman

Coming from Victoria, I find some of this a little odd, well alot odd actually.  There is also the fact that we're only seeing a very sterilized one side of the story...there are some things said and unsaid that are raising some flags with me that I'll just leave at that for now.  I'll be interested to see how this pans out.

MM


----------



## ModlrMike

I too was struck by the comments about Victoria.


----------



## PMedMoe

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> HALIFAX—Private Wally Fowler, an African-Nova Scotian



I've been imbibing, so I'll not even look at the link (oh crap, never mind I did).....

No one would be _assigned_ for Tfc Tech _training_ in Esquimalt.  The school is in Borden.



> Sergeant Rubin Coward, a military administrative *specialist*



We have those?

Okay, I had to stop reading.  End post.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

No speculation here. I've been to, stayed in and worked both coasts and locales.
The ethnic diversity, tolerance, acceptance, religious freedoms, racial equality and acceptance in Victoria, is light years ahead of anything that you will experience in or within 50 sq miles of Halifax's North End and Dartmouth. Especially in the late 60's early 70's with the closing and levelling of Africaville.

It also has, in the vast majority, SFA to do with the military.


----------



## Pusser

Something is definitely fishy.  There are a few points in the article that just don't add up.


----------



## medicineman

Pusser said:
			
		

> Something is definitely fishy.



No pun intended  ;D?

MM


----------



## Eye In The Sky

While the public posturing of "what?  the CF do something wrong against its members??" is eloquent and loyal, we know that the fact is that there ARE CF members who are wronged in the CF.  Disagree??

- why we have the need for a Grievance System?
- why do we have the need for an Ombudsmen?

The NDA and QR & O provide direction that an IA SHALL consider and determine a grievance within 60 days.  How often does that get blown past?  Often.  So even the system we have to use to griev is flawed.  A retired judge recently reviewed the CFGS, although I have yet to see a report, and not sure it will be avail for "the masses". 

Go to their sites (DGCFGA, CFGB, and the Ombudsmen) and show me where there are no decisions being made in the CF CofC that are wrong and reversed/overturned when they are looked at by IAs, the FA (CDS or DGCFGA on his behalf), CFGB.

My point?  Lets keep some reality going here.  Why does the TB, DND and the CF have documented policies on things like harassment?  Because they happen.

Lets not jump on the "he must be lieing" bandwagon.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> We have those?



If the article is correct, the guy helping him was the C Clk at 404 in 1993, so by trade likely an Admin Clerk, before Admin and Fin were married into RMS as we now know it.

Calling a Admin Clerk who is the Chief Clerk a "military administrative specialist" isn't a stretch IMO.


----------



## medicineman

Without speculating of course, having lived about a quarter of my life in Victoria, I have to say something doesn't sound right.  Being a health care professional, some of the stuff I've heard mentioned in there has other bells ringing.  Lastly, having spent 23 odd years in the CF also has some bells ringing too - both from an institutional side and from having dealt with subordinates (and sometimes even myself) that didn't get what they wanted out of their careers.  There is a system, on paper it works, but we all know in reality it's only as good as the weakest link, so yeah, somebody/bodies may have crapped the bed.   

Fact is, there are three sides to every story, and maybe even four in this case - Mr Fowler's, the CF's, the reporter's, and  what actually transpired.  We've only got 2 and a very sanitized part of another.

Hence the reason we're waiting for the rest.

MM


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> While the public posturing of "what?  the CF do something wrong against its members??" is eloquent and loyal, we know that the fact is that there ARE CF members who are wronged in the CF.  Disagree??
> 
> - why we have the need for a Grievance System?
> - why do we have the need for an Ombudsmen?
> 
> The NDA and QR & O provide direction that an IA SHALL consider and determine a grievance within 60 days.  How often does that get blown past?  Often.  So even the system we have to use to griev is flawed.  A retired judge recently reviewed the CFGS, although I have yet to see a report, and not sure it will be avail for "the masses".
> 
> Go to their sites (DGCFGA, CFGB, and the Ombudsmen) and show me where there are no decisions being made in the CF CofC that are wrong and reversed/overturned when they are looked at by IAs, the FA (CDS or DGCFGA on his behalf), CFGB.
> 
> My point?  Lets keep some reality going here.  Why does the TB, DND and the CF have documented policies on things like harassment?  Because they happen.
> 
> Lets not jump on the "he must be lieing" bandwagon.



Exactly why we said people shouldn't assume or draw conclusions, let alone pick a side, untill all the facts are heard, from both sides. Then we can wait until the investigation is done, and finally, people can comment all they want on the final outcome.


----------



## armyvern

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> A strange tale indeed.  I'm not sure on how much of it is accurate, how much speculation, how much innuendo.  I have no doubt that circumstance became a vicious circle after time. There seems to be some indication that "something" was happening.  Don't know how or if it could get ironed out after all this time.



Well, I have a whole bunch of comments after reading through it. The guy and his family were obviously discriminated against in Esquimault.

The flaws I see with regards to further statements that the CF failed to do anything about it though are:
1) School bus ... belongs to the School Board, District whatever of city of Esquimault and thus is not within CF jurisdiction to do anything "official" about except voice their complaint and make it known to those authorities (the CF investigated the incidents, confirmed, and acknowledged --- but certainly can't 'correct');
2) PMQs ... now (and then) fall under jurisdiction of the contractor; patrolled by civilian police; again, complaints acknowledged as having occurred, but jurisdiction of that location is outside of the CF. We can correct that. Get rid of CFHA and have DND once again take ownership of and jurisdiction of PMQ areas surrounding it's Bases.

Lots of other stuff too:
I knew both CWO Levesque and CWO Melancon. We knew in early-spring that CWO Melancon was coming back to Trenton and that CWO Levesque was moving to careers. Nothing nefarious there. CWO Levesque, going to careers would be normal seeing as how Trenton, 2 AMS was then and is now the largest, busiest Tfc Tech base out there, so it would be natural to see the next Snr Tech coming from that location. 

Context:
Seeing CWO Melancon "downgrade" from careers to the Snr Tfc Tech at Trenton would certainly not have been viewed as a downgrade "when" it actually occurred - it actually would have been critical to have that expert knowledge get back to that location as we had just sent our Army off to war. We were putting the Army in Afghanistan. We were standing up Camp Mirage. Had a SAL, TAL and LRP Dets to support all simultaneously with ongoing Golan UN rotations, ongoing rotations of Balkan battlegroups, sending seacans full of stuff to Turkey to get roadmoved down to the troops in Afghanistan etc (the media forget this? They made a heyday out of how overwhelmed MAMS Trenton was at the time).

Remember that the flight line is essentially owned by the 2 AMS MAMs Tfc Techs. They move, they load, they clean, they unload, they park ... they do everything! The base was so busy, in fact, that a great many of us ended up on "garbage details" - even those of us who weren't Tfc Techs nor Ptes or Cpls were getting tasked to do so. You had to, we were that busy! It was the times and the circumstances that caused it. It was crazy times.

Seems to me, that given the circumstances of the mbrs family and himself, it should have been a *Compassionate* Posting to the East Coast from the get-go. remember, the author already pointed out that CCM and Compassionate are indeed different. It also notes that Esquimault notes that request was for a CCM vice a Comp. A CCM however, would infer that mbr is capable and willing to do all duties and tasks at the new location without any career restrictions. It doesn't seem to me though that that is actually what the member required. 

A "compassionate posting" may indeed come with "career restrictions", but this article makes it seem likes that is something evil and bad. It is not; it is done in the members best interests, but can only occur IF the member requests it in writing. A Comp posting also means that careers can send you to a location even IF all the jobs/positions there are filled because it will compassionately be in your best interest. A Compassionate Posting also means that you have career restrictions such as, can not be tasked away from the home, can not be deployed, regular work hours, opportunity to attend counselling and appointments with your family whenever required etc.

A CCM would mean that you would be deployable, employable at whatever hour the CF wanted you and called you in - even if you had just worked all day for 7/8 days etc; you'd be expected to be avail 24/7, appointments scheduled around and outside of your work duties and timings else take leave. And, at that time period in the CF's history - Tfc Techs were constantly flying and moving on last minute notice - we were going to war and were still sitting in all those UN tours. A CCM would infer that you had "no career restrictions" and thus were able to perform those duties whenever the CF required you to do so. That does not seem to be what this young lad required at the time though. The CCM request seems to directly conflict with what the member and his family needed - which was time to heal, get counselling, and get stable.

Yes, a CCM means "no fault of the member" (this could be a CCM to location X because a child needs access to specialist hospital such as CHEO, but also infers that the member can, is able to and will perform all duties he is required to do whenever he is required to).

But a Compassionate doesn't therefore mean, "the member's fault". It means "compassionate circumstances" whereby the member and/or family needs "a break" from the military requirements as a unique situation has occurred that can be resolved and whereby the CF needs to afford them opportunity to resolve without being able to say, "too bad, we need Tfc techs on the next flight out tonight and you'll be gone for the next 3 weeks so get your butt in here."

I'm wondering if mbr refused to accept a compassionate status (I can't fathom CWO Melancon not explaining the difference). The article certainly makes it seem as if there was an insistence that the move be CCM based upon it "not being the mbr's fault". A compassionate certainly doesn't mean it was the members fault. The differences in CCM and Compassionate are indeed HUGE, but the difference is NOT in "who's fault it is" it is in exactly those "career restrictions". And, career restrictions seem to be exactly what this Pte required rather than "business as usual".

Now, any Colonel in Ottawa could write, "there are Tfc Tech positions available in Halifax, Greenwood, Shearwater, Sydney, Gagetown, Moncton, etc etc etc". That does NOT mean there are "positions open/unfilled". If there are no positions vacant, then to get him there careers (ie: CWO Melancon) would have had to have the mbr request a compassionate posting so that they could overfill the location based on those compassionate reasons. Did mbr refuse to request a compassionate (insist on a CCM instead) and thereby tie the hands of careers because, although there may indeed by Tfc techs in locations, no jobs were unfilled? Ie: the only places where there were vacant Tfc tech posns were Trenton and Winnipeg?

I don't know what to say, I just know that if I had been this lad's supervisor, I have explained the whole difference between CCM and Compassionate. It seems to me that someone was telling him, "you don't want a comp, your career stops!" while totally forgetting that CCM would not have allowed him to accomplish what he was requiring according to the social worker reports etc. The member certainly doesn't lose points for being compassionate status either. Sure, he couldn't be promoted (but he was a 3rd year Pte and not looking at promotion via merit boards anyway for at least 2 years [the max length of a compassionate status I'll point out).

I feel horrible for this guy and his family, but I think he got some bad advice on which posting status to request - I think someone concentrated too hard on the "not member's fault" and missed the big picture of the real differences between the two; a case of not being able to see the forest for the tree.

What an absolutely horrible situation.


----------



## PMedMoe

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Calling a Admin Clerk who is the Chief Clerk a "military administrative specialist" isn't a stretch IMO.



It is to me.  Sorry, just sounds stupid.  Why not just say Admin Clerk or RMS?  I think the reporter was trying to put an extra"spin" on it.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Well, probably because its *flashy* sounding and something the general public would understand...but ya, you're probably right on the extra spin thing too.

I dunno, I guess if he had been a WFE Tech, they would probably call him a "environmental systems specialist" or something that people can relate too.

I think sometimes we in the CF forget how little the average Canadian knows about the CF, or how able they are to speaka-da-lingo.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> - why we have the need for a Grievance System?
> - why do we have the need for an Ombudsmen?



Because both sides of an arguement pertaining to how something is written is a required thing in any forward thinking workplace.................if one thinks that these mechanisms are there just because one is getting 'screwed over' then it bitters the whole process.

As a union steward I always tell my members to think of it as a " I think I'm right" and "they think they're right" and we'll let an indipendant tell us who is actually right....................a grievance should never be personal.


----------



## Takeniteasy

Interesting, I will ask a question:

How many of you know what is going on with the family or person living beside you?

Most would answer that they know the person by name and by their daily or occasional interactions. I am sure most of us do not know the fine details that people are experiencing on a daily basis, or some of the stress that they may be experiencing due to a number of different reason's. We live our lives through context and you have to first understand that before making constructive conclusions.

Otherwise we would not have those major (holy &^%%$) how did we/I miss that? I am sure most of you can come up with a few immediate examples...

I prefer to read between the lines and see beyond a reporters lack of CF knowledge.


----------



## armyvern

IRONMAN3 said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> I prefer to read between the lines and see beyond a reporters lack of CF knowledge.



Agreed; I wonder though - why, when the reporter had an administrative expert there, that expert did not explain the actual real differences between CCM and compassionate postings; why that expert did not correct the reporters mis-thoughts on the PMQs and school buses somehow being CF property and jurisdiction etc etc. 

These are just the obvious inaccuracies in the article. Apparently, the administrative expert may have failed to properly or fully inform the reporter on things that he would, as a chief clerk, have known to have been inaccurate or slanted in favour of making the CF seem to have not acted properly.


----------



## ModlrMike

I can not in good conscience claim the plaintiff is lying as I don't know the whole story. Just the same, the incongruities in the story raise the spectre of doubt.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I can not in good conscience claim the plaintiff is lying as I don't know the whole story. Just the same, the incongruities in the story raise the spectre of doubt.



That's right. Doubt on both sides. There is not one person here, unless intimately involved in a completed investigation, that can say, categorically, who's at fault, who's stretching the truth, who's covering up or who should be penalized. Not one. Everyone here that says he's right the system is wrong or vica versa, is blowing smoke and is basing their 'knowledge and expertise' on simply what they want to think and should not be speaking as any kind of authority.

Or listened to as such.


----------



## garb811

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> 2) PMQs ... now (and then) fall under jurisdiction of the contractor; patrolled by civilian police; again, complaints acknowledged as having occurred, but jurisdiction of that location is outside of the CF. We can correct that. Get rid of CFHA and have DND once again take ownership of and jurisdiction of PMQ areas surrounding it's Bases.






			
				ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Agreed; I wonder though - why, when the reporter had an administrative expert there, that expert did not explain the actual real differences between CCM and compassionate postings; why that expert did not correct the reporters mis-thoughts on the PMQs and school buses somehow being CF property and jurisdiction etc etc.


RHUs remain the property and responsibility of DND, CFHA simply manages them on behalf of DND as a special operating agency within DND.  The only place (I'm aware of) that jurisdiction has been ceded is Gagetown, and again, as far as I know, that is for policing only; DND remains the property owner of the RHUs proper with all of the rights and responsibilities that entails.


----------



## 57Chevy

I think Army Vern sums up the military aspect of this ordeal quite well.
I too feel sorely for Mr. Fowler and his family.

The journalist covering the story is no expert on the military and is reporting primarily on items
that were offerred for publication. (Don't shoot the messenger.)

Considering that Veterans Affairs will award him with a full medical pension means that
there was extensive study regarding the deterioration of his medical condition while serving. 
One must keep in mind that VA considers the reasonable doubt and usually (or at times)
in favor of the applicant and therefore in itself, does not proove discrimination on the part of the CAF.

Was he subject to discrimination ?  He probably was.

Is there sufficient proof ?    Probably not, given the disappearance of vital documents
and the shredding of more by his own hand there remains a lack of substantiation.
Too much is left to speculation.

Should the process of reporting discrimination in the military (and anywhere else for that matter) be improved upon ?  Definitely. There is always room for improvement.

Should Mr. Fowler pursue his cause ?  IMO, I don't think so, but he alone must make that decision.

Why should he not pursue ?

I am no expert in the field but I would like to add my 2 cents worth.
Mr. Coward making mention of having the whole bakery over the loaf is protraying a pot of gold at the end of
a rainbow of speculation.
The process of such can be long and arduous.
I think Mr. Fowler must consider the fragility of his state of mind and
the hindrance of the healing process in so doing.  

I believe both Mr. Fowler and Mr. Coward will at some point read through this thread. And I hope they do.

Pertaining to discrimination,
You can't see the tree by reason of the forest. 

On the medical side, 
If the tree falls in the woods, who will hear it ?
In this case, Veterans Affairs did.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Ahh, "disappearing documents"........the equivalent of the old question "So when did you stop beating your wife?"   No right answer....


----------



## armyvern

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I can not in good conscience claim the plaintiff is lying as I don't know the whole story. Just the same, the incongruities in the story raise the spectre of doubt.



I actually don't doubt that he was discriminated against in Esquimault. I believe he was. Where he was discriminated against though (busses, Qs) are not CF jurisdiction therefore we can not deal with the offenders, nor can we enforce a change. But, the CF investigated, found it to be factual and recommended that he get posted away from there. It seems his local CoC made all attempts to do so.

But, when we get past that initial stage, there's claims of "a colonel said 6 spots on the east coast had tfc techs, but some CWO said they only had openings in Winnipeg and Trenton" - inferring that these two statements conflict and that the CWO therefore lied. To be clear, the CWO is the career manager, not the colonel, and although 6 bases may indeed have had tfc tech posns, that does not mean that they were empty.  IAW policy, (because different budget funds and rules cover CCMs than Compassionates) a posting to any base where all the positions were filled could only have occured as a compassionate. 

The article certainly infers that mbr (or his CoC) was insistent on a "CCM because the situation wasn't his fault". I think that's where the problems began. If he refused to apply for the compassionate, then the career manager would have no choice but to offer him posting locations where tfc tech positions were *vacant*. And, once making his choice and being posted there, in this case - to Trenton, he would have been expected to perform all duties and tasks on a 24/7 basis exactly as all other tfc techs were doing as a CCM has "no career implications".

Picking up garbage. Sorting through it. I was a Sup Tech MCpl and I was doing that there too. So were my troops even though flights were a MAMs tfc techs responsibility. Ironing flags ... that were flown when visiting dignitaries etc came in. Flown during Repatriation Ceremonies. Parades set up - by MAMs. etc etc. Also a MAMs tfc tech area of responsibility. Those things WERE/ARE part of the normal job of being a tfc tech at that location. They certainly aren't discriminatory as this article seems to slant it out to be. 

Did member refuse to fly? Refuse to work evenings etc? Insist that he could not fly, work 12-13 hour shifts etc because he had to help get his family settled, attend counselling etc? (Because that is what the social work reports in Esquimault certainly said needed to occur) If, "yes", he refused and could not perform his duties whenever/whatever required, then mbr should have been on a compassionate status NOT CCM. 

If mbr had requested a compassionate, then he would have been in Halifax, and would have been afforded all opportunity to have restrictions placed upon his career (no taskings, no flying, no duties, must be afforded time for social worker appts with family etc) so that he could indeed have gotten his family settled, stable and healthy again.

In the end, I think it all comes down to, once again, someone not explaining the true difference between CCM and compassionate to this lad. Someoine concentrated on the "not your fault" bit and missed the actual important differences (not that compassionate means "your fault" either as the article certainly seems to spin it that way).


----------



## armyvern

garb811 said:
			
		

> RHUs remain the property and responsibility of DND, CFHA simply manages them on behalf of DND as a special operating agency within DND.  The only place (I'm aware of) that jurisdiction has been ceded is Gagetown, and again, as far as I know, that is for policing only; DND remains the property owner of the RHUs proper with all of the rights and responsibilities that entails.



I understand we own them. Gagetown is policed by the RCMP, others are policed by civilian agencies now too. Got a problem with someone in the Qs, phone the local authorities.


----------



## garb811

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I understand we own them. Gagetown is policed by the RCMP, others are policed by civilian agencies now too. Got a problem with someone in the Qs, phone the local authorities.



Really? Other than Gagetown, which ones?  Honest questions which I'd like to know your answer to because, as I said, the only ones I'm aware of are Gagetown, never heard a comment from any of my peers that other PMQs have had jurisdiction formally ceded, and I highly doubt it has happened as the Branch has been strengthening the understanding of our jurisdiction with our civilian partners.  Having said that, I do know that in the recent past there have been problems related to 911 calls, in that the 911 operator will dispatch certain civilian police agencies vice routing the call to MP, but we have been working that issue in order to ensure DND civic addresses are clearly identified in the 911 system.

There are also MOUs in place in some locations, such as reserve Armouries where there is no 24/7 MP presence, to have civilian police do the initial response in emergency situations, but DND and the CF retain primary jurisdiction


----------



## armyvern

garb811 said:
			
		

> Really? Other than Gagetown, which ones?  Honest questions which I'd like to know your answer to because, as I said, the only ones I'm aware of are Gagetown, never heard a comment from any of my peers that other PMQs have had jurisdiction formally ceded, and I highly doubt it has happened as the Branch has been strengthening the understanding of our jurisdiction with our civilian partners.  Having said that, I do know that in the recent past there have been problems related to 911 calls, in that the 911 operator will dispatch certain civilian police agencies vice routing the call to MP, but we have been working that issue in order to ensure DND civic addresses are clearly identified in the 911 system.
> 
> There are also MOUs in place in some locations, such as reserve Armouries where there is no 24/7 MP presence, to have civilian police do the initial response in emergency situations, but DND and the CF retain primary jurisdiction



Esquimault: PMQ itself = MP / Roads = Local (the incidents below are banana peels being thrown at wife while she walked up the street)
North Bay: Roadways, snow maintenance, policing of roads = civpol / PMQ proper = unsure;

A great many locations also have agreements with local authorities to investigate all matters domestic and civil crimes as any charges will end up being heard in civil courts. MPs will "hold" to a Q, until civpol arrive.  I believe that you've pointed out that exact same thing here on this site previously in another thread.

Anyway, I'm not going to sit here and dig through all the bases because it is Sunday and the base that matters is up top. I'm sure that you are already well aware though that if you want to nail anyone and charge them in a great many PMQ areas with a civil offense, you're calling in the locals.

If you believe that Gagetown is the only location that "civ jurisdiction" is "really" applicable to, then I'd recommend that you do some background on the Federal Capital Assistance Program (CAP) to see just how badly the issue of "who has jursidiction in PMQs" can, does, and will effect what goes on.


----------



## fraserdw

Off topic, but in Gagetown the policing sucked when I lived in PMQs.  We used have dope users from the High School in our yard and that of the CTC commanders yard behind us.  Called the RCMP the first time they came an hour later and too late.  Called the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth times they never came.  Base got so fed up they put an 8 foot high wooden fence around the CTC commanders yard but left the rest of us sink or swim.  Most of the rest of us who lived there then moved out of Oromocto.  A PMQ across from the High School, the occupant came home at lunch at fought for his privacy, the dope users ended up tearing the outside of the Q apart piece by piece when he was in the field.  His poor wife was in a state of siege during the school year.  RCMP did nothing to help.  School installed cameras but would only use the video for internal discipline (AKA on school property).  Oromocto PMQs are an "outlaw" state.


----------



## garb811

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Esquimault: PMQ itself = MP / Roads = Local (the incidents below are banana peels being thrown at wife while she walked up the street)
> North Bay: Roadways, snow maintenance, policing of roads = civpol / PMQ proper = unsure;
> 
> A great many locations also have agreements with local authorities to investigate all matters domestic and civil crimes as any charges will end up being heard in civil courts. MPs will "hold" to a Q, until civpol arrive.  I believe that you've pointed out that exact same thing here on this site previously in another thread.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not going to sit here and dig through all the bases because it is Sunday and the base that matters is up top. I'm sure that you are already well aware though that if you want to nail anyone and charge them in a great many PMQ areas with a civil offense, you're calling in the locals.
> 
> If you believe that Gagetown is the only location that "civ jurisdiction" is "really" applicable to, then I'd recommend that you do some background on the Federal Capital Assistance Program (CAP) to see just how badly the issue of "who has jursidiction in PMQs" can, does, and will effect what goes on.


There's enough wrong in here that to rebut it would further derail the thread so I will defer to your immense knowledge and experience; you obviously know more about the world MP work in then I do.  I would appreciate it if you could send me your CSN via PM though, as I will start calling you for expert advice in the course of my duties.

PS - I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to start giving out advice related to the Supply system.  I've had the occasion to use it a time or two, and know a couple other people who have as well, so I suppose that makes me a SME on it too.   :


----------



## Scott

That's enough folks. Back on track, please

Scott
Staff


----------



## armyvern

garb811 said:
			
		

> There's enough wrong in here that to rebut it would further derail the thread so I will defer to your immense knowledge and experience; you obviously know more about the world MP work in then I do.  I would appreciate it if you could send me your CSN via PM though, as I will start calling you for expert advice in the course of my duties.
> 
> PS - I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to start giving out advice related to the Supply system.  I've had the occasion to use it a time or two, and know a couple other people who have as well, so I suppose that makes me a SME on it too.   :





			
				garb811 said:
			
		

> This question is a little complicated:
> 
> If the PMQs are built on a DND establishment, the MPs are the sole authority.
> 
> If the PMQs are leased or built on land which is leased, the roads are the jurisdiction of the civilian police while the leased land and PMQ proper are the jurisdiction of the MPs.
> 
> If a road running through the base is designated as a Provincial Highway then the jurisdicion is with the civilian police.
> 
> Local MPs and Base Commanders do not have the authourity to enter into any agreements to either waive or assume jurisdiction, this has to happen at the National level, a former Grn MPO in Gagetown learned that the hard way not too long ago.  What happened in some places, such as Gagetown, Edmonton, Suffield etc, was that local agreements that had been in place for years were voided upon review by NDHQ and MPs ceased patrolling areas they never officially had jurisdiction of in the first place.  My understanding is at least some of these are being re-negotiated but it is a long, slow process.
> 
> For those who are unsatisfied about the coverage you are receiving in your PMQs where the MPs are the ones who should be patrolling there, contact the Guardhouse and ask to speak to the NCO ic Pol Ops and let them know.  They should either sort it out or let you know what the problem is.  I'll admit, it seems kind of strange that the young MPs aren't all over issues such as that, since it's the "cop stuff" most joined to do...
> 
> Edit:  _Grammar_



...

Or, has that changed? You're the SME.


----------



## Pusser

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> A Comp posting also means that careers can send you to a location even IF all the jobs/positions there are filled because it will compassionately be in your best interest.



Not to detract from ArmyVern's otherwise excellent explanation, but I should point out that the above statement is incorrect.  DAOD 5003-6 (Contingency Cost Moves for Personal Reasons, Compassionate Status and Compassionate Posting) states:

DGMC, DSA and D Mil C shall be satisfied:

*that an establishment vacancy exists, or is forecast to exist within a reasonable time*, at the unit where a CF member is being considered for a contingency cost move for personal reasons or a compassionate posting;

So yes, there still has to be a vacancy to post the individual to.  Mind you, it could be an ATR billet.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Or, has that changed? You're the SME.



I'm pretty sure the Staff said to drop the tangent and stay on track.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## armyvern

Pusser said:
			
		

> Not to detract from ArmyVern's otherwise excellent explanation, but I should point out that the above statement is incorrect.  DAOD 5003-6 (Contingency Cost Moves for Personal Reasons, Compassionate Status and Compassionate Posting) states:
> 
> DGMC, DSA and D Mil C shall be satisfied:
> 
> *that an establishment vacancy exists, or is forecast to exist within a reasonable time*, at the unit where a CF member is being considered for a contingency cost move for personal reasons or a compassionate posting;
> 
> So yes, there still has to be a vacancy to post the individual to.  Mind you, it could be an ATR billet.



True that; career managers overwhelmingly supportive of such requests as "next APS" is usually considered to be "reasonable" time even at same trade vice ATR.


----------



## armyvern

recceguy said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure the Staff said to drop the tangent and stay on track.
> 
> Milnet.ca Staff



Oh yes, I see that they did; my apologies to the mods. Tangent complete.


----------



## wallyjfowler

For anyone wondering here is more info for you to read up on that was left out...Then before you start reply maybe you should realize there are two sides of the story and for some reason they wont comment. I have everything proving what is right and can back all of it up. So before you start playing this race card LOOK AT THE FACTS...

The Case of Wally Fowler - Possible Cover up!!!

Dear Tim McSorley,

Let me indicate that this was and still is a "cover up" now been perpetrated by Dominion Paper and it's members.

 It has been duly noted that your "follow up" with Miles has gone south perhaps.  Notwithstanding I shall take every measure possible to ensure others don't fall prey to this type of incompetent "hack" reporting.  Let me be very specific, while Miles was in receipt of at least seven (7) letters of support for Wally from both officers in the CF and Dr. Keith Martin, MP Juan de fuca, Esquimalt - we remain bemused as to why Dr. Martin wasn't mentioned?  For without his assistance in a letter to the Minister of National Defense Wally and copied to the Ombudsman, Wally would not have gotten out of that poisoned environment.  

More disturbingly, however, it would appear that the only person that Miles interviewed was retired Captain Dave Wong - Miles placed the call with the phone number that I provided him.  Where is the professionalism in interviewing "one" person when several more are available?  Is this responsible investigating and reporting of the "facts"?  I will submit, it is not.  Where are the interviews from Commander Taylor, Capt Penley, Colonel Boddam, and among others -

Marianne Ostopovich, BSW Counselling Services Coordinator dated 24 May, 2002 - from CFB Esquimalt Military Family Resource Centre - which states in part: 

"...Pte. Fowler reports that he has never lived in a community where people are openly this racist and degrading as they have been here in Victoria... Pte. Fowler has suggested some desired posting locations: They are: one, Greenwood, Nova Scotia or two, Halifax, Nova Scotia..."  He is very concerned for his family"...

Where are the very interesting comments and concerns of Lieutenant-Commander D.F. Ohs Base Chaplain, CFB Esquimalt that are contained in the letter dated 3 July, 2002 that we furnished Miles with that states in part:

..."I am concerned with the well being of this family.  They are not coping well with their present reality.  Their trust level with the local community is non-existent and they are truly miserable. Although Pte. Fowler feels personally happy and fulfilled as a member of the Canadian Forces, he has to go home at night, where he hears the daily plight of his family.  This has an overwhelming affect on him and he feels helpless .  My second concern is for the Canadian Forces itself.  

In the CF, we pride ourselves on fairness, duty, loyalty and honour, to name a few.  We stand between warring factions, seeking peace and demand justice for people we don't even know.  All we know is that they are people in need; even visible minorities and we will go to extraordinary lengths to assist them, regardless of cost.  This is what makes Canada a great and respected nation.  Yet, for all of our good intentions, our national and world image could be deeply stained on just one accusation of failing to take care of one of our own families, facing severe discrimination (to them) because they are from a visible minority, and because " no one would listen to them".  If the member were to seek the assistance of his racial community, I believe that this could be perceived a national scandal."

And where are the emails that we provided to Miles between the Ombudsman's office and the Military that clearly demonstrated a "cover up".  A cover up of epic proportions. Perhaps Miles simply forgot to mention these crucial documents eh???   Then shall attempt to refresh both of your memories then:

In an email from XXX dated Monday, 19 April, 2004 To XXX
CC: XXX; XXX

Subject:  Question in the House this Afternoon

We were advised by someone at NDHQ that a question may be raised in the house with respect to a complaint that has been referred to our office.  The complainant's name is Fowler and the case had to do with racial discrimination, as well as PSTD.

Could either yourself, Dawn or Althea check the transcripts of today's proceedings when they come out to see if anything was raised.  Let me know if you need more information.

Thanks
Barb F.

The next email establishes the cover up conspiracy between the Ombudsman and the Military.

From XXX dated Monday, 19 April, 2004
To: XXX

Subject:  RE:  Question in the House this afternoon

Importance:  High

Sensitivity:  Confidential

Here it is Garth.

Let me know if you're missing anything.

<<File: ROC #3 April 7.doc>>

A letter is also being sent this afternoon by Fedex confirming our conversation and that the "only issue you wished us to investigate were concerns with respect to a medical pension"  I am still awaiting a call from him this afternoon.  I'll keep you posted.

Brigitte.

Mr. McSorley, would you have Canadians believe that the above information is not essential and fundamentally germane to the "truth" about what really happened to Wally Fowler and his family?  Miles "hacked" the story and fabricated information to make both Wally and I look bad.  This is not the way to write a story - especially when someone else may hold the "Truth".  And yes, we have much more than this to share with fair-minded Canadians who are interested in learning the whole truth.

Sincerely,

Rubin Rocky A. Coward, CD

Note:  Edited to remove email addresses.  Harris - Milnet Staff


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Everything is hearsay. News articles, press releases, undergound sources aren't included or allowed.

We deal here in verifiable facts.

If you  have some, please post them.

NOTE: I said verifiable facts.

If you want to post rumour, innuendo, etc,  you can go to Radio Chatter.

There is tons of bullshit there to add to :


----------



## ModlrMike

Mr. Fowler: please don't spam me with PMs that repeat everything you post to the board. I am not amused!


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Members are being spammed with excess messages and useless junk mail. 
We don't tolerate Spam.

Thread locked


----------



## mad dog 2020

Military missing employment equity recruiting targets
Canadian Forces still dominated by white men
CBC news today.


----------



## MikeL

If you are going to post news items,  posting the article or at least a link is the norm, not just a paraphrase of something you read/saw on the news.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/08/02/pol-military-recruiting-targets.html



> Recruiting targets
> Target (2010)	        Current (2012)
> Women	                     25.1 %	           14.73 %
> Visible Minorities	     11.8%                	   4.93 %
> Aboriginals	             3.4 %	                   2.12 %





> Military missing employment equity recruiting targets
> Canadian Forces still dominated by white men
> By Kathleen Harris, CBC News Posted: Aug 2, 2012 7:28 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 2, 2012 7:43 PM ET Read 2 comments2
> 
> Two years after upping its targets for recruiting women, aboriginals and visible minorities, the Canadian Forces is falling far short of meeting its goals.
> 
> According to statistics provided to CBC News Network's Power & Politics by the Department of National Defence, women now make up less than 15 per cent of the military – well below the 25 per cent target and even behind its previous target that was based on 2001 census data.
> 
> Visible minorities account for less than 5 per cent of the Canadian Forces – that's less than half the goal of nearly 12 per cent, and aboriginals make up just over two per cent of the military, compared to the 3.4 per cent target.
> 
> The employment equity recruiting goals aim to meet the targets by 2013.
> 
> DND says it's committed to better reflecting Canadian society and has community outreach, advertising and other initiatives to increase diversity.
> 
> So why is the military still primarily made up of white men? Does it matter? And is the military doing enough to meet its own targets?
> 
> Speaking to CBC News Network's Power & Politics Chris Alexander, parliamentary secretary to the defence minister, said it's critical for the Canadian Forces to better reflect Canada's demography reality in order to project our values around the world. The department has set "ambitious targets" and is working hard to make better progress.
> 
> He pointed out that Canada is ahead of the curve on many fronts compared even to like-minded democracies – including the role of women in every capacity.
> 
> Alexander told guest host Hannah Thibedeau: "I think we can do more, but I think we need, as Canadians, to understand we have done well," he said. "They are submariners, they are fighter pilots."
> 
> The Conservative MP said today's dynamics are shaped by decades of past policy decisions, and blamed the Liberals for contributing to the problem by closing down reserve units when they were in power. Those units were helpful in recruiting target groups, he said.
> 
> But NDP MP and military procurement critic Matthew Kellway said the data masks an even more troubling trend. Women mostly serve in traditional roles in the military, and constant conflict between aboriginal groups and the federal government has thwarted efforts to attract more aboriginals to serve.
> 
> He said the Canadian Forces must do better in order to win support from the public.
> 
> "If the Canadian Forces wants the support of the Canadian population, it's imperative that they reflect the diversity of the population," said Kellway.
> 
> Liberal defence critic John McKay said the military isn't in tune as it should be with successful recruiting techniques. He said the Canadian Forces must do a better job of aggressively targeting groups in urban cores.
> 
> Walter Dorn, a professor of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada, said the military is doing much work to improve the numbers – but still needs to do more to change the "culture."
> 
> "Despite the best efforts, there's still a tendency for the white males to dominate in the Canadian Forces, and that's only natural. By being themselves they're going to have tendencies and biases that aren't shared by other communities," he said. "A lot of that is nuanced and subtle, but it's definitely there."
> 
> Dorn said the linguistic and cultural skills of minority groups not only better reflect Canada on the world stage, but are also an operational asset in deployments abroad.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

As a serving member, I am more concerned we recruit the right people, regardless of their "insert diversity driven adjective".

Seriously, is there anything more racist than a "quota"?   :


----------



## aesop081

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Seriously, is there anything more racist than a "quota"?   :



Thankfully, they are not quotas.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Seems like a fine line "target" and "quota" to me.

Why not aim for recruiting 100% of "the best possible candidate, regardless of their sex/age/color/religion/etc.

There is a good target, IMO.


----------



## Towards_the_gap

> Walter Dorn, a professor of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada, said the military is doing much work to improve the numbers – but still needs to do more to change the "culture."
> 
> "Despite the best efforts, there's still a tendency for the white males to dominate in the Canadian Forces, and that's only natural. By being themselves they're going to have tendencies and biases that aren't shared by other communities," he said. "A lot of that is nuanced and subtle, but it's definitely there."



What tendencies and biases? All white guys have nuanced and subtle differences? Hmm.......If that's not stereotyping I don't know what is.
And how on earth would he know? How much time has he spent in the back of a LAV with a section of soldiers?

Like EITS said, our, CORRECTION, target quota should be the best person for the job, period.


----------



## aesop081

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Seems like a fine line "target" and "quota" to me.



It may be fine, to you, but it exists and it is an important difference. If we had quotas, we would be turning away some people in order to keep spots open for others. The CF is not doing that.



			
				Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Why not aim for recruiting 100% of "the best possible candidate, regardless of their sex/age/color/religion/etc.



We are doing exactly that (although the recruiting forum here eposes some of our deficiencies on a daily basis). However, if you have not noticed, "white guys" is not the most growing demographic in Canada. It doesn't hurt recruiting to have people of various backgrounds in the CF, since if we keep counting on "white guys", there wont be anyone in the CF in a generation or 2.


----------



## mad dog 2020

Sorry , haven't. Mastered the cut and paste or copyright intro. From an ipad.  I need more practice. I really believe in first come first serve.  Back in the 60s 70s  they recruited plenty from high unemployment area and education may have been lacking but that was a different time.  Lots of Cape Breton, Northern New Brunswick and Newfoundland.  All Canadians.  
Maybe time for  a giant YTEP intake to address the high youth unemployment diversity be damned.  It is time for jobs and training not infrastructure.
Racism is wrong and so is bigotry. But does diversity provide any positive points or is it still viewed as a form of reverse discrimination.  

Just pick the most promising.  Always Canadian 100%, no matter the race creed colour or religion. 
I taught YTEP infantry and watched the buses arrive in Wainwright and we had kids from coast to coast. And they melded.


----------



## Remius

+1 CND AVIATOR.

When I was recruiting, diversity was a big part of what the attraction team did.  But it was never quotas only targetting.  Very different.  We would have a presence at various events and shows like women's shows, cultural festivals etc etc getting the message out to attract more people from those target groups.  But every file was the same colour in the end and the best candidates is what we aimed for.

Look at it like this.  We want more women, aboriginals, visible minorities, whatever.  But we want the best ones.  To that you need to get them through the door and processed in sufficient quantities to get the best ones.  If 1 woman comes through the door and 100 men come through your odds that she is the best aren't that good.  She could be.  But unlikely.  

When we talk about trends and tendancies it means that certain demographics are not drawn to certain occupations.  This may change with time but its a fact that we have to work with.  Women generally are not attracted to the combat arms in great numbers.  Some visible minorities come from countries where military service is either forced, or the military is seen as something oppressive and poorly respected and that predjudice is brought here.  For some aboriginal communities, leaving is just not something you do.  Like it or not there are some trades and professions that attract certain segments of society.

The key is getting information out so that we can attract the best and the brightest into ALL trades and professions.  That's what targetted recruiting is.  It isn't quotas, it is agressively selling ourselves to those groups that the CF is a place for them and that we do want their best and brightest.


----------



## The_Falcon

What Crantor and CDN Aviator said. 

We are perhaps the only federal government department that does not use "equity hiring" in our recruiting.  We may have "targeted attractions" to encourage more groups other than white male to apply, but they aren't given any priority in the process to get through  (there are seperate Aboriginal entry programs, but they are their own distinct programs that have no bearings on spots at St-Jean, and even still it is hard to fill all the seats).  And the majority of our selections are down via top down merit listing  (if there are 10 spots available for a given MOSID, then basically the 10 highest ranked people get selected, period.) 

Unless these NDP/Liberals want to change the CF from a volunteer force to a conscript one, we can't force people to join if they don't want to.


----------



## mariomike

A few more Employment Equity / Diversity / Target topics, if interested.

Topic: "Canadian Forces failing in gender integration and employment equity: report":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/2262.0

Topic: "Haven't We Done The "Target" Recruiting Before?":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/73674.0.html

Topic: "ROTP Questionare- Employment Equity Act":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/90556.0

Topic: "Employment equity is only for those who qualify":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37277.0/nowap.html


----------



## PeterL

I would hate to see the race and gender-based paranoia that is being peddled in the US making its way here.

I hope the CF continues to select based on merit and not some arbitrary categories like pigmentation levels.


----------



## Trick

Growing up in an Indian family and around other immigrants I feel like "targeting" is a good thing. It's not something that's an obvious option for a lot of ethnic groups, especially once they come to Canada. For the most part it's not an issue of disapproval of the military, it's just completely out of their minds. Going out of the way to expose 1st/2nd generation immigrants to the CF is a good thing. I also would never want a "quota" but I do think it's important to try to have a military that reflects the population of the country, and that population is changing.


----------



## George Wallace

Trick said:
			
		

> ..........I also would never want a "quota" but I do think it's important to try to have a military that reflects the population of the country, and that population is changing.



It isn't quite to the point yet where our demographics reflect the predominance of Black Somali Muslim women being in the majority.    >


----------



## Eye In The Sky

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> It may be fine, to you, but it exists and it is an important difference. If we had quotas, we would be turning away some people in order to keep spots open for others. The CF is not doing that.



Given the distinction/difference you've indicated, no there is not a quota system.  



> We are doing exactly that (although the recruiting forum here eposes some of our deficiencies on a daily basis). However, if you have not noticed, "white guys" is not the most growing demographic in Canada. It doesn't hurt recruiting to have people of various backgrounds in the CF, since if we keep counting on "white guys", there wont be anyone in the CF in a generation or 2.



I guess what irks me is the idea of "we don't have enough Xs" or "we don't have enough Os".  If not as many "insert group being targetted" are applying to the CF as someone thinks should be, maybe they just aren't interested.   Not everyone wants the military lifestyle, being away alot, deployed to ops all over the place, etc.  There is a significant loss of what most people see as 'freedom' with military service.  Then there are those in Canada who just don't care about giving anything to this country, period.

Some of the statements in the article make me shake my head, such as....



> But NDP MP and military procurement critic Matthew Kellway said the data masks an even more troubling trend. Women mostly serve in traditional roles in the military, and constant conflict between aboriginal groups and the federal government has thwarted efforts to attract more aboriginals to serve.





> "If the Canadian Forces wants the support of the Canadian population, it's imperative that they reflect the diversity of the population," said Kellway.



WTF.  So, based on this line of thinking, I should go to the firehall where I live and see how "diverse" they are.  If they don't have 23.4% of this group, and 14.7% of that group, they should not expect my support.  I am more inclined to judge them on 'can they do the job, or not'.  



> Walter Dorn, a professor of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada, said the military is doing much work to improve the numbers – but still needs to do more to change the "culture."



What "culture" is he referring to exactly?  "Improve the numbers"...this is the stuff that irks me.  We take any applicants that qualify, merit list them, and offer TOS to the ones who are the best amongst their fellow applicants.  I fail to see how that system is failing.



> "Despite the best efforts, there's still a tendency for the white males to dominate in the Canadian Forces, and that's only natural. By being themselves they're going to have tendencies and biases that aren't shared by other communities," he said. "A lot of that is nuanced and subtle, but it's definitely there."



:

I think the best applicants should get the job, full stop.  The CF can do all the 'targetted recruiting' in the world, but if those targetted groups (1) aren't interested and don't apply (2) aren't the best applicants/don't merit higher than others and/or (3) wash out in Basic or Initial Occ/Classification training, then I fail to see what more can be done.   Then again, someone will start quoting #s and % of this group and that group (like in the article) and people will wag their fingers and say "tsk tsk, the CF needs to do more, these percentages are WAY off".

I have no doubt if the CF does some really bang-on targetted recruiting to say, Aboriginal groups, and a whole bunch of them join, then we will see a CBC article with some critic yabbering on about how the CF is *targetting* aboriginal youth to military service, but in the negative context.    :

Target the best Canadians from all walks of life and backgrounds (which we do), select the best of the applicants (which we do) and hold them to the standards in the Trg System as they go thru (which we do). 

So I am not seing what is broke and why there is a need to try to fix it (outside of concerns that fall under the PC umbrella).   :2c:


----------



## brian8225

Diversity is a hot topic and something every major organization is trying to effectively manage, to the point of appointing a C-level diversity officer, CDO, (think CEO, CFO, etc.).

People, including recruiters/interviewers at any organization, may have a subconscious bias or simply likely someone more because they can relate to them. For me, if I interview a guy that plays golf, likes MMA, etc, I may be more inclined to hire that person vs. say a female with no shared interests/hobbies. People tend to be more comfortable with like minded people, but a homogeneous group of people is less likely to bring anything new to the table or learn anything from each other than a diverse team. You get tangible benefits to an organization by making diversity an initiative without sacrificing the high level of standards required for the role. Part of that is exactly what the CF is doing, which is getting the message out to the nontraditional applicants so that you can get a broader pool of applicants to choose from.

Every company would love to double/triple the number of qualified people applying for a job, because the odds of getting the best people from all walks of life is going to increase resulting in a stronger team over all.

This is NOT about hiring people that can't do the job or hiring someone less qualified than the white guy simply to hit a target, and that's simply a short sighted view of what a diversity initiative entails.


----------



## Bluebulldog

Just looking at the numbers, things get skewed somewhat.

Much of the visible minority population in Canada exists in urban areas, where the job market offers more opportunities. Most urban areas also offer more in the way of easily accessible post secondary education as well, in the form of career colleges, community colleges, and Universities.

The attraction to the CF from persons living in rural areas has always been there. The ability to receive training and education, as well as a career is very attractive to folks who live long distances away from the nearest large centres. The number of visible minorities living in rural areas probably is close to what's mirrored in the make up of the CF currently.

Coincidence? I think not.


----------



## Trick

Yeah I definitely agree with that. Living in Toronto I can tell you pretty much all my friends have never really thought of the CF all that much be they black, white, brown, w/e.


----------



## mariomike

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> WTF.  So, based on this line of thinking, I should go to the firehall where I live and see how "diverse" they are.  If they don't have 23.4% of this group, and 14.7% of that group, they should not expect my support. I am more inclined to judge them on 'can they do the job, or not'



Regarding that,
"I also explained that women and visible minorities, once qualified, are placed in their own group and that each class hired would require 50% from that group and 50% from the white male group. I further explained, that usually after the first class, the visible minority group is exhausted.":
http://www.torontofirefighters.org/OSS/images/firewatch/spring2009.pdf
Page 9.


----------



## Jarnhamar

When we put together our team for the olympics do we go out of our way to target certain %'s of visible minorities in order to reflect that the olympic team is made up of a diverse group of Canadians from across the country and all ethnic groups?

Or do we pick athletes according to skill...


Looks like the Olympics are concerned more with skill and the CF with image.







This team is racist and I cannot support them in the Olympics since they clearly do not have an assortment of races, like Canada does.


----------



## Remius

That's a really poor comparaison for so many reasons.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Crantor said:
			
		

> That's a really poor comparaison for so many reasons.



Like?


----------



## Remius

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Like?



Oh I don't know, how about the fact that we are a Government organisation that is required to achieve various mandates and we are given direction to meet our targets including diversity and the Oluypic team is something completely different?  Our overall reason for being is completely different than the Canadian Olympic team?  You show one pic of the rowing team, how about all of team canada?  I bet you they are way closer to a reflection of canadian diversity than the CF is.  Why?  Because some cultures and groups are into some sports and activities that others aren't.  

As good as the Olypmpics are for our national pride, those athletes do not serve Canadians, they represent our country yes, but it's about individual achievement.  Those athletes do not swear an oath to the Queen and are not expected to serve ALL Canadians.  We do. And we should strive to reflect that even if it is impossible at this time.


----------



## Remius

And a few other things, too.  If the Olympics is about the best then why have women's and men's events?  Why not just combine it all?

The reason we have successful athletes is maybe because the Olympic Canadian Team actually went and attracted people from all diverse backgrounds and that diversity has actually helped them?  We certainly wouldn't do as well without it.

http://sharenews.com/canada%E2%80%99s-olympians-reflect-country%E2%80%99s-diversity-official/

Found this after doing a quick google search.  I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to find actual numbers.


----------



## Bluebulldog

Crantor said:
			
		

> Oh I don't know, how about the fact that we are a Government organisation that is required to achieve various mandates and we are given direction to meet our targets including diversity and the Oluypic team is something completely different?  Our overall reason for being is completely different than the Canadian Olympic team?  You show one pic of the rowing team, how about all of team canada?  I bet you they are way closer to a reflection of canadian diversity than the CF is.  Why?  Because some cultures and groups are into some sports and activities that others aren't.
> 
> As good as the Olypmpics are for our national pride, those athletes do not serve Canadians, they represent our country yes, but it's about individual achievement.  Those athletes do not swear an oath to the Queen and are not expected to serve ALL Canadians.  We do. And we should strive to reflect that even if it is impossible at this time.



Crantor, with respect to your argument, the Canadian Olympic Team is heavily funded by the Federal Govt. As such, and given that the games are a far more public display of Canadians, one would wonder why this kind of target isn't set for it as well. Most likely because "owning the podium" takes precidence over filling in a tick box on the diversity worksheet. 

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2012/03/13/sp-olympic-funding-canada.html

OTP now divides about $70 million annually in federal government funding between summer and winter sports. 

Right person for the job, period.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Crantor said:
			
		

> Oh I don't know, how about the fact that we are a Government organisation that is required to achieve various mandates and we are given direction to meet our targets including diversity and the Oluypic team is something completely different?  Our overall reason for being is completely different than the Canadian Olympic team?  You show one pic of the rowing team, how about all of team canada?  I bet you they are way closer to a reflection of canadian diversity than the CF is.  Why?  Because some cultures and groups are into some sports and activities that others aren't.
> 
> As good as the Olypmpics are for our national pride, those athletes do not serve Canadians, they represent our country yes, but it's about individual achievement.  Those athletes do not swear an oath to the Queen and are not expected to serve ALL Canadians.  We do. And we should strive to reflect that even if it is impossible at this time.



My argument being that the Olympic team does a better job at representing the different colours of Canadians. The CF would be better off putting effort and money in training and equipment.
The colour of a soldiers skin doesn't reflect their ability to serve "ALL" Canadians. Taking an oath to Canada does.  You really think people care what % of the CF is made up of their own ethnicity?  If the CF does something good then they are proud because it's "their" soldiers. If their group comes into conflict with the CF for whatever reason you can bet they aren't going to concern themselves for an instant over how many of their people wear the uniform.
Uniform = government = evil for telling them they can't do something.  

The minute a group comes into conflict with the CF being involved they're going to look at "their own people" with suspicion and ask them why they are siding with the evil government and not "their own people".  It's the nature of the beast. 7.5% X isn't going to change a thing.  How about Red and White as colours?

Just last month I mentioned doing away with the Indian act (To begin solving issues Natives have) and a board member commented that if that happened Native Americans in uniform would have a big choice to make (or something along those lines). Wonder what was implied..


I have no idea where you are going with the womens and mens events. Why have 2 standards for physical fitness for men and women in the CF?

You might want to check your facts about where money for the Olympic team comes from in all it's forms.


----------



## Jed

Our Canadian Rowing team has the prerequisite token short guy as the coxn.  >


----------



## Bluebulldog

Jed said:
			
		

> Our Canadian Rowing team has the prerequisite token short guy as the coxn.  >



 :rofl:

..thought the same darn thing...


----------



## pthebeau

Crantor said:
			
		

> And a few other things, too.  If the Olympics is about the best then why have women's and men's events?  Why not just combine it all?


That statement fails to establish any kind of point.  Men and Women have very notable physiological differences affecting the levels of strength they can achieve.  Much in the same way there are weight categories for certain sports.  You just cannot compete a 63kg male against a 105kg male in weightlifting.  Are you trying to say that there are such differences and limitations when comparing ethnicities??  Would that explain how there are athletes from all types of ethnicities that are neck and neck in almost every type of competition?  Compare an asian man to black man, to a white man, in the olympics in any given competition, and you will NOT see a pattern of "limitation" for any given ethnicity.  Compare male athletes to female athletes, and you can see a consistant difference.  Apples and Oranges, on both your statement, and the point you were trying to make with it.


ObedientiaZelum's poor comparison is not poor at all.  He's pointing out the fact that any given "team" is not chosen based on ethnicity, it is based on merit.
The Olympic team in his comparison was not chosen base on ethnicity, it was based on merit, supporting his very good point.  

Appreciate the similarity in the next two paragraphs:
Olympic qualifiers is a competition yielding a name and a result.  If the result is good enough to compete at the Olympics, and Canada has a spot for the name, that person gets to represent his country, end of story.  If the entire Canadian olympic team was 100% aboriginal (just an example), I know that they are the ones best suited to represent my country in a given sport, thanks to the qualifiers, and would never look to see if their ethnicity reflects our popluation's diversity.  It is completely irrelevant, and a waste of my time.

The Canadian Forces recruiting process is an application process yielding a name and a result.  If the result (CFAT, Interview, Medical, etc) is good enough to be part of the Canadian Forces, and Canada has a sport for the name in a given trade, that preson gets to defend his coutnry, end of story.  If the entire Canadian Forces was 100% aboriginal (just an example), I know that they are the ones best suited to defend my country in a given trade, thanks to the recruiting process, and would never look to see if their ethnicity reflects our population's diversity.  It is completely irrelevant, and a waste of my time.

*Do you still fail to see the comparison?*

Really at the end of the line, its a matter of making sure that every single Canadian citizen is aware of the fact that he is welcome to defend our beautiful country regardless of his ethnicity.  Which leads me to agree with the frustration of the need for "targets" and how our force should represent the diversity of our population.  Sorry, #1 is, our force should protect and support our population to the best of our ability, and no ignorant politician or CBC news article should distract us from that.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Olympic team may be a good analogy here for other reasons:

The overall team has reasonable diversity reflecting Canada, but if you break it out by individual sport, you find out that for various cultural reasons, some specific minorities are attracted to specific sports: for instances, black Canadians seem more prominent in track and field or basketball, more asian Canadian are found in volley-ball and badminton, etc, etc. However, remember that  the Jamaicans broke into bobsleiding with determination and elite track and field stars. The talent is there and if, for instance, we could convince some more Caribbean-Canadian to give a try to say, rowing sports, I bet many of them would  qualify for the team as easily as their "white" counterparts. 

I suspect its the same for the military: While there are candidates out there from the various "minority-groups" that meet and even exceed all the requirements, they don't pick the military as a career for various" cultural" reasons. So we can increase the efforts at getting them interested, but pick only the best candidates at the time of recruiting. If this means that reaching targets that, in our view, reflect the Canadian society as a whole requires to put double our recruiting efforts into reaching these minority-groups compared to the majority of Canadian, but then continue hiring just the best, then so be it. I suspect the qualified members of those minority groups would not want it any other way.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Jed said:
			
		

> Our Canadian Rowing team has the prerequisite token targetted percentage of  short vertically challenged  guy non-identified ethnic origin Canadians  as the coxn.  >



FTFY in the interest of the PC-Police.


----------



## Remius

> My argument being that the Olympic team does a better job at representing the different colours of Canadians. The CF would be better off putting effort and money in training and equipment.
> So  we shouldn't put effort and money into making the CF diverse?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The colour of a soldiers skin doesn't reflect their ability to serve "ALL" Canadians. Taking an oath to Canada does.  You really think people care what % of the CF is made up of their own ethnicity?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said that the colour of their skin has anything to to with their ability.  But the diversity of our forces helps us as an organisation serve ALL Canadians.  As a matter of fact I do think people care about the CF being inclusive.  Having done countless diversity events for all targetted groups all across the country I can tell you that the effort is appreciated by just about every group I've dealt with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The minute a group comes into conflict with the CF being involved they're going to look at "their own people" with suspicion and ask them why they are siding with the evil government and not "their own people".  It's the nature of the beast. 7.5% X isn't going to change a thing.  How about Red and White as colours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pretty broad statement.  having higher percentages does help with attracting more people from those groups, what's wrong with that. Being diverse has everything to do with "Red and White"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just last month I mentioned doing away with the Indian act (To begin solving issues Natives have) and a board member commented that if that happened Native Americans in uniform would have a big choice to make (or something along those lines). Wonder what was implied..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not sure what that has to do with the CF trying to be more diverse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea where you are going with the womens and mens events. Why have 2 standards for physical fitness for men and women in the CF?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe its because the olympics try to be inclusive? No arguments about your question for two standards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You might want to check your facts about where money for the Olympic team comes from in all it's forms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I mention anything or facts about where money from the Olympics came from?
Click to expand...


----------



## brian8225

I think there is confusion about promoting diversity to attract a different group of applicants and hiring someone because they are diverse.

Recruiting campaigns focused on attracting minorities should inherently result in more minority applicants and more diversity occurring naturally within the force based on the simple fact that if you have 1/10 people applying as a minority vs 1/100, odds are good that you're going to get a different mix of equally and highly skilled applicants. Promoting the CF to a new demographic is DIFFERENT than a quota or hiring someone because of their gender/color/religion/etc. You are STILL hiring the best applicant, your top 10 list is now a more diverse pool of people to choose from.

Simple example:

I receive online applications from 10 white males. The best candidates are 3 white males, and I end up employing 3 white males. Zero diversity.
I receive online applications from the same 10 white males and an additional 5 minorities. The best candidates are 2 white males and 1 minority. Now I'm at 33% diversity.

In both cases, you picked purely based on skill/merit/qualifications, but because you got a different mix of applicants, you get diversity, and end up with a BETTER army than if you had taken male #3 from the first scenario because minority #1 is more qualified. Edit - You could also still end up with the same 3 white guys, and have no diversity. That's the difference between quotas and targets. A quota would force the 33% whereas a target still gets the best people for the job.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Crantor said:
			
		

> So  we shouldn't put effort and money into making the CF diverse?



I don't see it as a very important issue right now considering the state of the CF and the issues we have especially surrounding money. 
I would rather see more time and effort put into other things like fixing military housing, veterans benefits, upgrading equipment, ammunition, physical fitness.  I've found the CFs attempts to make the CF more diverse looks forced and hollow.  12 million dollars annually on these commercial that just offend people they are trying to attract?

If someone doesn't want to work for the CF then too bad for them. 




> I never said that the colour of their skin has anything to to with their ability.  But the diversity of our forces helps us as an organisation serve ALL Canadians.


Can you explain to me how?   How can soldiers serve the interests of Canada and Canadians better based off their race?




> As a matter of fact I do think people care about the CF being inclusive.  Having done countless diversity events for all targetted groups all across the country I can tell you that the effort is appreciated by just about every group I've dealt with.


I remember having a bad taste left in my mouth when someone broke down how many english Canadians vs french Canadians died in Afghanistan.
If you say you've done countless diversity events (I can't even begin to guess what that is?) I'll believe you and if you say it's appreciated then I'll believe that too- but I still don't see how it makes our forces stronger or in a better position to protect Canada.   



> Pretty broad statement.  having higher percentages does help with attracting more people from those groups, what's wrong with that. Being diverse has everything to do with "Red and White"


Right. People should worry more about red and whilte and not if the latest recruiting commercial had enough asian canadians in it.  If you don't want a 50'000 a year job because someone mispronounced the letter R in a commercial well how do you debate that?



> Not sure what that has to do with the CF trying to be more diverse.


A more diverse CF will mean Canadians will more readily identify with the CF, right?  There are  black female soldiers in the CF so as a black female I feel like I'm better represented.   My argument is that  even when the CF is 100% diverse with 33.3% male, 33.3% female, 33.3% transgender, an exact equal number of heterosexal, homosexual and bi tri sexual persons and all races imaginable- the minute whatever diverse group conflicts with the CF or something to do with the government all of the diversity in the CF won't mean shit. It will be CF goons in green nazi uniforms bla bla bla.

I understand the CF is just following what the government has set out. I just think as the organization charged with the defense of our country we have more important things to worry about and can spend our limited money on more significant things.


----------



## Towards_the_gap

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Right. People should worry more about red and whilte and not if the latest recruiting commercial had enough asian canadians in it.  If you don't want a 50'000 a year job because someone mispronounced the letter R in a commercial well how do you debate that?




HA!!  ;D


----------



## jrst

As a woman, and therefore one of these "target" groups... I guess... I have to say I hate hearing about pushing for diversity in any workplace.  If some one hires me, I want everyone to know that I got hired because I was the best person for the job.  I don't want people I work with thinking/saying I got hired because we needed a token female.  If you look at the target goals, they don't really represent the diversity of Canada anyways.  I can't seem to find the post with the number, but I believe the target for women in the CF was around 25%? (some one can feel free to correct me) - I'm pretty sure us women make up more than 25% of Canada    So by all means, the CF should reach out to different communities, but like others have said, don't hire us because you want to be more diverse, hire us because we are a better candidate.


----------



## aesop081

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I just think as the organization charged with the defense of our country we have more important things to worry about and can spend our limited money on more significant things.



If we continue to alienate population groups that do not fit the "white guy" profile, we *will* have something more important to worry about. We will have to worry about having less and less people to fill the ranks of the CF. 

I am one of the less PC guys you will ever meet. I do recognize the long-term utility of having minorities look at CF members from that group and say "that could be me" as the composition of Canada's population is rapidly shifting. We have to set ourselves up for long-terms success. The current base of recruiting for the CF is shrinking and the rest are largely hesitant. We have to change that. Not to simply have more of whatever race but to simply have people to recruit later on.



Some here would benefit from some training in employment equity legislation, diversity and demographics beyond a simple news article and PC/anti-PC rhetoric.



			
				jrst said:
			
		

> don't hire us because you want to be more diverse, hire us because we are a better candidate.



FFS, we do not hire anything other than the best candidate. We do not turn people away because they are not part of the groups we have targets for. make an effort to understand that. We are not mandate to hire X% of whatevers. We are targeting groups who have traditionally shied away from the CF. The organization can only benefit when we find the best person and having a larger pool of applicants is a good thing.


----------



## Strike

jrst - The CF targets specific groups in its advertising but does not choose one person over the other based on race or gender. They choose based on ability. So worrying that people think you got in because of a quota system that doesn't exist is something that, well, you really don't need to worry about.


----------



## mariomike

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Some here would benefit from some training in employment equity legislation, diversity and demographics beyond a simple news article and PC/anti-PC rhetoric.



For reference,
"Canadian Forces Employment Equity Regulations":
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-421/index.html


----------



## Eye In The Sky

brian8225 said:
			
		

> I think there is confusion about promoting diversity to attract a different group of applicants and hiring someone because they are diverse.



Nope, I don't think there is any confusion, but thanks for the lesson anyways.

The demographic the CF should be targetting is CANADIANS.  All of 'em.


----------



## aesop081

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> The demographic the CF should be targetting is CANADIANS.  All of 'em.



Last time i check, that is the case.


----------



## Remius

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I don't see it as a very important issue right now considering the state of the CF and the issues we have especially surrounding money.
> I would rather see more time and effort put into other things like fixing military housing, veterans benefits, upgrading equipment, ammunition, physical fitness.  I've found the CFs attempts to make the CF more diverse looks forced and hollow.  12 million dollars annually on these commercial that just offend people they are trying to attract?



That's because you aren't looking at the big picture.  The general population things army=infantry, air force=pilots and Navy=sailors.  You have to get out and inform people of what we have to offer and you need to spend money on advertising to do it.  Word of mouth doesn't cut it.  We still have critical shortages in trades and a lot has to do with people not knowing that these even exist in the CF.  Also, this might be news flash, but we have a severe shortage in skilled trades.  techs, mechs etc etc.  Strangely enough, a lot of new Canadians actually come over here with with those skills.  So why not make the effort to go and get them?  Being aware of their cultural norms etc can make a huge difference in getting to join our team.



> If someone doesn't want to work for the CF then too bad for them.



If we don't make the effort to go and get the best qualified person and show/inform them why we are the employer of choice then too bad for us.  We went through and are still going through tough times because we failed to do that and had to play catch up.  Doctors, Engineers, Naval techs etc etc.



> Can you explain to me how?   How can soldiers serve the interests of Canada and Canadians better based off their race?



Again, diversity helps us as an organisation serve the interest of Canada. There are plenty of examples.  What do you think the impact is of a say, I don't know, a couple of Haitian born canadians that can speak creole if say we were to do something like relief operations in Haiti?  Do you think that would help us?  Or how about every year they make staff checks asking for lists of people that can speak languages other than English and French?  Do you think they are doing that for giggles or maybe they are identifying particular skill sets that can help us on operations abroad?  Or how about a ship that enters a foreign port for re-supply, do you think that someone speaking the language might help?  Or how about a Padre that might be of a non-christian denomination?  Think that might be useful?  Or how about if you have to deal with a woman that's been raped in some warzone, might be nice to have a woman with you to help you with that.



> If you say you've done countless diversity events (I can't even begin to guess what that is?) I'll believe you and if you say it's appreciated then I'll believe that too- but I still don't see how it makes our forces stronger or in a better position to protect Canada.


  

I'll explain. A diversity event can be anything from a visit to an all girls school to talk about what we have to offer (it helps when we send a female recruiter), having a booth at a trade fair on a local reserve or something like the women's show, remote recruiting activities in the Arctic etc etc.




> A more diverse CF will mean Canadians will more readily identify with the CF, right?  There are  black female soldiers in the CF so as a black female I feel like I'm better represented.   My argument is that  even when the CF is 100% diverse with 33.3% male, 33.3% female, 33.3% transgender, an exact equal number of heterosexal, homosexual and bi tri sexual persons and all races imaginable- the minute whatever diverse group conflicts with the CF or something to do with the government all of the diversity in the CF won't mean crap. It will be CF goons in green nazi uniforms bla bla bla.



So we are planning for conflicts with various diverse groups in Canada?  So you say that it doesn't matter if we try to achieve 25% female representation in the CF because somehow it means squat if and when women take up arms in revolt against Canada?  I think you are missing the point of what diversity in the CF is.

As a side note: sexual orientation is NOT a targetted diversity group.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Last time i check, that is the case.



Exactly.  Which is why I don't see an relevant point to the CBC article or the points some of the people made in it.   ;D


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Crantor said:
			
		

> That's because you aren't looking at the big picture.  The general population things army=infantry, air force=pilots and Navy=sailors.  You have to get out and inform people of what we have to offer and you need to spend money on advertising to do it.  Word of mouth doesn't cut it.  We still have critical shortages in trades and a lot has to do with people not knowing that these even exist in the CF.  Also, this might be news flash, but we have a severe shortage in skilled trades.  techs, mechs etc etc.  Strangely enough, a lot of new Canadians actually come over here with with those skills.  So why not make the effort to go and get them?  Being aware of their cultural norms etc can make a huge difference in getting to join our team.
> 
> 
> If we don't make the effort to go and get the best qualified person and show/inform them why we are the employer of choice then too bad for us.  We went through and are still going through tough times because we failed to do that and had to play catch up.  Doctors, Engineers, Naval techs etc etc.
> 
> Again, diversity helps us as an organisation serve the interest of Canada. There are plenty of examples.  What do you think the impact is of a say, I don't know, a couple of Haitian born canadians that can speak creole if say we were to do something like relief operations in Haiti?  Do you think that would help us?  Or how about every year they make staff checks asking for lists of people that can speak languages other than English and French?  Do you think they are doing that for giggles or maybe they are identifying particular skill sets that can help us on operations abroad?  Or how about a ship that enters a foreign port for re-supply, do you think that someone speaking the language might help?  Or how about a Padre that might be of a non-christian denomination?  Think that might be useful?  Or how about if you have to deal with a woman that's been raped in some warzone, might be nice to have a woman with you to help you with that.
> 
> 
> I'll explain. A diversity event can be anything from a visit to an all girls school to talk about what we have to offer (it helps when we send a female recruiter), having a booth at a trade fair on a local reserve or something like the women's show, remote recruiting activities in the Arctic etc etc.
> 
> 
> So we are planning for conflicts with various diverse groups in Canada?  So you say that it doesn't matter if we try to achieve 25% female representation in the CF because somehow it means squat if and when women take up arms in revolt against Canada?  I think you are missing the point of what diversity in the CF is.
> 
> As a side note: sexual orientation is NOT a targetted diversity group.



Some good points on making sure we get the CF recruiting message to ALL Cdn's in your post.

BUT...the article indicates another reason for the targetted recruiting, which is solely %s and #s.


----------



## aesop081

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Exactly.  Which is why I don't see an relevant point to the CBC article or the points some of the people made in it.   ;D



It was a typical CBC article: Poorly done.

Think of what the CF is doing as selling cars. I know, just flow with me here.

You build and sell cars. You traditional client base has been white males. Your cars have always sold well with this group.

Your cars have never sold well with Canadians of Chinese background. They see your cars as "cars for rednecks" despite never having advertised them as such.

After 40 years of being in business, you realize that the number of white males (your traditional base) is rapidly shrinking and that Canadians of Chinese background are growing exponentially, to the point where they will be a majority in 20 years.

You quickly realize that, to stay in business and keep selling cars, you have to change how your cars are perceived. You have to adjust to market conditions ( less and less white guys and more & more chinese).

You still sell cars to white guys but if you want to maintain the same sales numbers, you need new customers.


----------



## Remius

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Some good points on making sure we get the CF recruiting message to ALL Cdn's in your post.
> 
> BUT...the article indicates another reason for the targetted recruiting, which is solely %s and #s.



An article written by the CBC right?  %s and # aren't the reasons for targetted recruiting, those are the benchmarks we've set for ourselves. I've already listed plenty of reasons why we do it, mainly to increase certain demographics.

The alternative is to do selective recruiting like the PS, RCMP etc.  So pick your poison.  I for one am happy the CF is trying to achieve its targets the way it is.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Now, what you 2 guys just posted make some sense.  The CBC story?  Their spin on it and some of the comments by the people in the article just made my bloodpressure increase.

I am not a fan of the PC-bandwagon.  Best person/ppl/Canadian for the job.


----------



## aesop081

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> some of the comments by the people in the article just made my bloodpressure increase.



That's where you went wrong  ;D



> I am not a fan of the PC-bandwagon.  Best person/ppl/Canadian for the job.



I am not either. As i said, i am one of the least PC guy around. What the CF is doing is not about being PC.


----------



## mariomike

Article in the Canadian Military Journal on the topic.

"Diversity Best Practices in Military Organizations in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States":
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo9/no3/05-scoppio-eng.asp

"Diversity and Equity

The term diversity is adopted as the new business approach to address both internal and external diversity, and can include: culture, ethnicity, language, religion, ability and disability, education, socio-economic background, and sexual orientation. The diversity discourse reaches a broad spectrum of stakeholders, in that everyone feels part of it.

Former concepts of equity and equality were linked to treating everyone the same, as in ‘equal pay for equal work.’ The new approach recognizes that by ignoring differences we also ignore individuals’ legitimate needs. Equity and equality are about fairness, not about the equal treatment of people. 1

Equity legislation still encounters resistance among those who see it as lowering the standards. Others feel they might be disadvantaged. Finally, those belonging to certain groups might feel labelled. However, the approach of this legislation is not to impose quotas or hire people who are not qualified to do the job, although sometimes it may be necessary to treat certain groups differently in order to be equitable.

While legislation is key to making progress toward achieving greater equality in the workplace, it should not form the sole basis of diversity policies, programs and practices. It should be considered a stepping-stone toward addressing inequalities in the workplace experienced by historically disadvantaged groups."

1. Judge Rosalie Abella, Royal Commission Report – Equality in Employment. (Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing Centre, 1984).


----------



## Eye In The Sky

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> That's where you went wrong  ;D



Damn!  Sucked in by CBC again.  I should have known better, in retrospect, and simply....performed the appropriate IA  :Tin-Foil-Hat:


----------



## Jarnhamar

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> If we continue to alienate population groups that do not fit the "white guy" profile, we *will* have something more important to worry about. We will have to worry about having less and less people to fill the ranks of the CF.
> 
> I am one of the less PC guys you will ever meet. I do recognize the long-term utility of having minorities look at CF members from that group and say "that could be me" as the composition of Canada's population is rapidly shifting. We have to set ourselves up for long-terms success. The current base of recruiting for the CF is shrinking and the rest are largely hesitant. We have to change that. Not to simply have more of whatever race but to simply have people to recruit later on.


I concede to your points.  It's hard to accept that the current base for the CF is shrinking when one hears that certain trades are full and there are 5 times too many people waiting to get in.

Perhaps some of the effort spent trying to recruit a more diverse base of Canadians could be spent unscrewing the CFRC mess which seems to stop or slow so many people from getting into the CF, including the diverse Canadians we have attracted.  



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> For reference,
> "Canadian Forces Employment Equity Regulations":
> http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-421/index.html



I'm going to read this thanks for the link.




			
				Crantor said:
			
		

> That's because you aren't looking at the big picture.  The general population things army=infantry, air force=pilots and Navy=sailors.  You have to get out and inform people of what we have to offer and you need to spend money on advertising to do it.  Word of mouth doesn't cut it.  We still have critical shortages in trades and a lot has to do with people not knowing that these even exist in the CF.  Also, this might be news flash, but we have a severe shortage in skilled trades.  techs, mechs etc etc.  Strangely enough, a lot of new Canadians actually come over here with with those skills.  So why not make the effort to go and get them?  Being aware of their cultural norms etc can make a huge difference in getting to join our team.



Perhaps I am not.  My picture is painted from an infantry trench so maybe I'm not seeing what the generals see, so to speak.   Again I find it really hard to see  that there are critical shortages given the amount of people waiting on courses, CTs, transfers and all that. People are waiting years to get in, if there IS a shortage I don not think it is for want of interest.  I understand that there are some cultural issues but I stand by my opinion that worrying about who we are offending by pronouncing R properly is a huge waste of time. (If someone is THAT nit picky than I can only imagine what other kind of issues they would bring coming into the CF)



> If we don't make the effort to go and get the best qualified person and show/inform them why we are the employer of choice then too bad for us.  We went through and are still going through tough times because we failed to do that and had to play catch up.  Doctors, Engineers, Naval techs etc etc.


  
I don't nessairily see the CF aiming to recruit a target diversity number as the CF "going to get the best person for the job". They're simply trying to get X% of different races.



> Again, diversity helps us as an organisation serve the interest of Canada. There are plenty of examples.  What do you think the impact is of a say, I don't know, a couple of Haitian born canadians that can speak creole if say we were to do something like relief operations in Haiti?  Do you think that would help us?  Or how about every year they make staff checks asking for lists of people that can speak languages other than English and French?


Very excellent point.  



> Do you think they are doing that for giggles or maybe they are identifying particular skill sets that can help us on operations abroad?


your sarcasm aside I can again see the merits of your points- but do you think that was the original intention or a by product?  



> I'll explain. A diversity event can be anything from a visit to an all girls school to talk about what we have to offer (it helps when we send a female recruiter), having a booth at a trade fair on a local reserve or something like the women's show, remote recruiting activities in the Arctic etc etc.


Makes sense.



> So we are planning for conflicts with various diverse groups in Canada?  So you say that it doesn't matter if we try to achieve 25% female representation in the CF because somehow it means squat if and when women take up arms in revolt against Canada?  I think you are missing the point of what diversity in the CF is.


My context is that if someones train of thought is that having X % of Y group will mean that Y group views the CF more favorable then the minute Y group has a beef with the government for whatever reason then all the X% of said people in the CF won't mean shit. It's a fairly narrow example but one I've heard people argue before.  If that isn't the reasoning behind the diversity then the example doesn't apply.



> As a side note: sexual orientation is NOT a targetted diversity group.


Nope not yet but it's not inconceivable that the CF might try to tackle that next- simply in order to better represent ALL Canadians.


----------



## aesop081

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I concede to your points.  It's hard to accept that the current base for the CF is shrinking when one hears that certain trades are full and there are 5 times too many people waiting to get in.



OZ, you are not thinking far enough down the line. Think 20 years from now. If we want an adequate, sustainable pool of applicants in 20-30 years & beyond, we have to start changing attitudes and perceptions *today*.


----------



## Jarnhamar

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> OZ, you are not thinking far enough down the line. Think 20 years from now. If we want an adequate, sustainable pool of applicants in 20-30 years & beyond, we have to start changing attitudes and perceptions *today*.



Understood.  But what is wrong with how we are recruiting today? (In terms of attracting members)  
We seem to be backed up considerably.   
Do you mean a sustainable pool of applicants from the targeted diverse background or just in general?   I'm not disagreeing I just can't see the issue.


----------



## aesop081

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Understood.  But what is wrong with how we are recruiting today? (In terms of attracting members)
> We seem to be backed up considerably.
> 
> Do you mean a sustainable pool of applicants from the targeted diverse background or just in general?



In General. I cannot remember the statistic but the time frame for Caucasians to become the minority in Canada but it is on the horizon. We are creeping there. A casual look at birthrates and immigration will make this fairly obvious. In , lets say 50 years, the majority of Canadians who meet the requirements for military service will not be the same as the ones beating down the doors today. They will come from backgrounds or nationality who do not see military service as we do, for a multitude of reasons. 

The make up of the population is shifting. Simply saying with "we have no shortage of applicants now" is ignoring this shift. Changing attitudes and perceptions does not happen overnight. It can take decades.


----------



## Remius

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Understood.  But what is wrong with how we are recruiting today? (In terms of attracting members)
> We seem to be backed up considerably.
> Do you mean a sustainable pool of applicants from the targeted diverse background or just in general?   I'm not disagreeing I just can't see the issue.



Part of the issue is that we didn't have enough people leave. The predicted attrition rate didn't materialise but the CF hired/processed for that target.  The thing is that we don't have a hard time attracting people to some trades so while we might have 4000 people applying to be in the combat arms we might only have 2 applying to be Naval Electronic Techs.  So while over the years we might have 4000 mostly male applicants a year for the combat arms to 1200 positions I only have 2 a year applying for 35 NET positions. I'm using these numbers as examples.  Now I don't know the state of things now but I'm sure the Navy is still hard pressed to fill those kinds of jobs.  The CF can't rely on the white male majority to fill those jobs.  I'm not saying they don't, just that we can't rely on them alone.  We have no problem attracting the 4000 guys who want to shoot guns.  What we need to attract are the 35 geeks with High school advanced math or even college level skills to fill some important jobs.  More women than ever are getting higher education, immigrants with skills are coming to Canada more than ever etc etc.  If we don't go and get them, someone else will.

Essentially we have no shortage of people that want to join up.  But we have a shortage of the right people for the right jobs.  And that will only get worse if we don't invest in targeting non-traditional population groups.


----------



## bdb1231

Crantor said:
			
		

> "When we talk about trends and tendancies it means that certain demographics are not drawn to certain occupations."



What are the occupations that visual minority are not drawn into?


----------



## mariomike

mariomike said:
			
		

> A few more Employment Equity / Diversity / Target topics, if interested.
> 
> Topic: "Canadian Forces failing in gender integration and employment equity: report":
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/2262.0
> 
> Topic: "Haven't We Done The "Target" Recruiting Before?":
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/73674.0.html
> 
> Topic: "ROTP Questionare- Employment Equity Act":
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/90556.0
> 
> Topic: "Employment equity is only for those who qualify":
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37277.0/nowap.html



One more to add.

Topic: "Affirmative Action recruiting policies?":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/22619.0.html
5 pages.


----------



## Allgunzblazing

Hi, 

I’ve been closely following this thread. 

I’m fairly fresh off the boat (been here for only five years) and I’m a visible minority. 

Yes, Canadian demographics have changed and ideally the CF should be reflective of this. But what has stopped the “non white male” groups from applying? Information about the CF is freely available to most Canadian. Every applicant should be given an equal chance and the best person should be matched with every job opening. I can’t speak for Caucasian women, Aboriginals or other visible minorities. However I can speak for people from India because that’s where I came from. The Indian Army has several battalions of Sikh and Gurkha troops. Both the Sikhs and Gurkha are well recognized martial races. They both have a history of serving the Crown, numerous VCs, Orders of Merit, etc. The British Army had till recently toyed with the idea of raising a British Sikh Regiment. An idea that had been supported by none other than Prince Charles.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1555507/Sikh-regiment-dumped-over-racism-fears.html

Why do we not see more Sikhs or rather people from the Indian Subcontinent applying to join the CF? I’ve been in the recruiting process for three and a half years now. During this time I’ve made numerous visits to the recruiting centre. I’m trying to remember when or if I ever saw another applicant there who looked like he/she was of Indian descent. Sadly, I have to say that I’ve seen only one other brown guy. I clearly remember this dude because he had showed up for the CFAT five minutes late, he was wearing town jeans, unshaven, had shoulder length hair. To top it all he was arguing with the staff at the front counter why they did not provide free parking. All in all – he didn’t give the impression of being the best candidate, but I could very well be wrong. 

Anyway, getting back on topic – is there any statistic available which shows how many people belonging to visible minorities show up at the RCs inquiring about jobs? Once this number is ascertained, it’ll be easy to see why there are so few coloured people/ females in the CF. 

I’ve asked several of my Sikh and other Indian friends (I’m not Sikh) if they’re interested in a career in the CF. The answer is a unanimous NO. In fact they turn my question around and ask me why I’ve been doggedly jumping through all the recruiting hoops and the net result is still zero. I do know a few blokes who’re interested but the idea of being in the queue for a few years because of foreign implications deters them from applying. Anyway, this is a separate topic and I’m not going to get into it. 

The majority of Indians I’ve spoken to, do not want to join the forces because they live in joint families and can’t bear the thought of relocating. My father served in the India Army. One of his postings was to a Self Propelled unit. This unit recruited only Sikh troops. I remember the pride that they had for serving their country. For the troops and some of the officers who were also Sikhs, they were following the footsteps of their ancestors. There is also another reason which some of my pals have told me – “lack of respect”. A number of them compare the forces of the two nations based on the perception in the minds of the general public. I have lived in India, so I can see where they’re coming from. The military presence in India is huge. Civilians routinely see military personnel and vehicles in their cities and villages. A number of the cities have cantonments. Because of all these reasons, there is a great sense of awe among the civilian populace. Travelling in buses and trains, it is normal to see civilians leave their seats for a military member. In Canada, on the other hand – I have not been around  much and I’m still relatively new here, so I can’t really say what the general perception is towards the Forces. I do think that, there is a great deal of respect for soldiers and veterans. 

The same friends I spoke to regarding the forces are trying to join various police departments. So the fear of putting oneself into harm’s way is not the case. If I’m not mistaken, there are more Indians in the Reserves than in the Regular Force. Which again reinforces my earlier point about why most Indo-Canadians do not look at the CF as a career option. 

Now, speaking about the Cadets. I volunteer at a Cadets unit. It’s heartening to see kids from diverse backgrounds and cultures. Kids belonging to Indian ethnicity are certainly not a minority in this particular unit. A number of the senior ranking cadets are Indo-Canadians. On asking them if they have any intention of joining the Forces, the answer again is “no”. The cadet program, I’m told by them is only for “resume building” or because the parents wanted someone to instil some “discipline” in their kids. A number of the Caucasian kids (girls and boys) on the other hand can’t wait till they’re of age, so that they can apply to join the CF. 

What I have said may not appeal to certain people and it is not my intention to hurt anyone’s sentiments. Thank you to those who have taken the time to read this post. 

Cheers.


----------



## aesop081

Allgunzblazing said:
			
		

> But what has stopped the “non white male” groups from applying?



Nothing.



> Every applicant should be given an equal chance and the best person should be matched with every job opening.



This is how things are.


----------



## Allgunzblazing

Aviator, this is exactly what I'm saying. 

All applicants are already being given an equal opportunity - it is for people to make use of this.


----------



## aesop081

Allgunzblazing said:
			
		

> it is for people to make use of this.



Convincing them to choose us as a career is something we must do, for several good reasons.


----------



## roadrunner60

But howwwww


----------



## aesop081

roadrunner60 said:
			
		

> But howwwww



I don't know. What i do know is that there is only one "w" in the word "how".


----------



## roadrunner60

Well all i know is canadian is spelt canadian not CDN but who am i to say


----------



## aesop081

roadrunner60 said:
			
		

> Well all i know is canadian is spelt canadian not CDN but who am i to say



Who said that "CDN" represented a nationality ?


----------



## roadrunner60

Cant we just be friends canadian aviator, cant we just all get along.
eace:


----------



## Allgunzblazing

Back on topic - does anyone know the numbers or rather percentages of minorities in the US, British, Australian and New Zealand armed forces? Great Britain has a sizeable immigrant population and the others also have native communities. So in a way similar to Canada. If these nations have more minorities in their forces than us, then what is the reason for this?


----------



## mariomike

"Can the Canadian Forces Reflect Canadian Society?":
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no3/jung-eng.asp

"Since the majority of MAs, which constitute the bulk of the Canadian population, are not the traditional recruitment bases for the CF, it is questionable whether the CF has ever been truly reflective of Canada, even if one were to leave the visible minority issue on the sidelines."

MA = Metropolitan Area


----------



## curious george

"How?"  A lot more research and dialogue with people from minority backgrounds.  Focus groups have their limitations, but it could be a start in understanding cultural values and nuances (thereby avoiding stereotypes), and asking participants how CF could be made more appealing/barriers/advertising content, etc. Or even starting a thread if one hasn't already been.

Also, this is an excellent example of how the CF can benefit from diversity, perhaps forming a planning committee comprised of visible minority CF members.  

You can also learn from what HAS worked and build on that.  ie. What made some visible minorities decide to take the plunge despite the CF not being appealing to their group in general?  If you can get at that information, that would be gem.


----------



## curious george

bdb1231 said:
			
		

> What are the occupations that visual minority are not drawn into?



Um, lots.  Basically anything that is less education than university level.  Lets just say, education and professional status is the end all and be all in, *ahem*, uh, some cultures.  What you do for a living really matters - its all about face- not just for yourself, but also for your parents.


----------



## Scott

roadrunner60 said:
			
		

> Cant we just be friends canadian aviator, cant we just all get along.
> eace:



Quit trolling.

Staff


----------



## curious george

"What has stopped the nonwhite male groups from applying?"



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Nothing.


I disagree.  I can't name anything specific, but I think there could be very subtle things that could easily be missed.  They would be things specific to the minority culture, like internal barriers.  I think if the CF is interested in hiring the best and the brightest (creating a larger pool to draw from), they should find out and address those barriers. On a very superficial level, I agree, there is nothing stopping the nonwhite male groups from applying. Noone is holding a gun to their heads if they walk into a recruiting centre.


----------



## GAP

A number of nonwhite groups/persons might not be applying based on the history of their parents. 

Remember a lot of immigrants who moved here were from places where the military were brutal and they don't want their children becoming like them. 

It matters not that the CF is nowhere near the same calibre of those 3rd world militaries, it is the stigma they get stuck with based on the person's experience....


----------



## curious george

i'll





			
				GAP said:
			
		

> A number of nonwhite groups/persons might not be applying based on the history of their parents.
> 
> Remember a lot of immigrants who moved here were from places where the military were brutal and they don't want their children becoming like them.
> 
> It matters not that the CF is nowhere near the same calibre of those 3rd world militaries, it is the stigma they get stuck with based on the person's experience....



Good point.  The uplifting aspect to this point is once that stigma is shattered, its like breaking through a brick wall.  It might take the third generation (ie. grandson/daughter), but once he or she does, it could be a valid option for future generations because he or she has set a precedence. I suspect something that keeps the snowball rolling are role models.  Having more visible minorities in senior NCM and officer roles could have an impact on attraction.  The catch 22 is that you have to start somewhere.

It has helped immensely that one side of my family has been exposed to "professional" roles, both here and US army, so they have at least some clue of what I'm getting into.  It also helps that my parents' time in Canada and level assimmilation has worked in my favour. (And that i'm going for a profession  ).


----------



## Maxadia

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Nothing.



It's got to be something.  Maybe not anything that the Forces is actually doing, but maybe there is something that is giving them the impression that the CF is not an employer that they should bother with.


----------



## mariomike

RDJP said:
			
		

> It's got to be something.  Maybe not anything that the Forces is actually doing, but maybe there is something that is giving them the impression that the CF is not an employer that they should bother with.



The CF is facing a lot of tough competition from many other excellent employers.

The police, for example:
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=4021

And others:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/top-employers/canadas-best-diversity-employers-for-2012/article548123/


----------



## dimsum

I've said this before, but an important reason (and one that will be difficult to fix, at least for the Reg Force) is that a large percentage of our visible minorities are in the big urban areas and don't see moving to rural areas (where some of the bases are) as a good idea.  Some groups (I'll take Chinese as an example since I'm one) may feel that their family should stay relatively close to each other for support, etc. and will not approve of their son/daughter living in somewhere else when the rest of the family is in Toronto/Vancouver.  The idea of moving every few years is even worse, because some feel that the military member never really "settles down" and lives life like an extended working holiday.  Also, for the applicant, the shift from a large city to a base in rural Canada may be a huge turn-off; even things like certain restaurants and groceries become an issue.  I defy anyone to find a good Chinese food place (on par with Toronto and Vancouver) in somewhere like Cold Lake or Wainwright.  

These factors obviously don't really come into play with the reserves, since they can stay in their home city and just do the Class A stuff and a bunch of exercises/operations.  In my family (at least), the main issues are similar to the ones above.  Notice that I didn't say that my parents don't support what I do as a job; they think it's actually really cool and worthwhile.  They just wish I did it near Toronto.

How do we fix this?  I have no idea, short of re-opening the bases near cities.  And since that's not happening, it will be a tough sell for most new immigrants and visible minorities.  Of course there are exceptions, but by and large it will be pretty tough to convince them to move out of Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver/Calgary.


----------



## Jed

So if we want diversity in recruitment to come way up in priority, here is an idea. If you are Canadian, healthy and 18 years old; get conscripted for a year. After a year of serving your country you can go on or stay around if it is the right fit.

 :warstory: I am putting on my helmet as I wait for incoming.


----------



## Strike

Dimsum - I've been waiting for your $0.02 on here.  Thanks!

Another factor to consider is where many immigrants come from the military is not a trusted agency and they carry those stereotypes with them from their former homes.  So why would someone who might have come from a country where the military was a tyrant want to join the military in their own country?  It will take some time and likely several generations before anyone in those families ever considers joining.


----------



## mad dog 2020

Can you say: YTEP, on one year contracts and promote trades for job experience. Like Fd Eng, supply, cook, MSE Op, stwd, Bosn, and Cbt Arms to beef up the reserves. I know we did like 13 Pl in Wainwright in 83ish.  Use up Meaford, Pet, Gagetown and Borden in the off season.


----------



## brihard

mad dog 2020 said:
			
		

> Can you say: YTEP, on one year contracts and promote trades for job experience. Like Fd Eng, supply, cook, MSE Op, stwd, Bosn, and Cbt Arms to beef up the reserves. I know we did like 13 Pl in Wainwright in 83ish.  Use up Meaford, Pet, Gagetown and Borden in the off season.



How is it in the military's interest to hang on to people for only a single year? Does this idea contribute to our ability to kill bad people and break their stuff?


----------



## Journeyman

Brihard said:
			
		

> How is it in the military's interest to hang on to people for only a single year? Does this idea contribute to our ability to kill bad people and break their stuff?


   :nod:  Exactly. 

If someone wants to reinvent Katimavik then just call it Katimavik, but don't pretend that it will benefit the CF or assist in cultural assimilation.


----------



## dimsum

Thinking about this a little bit, what is the harm of having more visible minorities in the Reserves than in the Reg Force?  Those that are committed enough to serve in the Reserves may (I suspect will) want to go on deployment, and some may want to go Reg Force once they realize the lifestyle is to their liking (I'll use myself as an example of that.)  Those that don't go Reg Force will still be staunch supporters of the military in their home towns/cities.  Both are valuable in that their communities will see visible minorities in uniform and can be persuaded to do so themselves.  

A personal example; I volunteered for the Abbotsford Airshow and Canada Day in Vancouver when I was posted in Comox and Victoria.  It wasn't anything major, just talking about the CF and what my experiences were prior to and after OP ATHENA.  The most surprising thing to me was that once other Chinese people found out I was first-generation Chinese-Canadian, they would be surprised and intrigued that I was in the Forces and would stop to chat.  

If the Chinese community is like most other visible minority communities (and I suspect it is), the interest is definitely there and we just need to target it.  If you think of the Reserves as the "gateway" to further service in the Reg Force, then really the only reason why visible minorities and other cultures aren't interested is because they see the CF as predominately Anglo-Saxon males.  To counter this, it may mean setting up something during cultural events with CF members of that culture/ethnicity, which I suspect won't be hard in the larger cities.  While that may sound like pandering to the community, it also gets the message across that the CF isn't a bunch of "white dudes from the farm".  I would even suggest that you probably don't need a recruiting booth; just have some people present in uniform and naturally people will notice they're different and want to talk.  Most people would be more inclined to chat if it isn't obvious that it's a recruiting gig.

It became a bit of a rambling rant, sorry.  This is something that I find very important, for personal as well as professional reasons.  Strike and other PAOs, feel free to poke holes in my arguments.


----------



## GAP

I think you make a really valid argument for it....interesting approach....low key, but effective. :nod:


----------



## George Wallace

Dimsum.  I must agree with your observations and believe that they are already in motion.  In my unit, one of my subordinates, born in Hong Kong, has recently done a CT.  He has joined about thirty or so others from this unit who have gone the CT route over the last five years.  Not all of them White Anglo Saxon Protestant Males.   ;D

Going back some in this discussion, I have know many Native and Metis members of the Forces over the years.  Many did not identify themselves as such.  What affect this actually had on the 'Bean Counters' statistics I don't know, but I am convinced that this whole matter is really a non-issue.

As Dimsum and others have pointed out, many of the Reserve units in the major metropolitan areas, more accurately represent the ethnic populations of their area.  If they are not being accounted for in all of this statistic gathering, then there is a problem.


----------



## Remius

George, you are correct in your statement.  The only way they collect the stats is through self identification.  Many people choose not to.  Finding out how many women we have is easy enough but the rest have to self identify.  And it does indeed skew the numbers because it only represents those that do.

I met an aboriginal NCM who was giving a lecture on diversity issues and he talked exactly about that.  How in his first years in the CF he didn't want to self identify.  He said that he realised that he was doing more damage than good by doing that and that he changed his mind began self identifying and encouraging others to do so , to allow the CF to accurately gauge where it is at in regards to diversity and allow us as an organisation to better reflect, accomodate and encourage.


----------



## pthebeau

As much as I admire the trust that some CF members put in the recruiting process, I am very skeptical of its full integrity.  Here's why:

The RCMP has a similar intention to recruit minorities, and it is very apparent.  I have been through the process before, and have gotten to know many that have as well, including men of aboriginal background and women.  I know for a fact that a female candidate with a lower score on the RPAT was given a selection package ahead of a male candidate who got a higher score.  The same exact scenario happened where preference for the aboriginal male was given ahead of pure RPAT score merit.  

Granted, regardless of their score, they need to be successful at all recruiting steps along with a graduation at Depot, but the fact they got processed ahead of someone else due to their minority status is not commendable.

Having the same targets, I cannot help but feel the CF may share some of these unfortunate recruitment scenarios, and find it realistic to consider it probable.  I'm very proud that the CF is reaching out to minorities, but do not feel it would be fair to any "majority" applicant to be passed off based on anything other than merit.

I'm not saying this is the case, since it would be very difficult and unearthing to prove it right or wrong.  
(Unless we have a high ranking recruitment officer on these forums willing to blow the whistle)


----------



## Strike

pthebeau said:
			
		

> I'm not saying this is the case, since it would be very difficult and unearthing to prove it right or wrong.
> (Unless we have a high ranking recruitment officer on these forums willing to blow the whistle)



If you are not saying that this is not the case, then why bother bringing it up in the first place?

Numerous posters, some of whom have direct experience/knowledge in the subject, have already mentioned in this thread and the original from which this one branched off, that the CF does not use a quota system in recruiting, but does try to target certain groups at various times.  VERY different.  Please learn what these differences are before you post stuff like this again.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Strike said:
			
		

> If you are not saying that this is not the case, then why bother bringing it up in the first place?
> 
> Numerous posters, some of whom have direct experience/knowledge in the subject, have already mentioned in this thread and the original from which this one branched off, that the CF does not use a quota system in recruiting, but does try to target certain groups at various times.  VERY different.  Please learn what these differences are before you post stuff like this again.



However we, very publicly and without any appraent shame, use a quota system for the QDJM. Contradictions like this are hard for serving members to reconcile. I assume it's even more confusing for non-members.


----------



## mariomike

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Thinking about this a little bit, what is the harm of having more visible minorities in the Reserves than in the Reg Force?



Regarding visible minorities in the reserves:

"This does not mean that a draw towards military service is totally discarded. On the contrary, surveys have shown interest, but this interest is often higher in the reserves, where the primacy of family, higher education, and professional (respectable) careers can still be pursued within the civilian sector.":
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no3/jung-eng.asp


----------



## pthebeau

Strike said:
			
		

> If you are not saying that this is not the case, then why bother bringing it up in the first place?
> 
> Numerous posters, some of whom have direct experience/knowledge in the subject, have already mentioned in this thread and the original from which this one branched off, that the CF does not use a quota system in recruiting, but does try to target certain groups at various times.  VERY different.  Please learn what these differences are before you post stuff like this again.



Thank you for your criticism.  Unfortunately you failed to see the objective of my post .  

I respect the posts of those with direct experience and knowledge on the subject and thank them for sharing their experience.  However, I cannot ignore the misdirection that has been known to spawn from objectives such as diversity targets.  If the RCMP recruitment process has been victim to such things, it is not unreasonable to suspect that the CF recruitment process has been victim as well.  Let's not be naive and pretend that such things would openly be admitted on the internet by those who would have professional knowledge of this.

Why bother posting?  Well since this is a forum where facts and opinions are shared, I respectfully raised the question.  I would expect more respectful behavior from a forum veteran such as you, sir.


----------



## Scott

She's not a 'sir'. Respect begetting respect would mean you checking to make sure you don't make that mistake 

And you did more than raise questions, hence the response you got.

I see nothing insulting, or attempting to insult, about it.

Lighten up if you want to participate in the grown up discussion.


----------



## Strike

pthebeau said:
			
		

> If the RCMP recruitment process has been victim to such things, it is not unreasonable to suspect that the CF recruitment process has been victim as well.  Let's not be naive and pretend that such things would openly be admitted on the internet by those who would have professional knowledge of this.



 :Tin-Foil-Hat:

Heaven forbid we actually learn from the errors of others, huh?


----------



## pthebeau

Strike said:
			
		

> :Tin-Foil-Hat:
> 
> Heaven forbid we actually learn from the errors of others, huh?



Fair enough.  Although...at the rate changes are made at the federal level?


----------



## aesop081

pthebeau said:
			
		

> Fair enough.  Although...at the rate changes are made at the federal level?



The CF has no quota for recruiting visible minority groups. I can repeat this in French if it would settle it for you once and for all.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Heck, even *I* got that after 2 or 3 times, and I am so smart, I can count to potato!


----------



## Remius

ptebeau:

It's a little hard to compare both.

The RCMP recruits people for one job with one standard.  Now they might be looking at some people with skills for potential in the future for other tasks in the force.

The CF has over one hundred different entry level jobs with different entry standards for each.  also these career paths also have the same perception and stereotypes problems that make attraction of targetted groups a challenge.  

Whereas policing has gone a long way to get women and visible minorities to be attracted to, we face challenges they just don't have.  The RCMP has close to double the percentage of aborignals and visible minorities than we have and have a higher percentage of women as well.  If we nefariously recruited like you say we might be, would our numbers not be similar?  I can assure you, the recruiting system does not have a secret diversity recruiting scheme.  At least not when I was there, and I'd be surprised if they have one now.  I was not a "high up recruiting officer" but was very well connected to the system.  Enough to know.

Funny thing is that a few years ago the RCMP recruiting cell came to us for advice on getting numbers and how we did our recruiting process. They even sent some of their recruiters on our CF recruiter course.


----------



## pthebeau

Crantor said:
			
		

> ptebeau:
> 
> It's a little hard to compare both.
> 
> The RCMP recruits people for one job with one standard.  Now they might be looking at some people with skills for potential in the future for other tasks in the force.
> 
> The CF has over one hundred different entry level jobs with different entry standards for each.  also these career paths also have the same perception and stereotypes problems that make attraction of targetted groups a challenge.
> 
> Whereas policing has gone a long way to get women and visible minorities to be attracted to, we face challenges they just don't have.  The RCMP has close to double the percentage of aborignals and visible minorities than we have and have a higher percentage of women as well.  If we nefariously recruited like you say we might be, would our numbers not be similar?  I can assure you, the recruiting system does not have a secret diversity recruiting scheme.  At least not when I was there, and I'd be surprised if they have one now.  I was not a "high up recruiting officer" but was very well connected to the system.  Enough to know.
> 
> Funny thing is that a few years ago the RCMP recruiting cell came to us for advice on getting numbers and how we did our recruiting process. They even sent some of their recruiters on our CF recruiter course.



This is the post I was seeking all along!  Thank you for sharing Crantor, great points, great post and good to know!


----------



## mariomike

If interested,

From the Canadian Forces Leadership Institute: 

"Challenge and Change in the Military: Gender and Diversity Issues":
http://post.queensu.ca/~leuprech/docs/Gender_Diversity_reprint.pdf


----------



## Scoobydude

This is very interesting especially me being a Sikh Indo-canadian, I know the CF has been targeting minority groups because I have seen them with a little recruiting/info table at religious festivals before. So I don't think its fair to say they aren't making the effort. Could they do more? Yeah of course. Thing is Indian and Chinese people are the largest visible minorities in Canada (from what I understand), But Indian people are very family oriented and joining the military makes being close to your family and keeping those connections much more difficult. My chinese friends also tell me that their culture is also very family oriented as well. I also noted that there just isn't much interest in Indo-canadians joining the forces. Most just think about going to university and becoming a Doctor, Pharmicist, ect... Despite the majority having a warrior heritage (In reference to sikhs). My uncle is a Pharmicist in a reserve unit in the toronto area and he's mentioned how there aren't very many of us. He's got a turban so he isn't hard to miss lol It did help a ton when Lt.Col Sajjan was made CO of the BC regiment because it showed a ton of sikhs that we can get some here in a military career and that it isn't impossible.


----------



## pthebeau

Scoobydude said:
			
		

> This is very interesting especially me being a Sikh Indo-canadian, I know the CF has been targeting minority groups because I have seen them with a little recruiting/info table at religious festivals before. So I don't think its fair to say they aren't making the effort. Could they do more? Yeah of course. Thing is Indian and Chinese people are the largest visible minorities in Canada (from what I understand), But Indian people are very family oriented and joining the military makes being close to your family and keeping those connections much more difficult. My chinese friends also tell me that their culture is also very family oriented as well. I also noted that there just isn't much interest in Indo-canadians joining the forces. Most just think about going to university and becoming a Doctor, Pharmicist, ect... Despite the majority having a warrior heritage (In reference to sikhs). My uncle is a Pharmicist in a reserve unit in the toronto area and he's mentioned how there aren't very many of us. He's got a turban so he isn't hard to miss lol It did help a ton when Lt.Col Sajjan was made CO of the BC regiment because it showed a ton of sikhs that we can get some here in a military career and that it isn't impossible.



To be fair, I do not believe there are many ethnicities, including English/French Canadians that aren't family oriented.  I don't think there is a single military person that did not find it difficult being away from their family, whether it being their parents, brothers, sisters, children, wives, husbands, etc.  I know personally being away from a community I have been a part of for almost 20 years will be difficult for me, not to mention my family.

Generally, it is know that when you lose something, you appreciate it a lot more, and you find energy to fight for it.  Which sometimes enriches the experience.  Often, convenience is the quickest path to taking something for granted.  Knowing this, you may find keeping close with your family will not be an obstacle to a great military career.  :warstory:


----------



## Allgunzblazing

I completely agree with pthebeau - no community can claim to be more family oriented. Lets be honest - man is a social animal and most folk would prefer not be away from their family and friends. 

I will never understand why immigrants from India do not turn up in hordes to the Recruiting Centres. The paper written by Capt. (N) Jung correctly notes that the armed forces of certain countries are known for their brutality and corruptness, so people from those countries are liable to perceive every armed force to be the same. 

Now, I’m not saying that the Indian armed forces are the best in the world. But among many Indians living in India they are perceived as a great institution. They are seen as a government body which has remained largely untainted by politics, corruption, etc. For this reason it is still a career of choice. The India Army alone has over a million active duty soldiers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Army. Does this mean that these million soldiers do not value their families? If they are able to manage their military career and their family in India, why can't they do so when they come here?  

With regards to immigrants from India, wishing to join the CF should be natural but it is not.  

As far as information regarding the CF among Indo-Canadians, I think that there are no issues in this regard. This can be seen in the cadets. Now even assuming that information regarding the CF in limited to the cadets and their parents, why do we not see these kids wishing to make a career in the forces? All the cadets I’ve spoken to, absolutely love the program. They know that being a cadet has opened so many doors to them. So if the CF has already given them so much just as a cadet, then why do they not want to become paid full-time members?


----------



## dimsum

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it could be a case of where the bases are located in India.  If they are located close to population centres, then it's not such a big deal for the families (and consequently the military is seen as a viable profession with a good work/life balance.)  

It's good that the Cadets love the program, but Cadets is inherently different than the CF.  While one can be a stepping stone to the other, they are two totally different organizations.  However, as you've stated before, the interest level may convince some to look into the CF later on.


----------



## Allgunzblazing

Dimsum, the bases in India are located all over - some within or adjacent to major cities and some in the middle of no where. By no where I mean, there is just the base and nothing else.

You're absolutely correct about the Cadets, in that they're different from the CF. They are certainly not viewed as a feeder organization. I've chatted with Indo-Canadian parents, who put their kids into the Cadet program because the dad's father happens to be a retired soldier from the Indian Army. So obviously I wanted to know if they see their kids joining the CF. The answer is a flat "NO". 

Beats me  :. 

EDIT - In India they have a system of "Field Posting" and "Family Posting". Those in the Infantry go back and forth from Field and Family postings. The folks in the other combat arms end up doing two to three field postings. The other arms do at least one. A posting generally lasts three years. Overseas deployment is not that common. However when it does happen, it is seen as a prize posting - simply for the monetary and career advancement factors. Also, even when one is on a family posting, he/ she could be away for months on exercise. Or the unit could get deployed to fight insurgents. So again - lots of time away from ones family.


----------



## Remius

Allgunzblazing said:
			
		

> I completely agree with pthebeau - no community can claim to be more family oriented. Lets be honest - man is a social animal and most folk would prefer not be away from their family and friends.



It isn't quite like that.  While it maybe true that no community can claim to be more family oriented, the way family works can differ.

Take white, north american people of european descent.  We have a history of having our kids strike out on their own at a certain age.  We expect it.  Chances are that many people of European desent have and know family members that have left their families to find a better life or just to start a better life.  I have family all over the place.

But in certain cultures you never leave the family or the community.  An example is the Inuit.  You are expected to be a productive member of the community and you help provide.  Leaving to join the CF isn't something you would consider.  What we try to do in the CF, is sell the CF as a way to gain skills that you can bring back and benefit your family and community.  But it's a tough sell.

In other cultures, parents are happy to keep their children around as long as they can.  Or you don't leave until you are married and so on.  These are cultural aspects that come into play and family is a huge part of it.

In Canada, we had two entire generations that went to war.  It wasn't just the army that went to war.  The whole country did.  Their sons and daughters, many of them joined in their wake and so on.  A lot of serving members proudly point to various family members that have served.  There is a history there and the perception of military service is different.

The thing is, that a lot of newer Canadians don't have that link.  It's not to say they aren't any loyal or proud but military service can be seen differently based on family and cultural history.


----------



## mariomike

A brief explanation of the two options:

"Two options are recommended to ease CF recruitment and retention problems: greater concentration on the traditional sources of personnel (Caucasian males from rural and low-economic-growth areas); or diversity recruitment, with emphasis on recruiting men and women from the ethno-cultural and aboriginal communities. The first option has very little demographic support and would leave the CF vulnerable to higher costs and personnel shortages. Demographic and labour-force trends argue for the diversity strategy that the CF adopted in 1999; while it may have higher resource costs at the outset, it should have substantial payoff in the longer term."

Canadian Forces Leadership Institute ( CFLI )
"Challenge and Change in the Military: Gender and Diversity Issues"

( Page 19. )


----------



## pthebeau

Crantor said:
			
		

> It isn't quite like that.  While it maybe true that no community can claim to be more family oriented, the way family works can differ.
> 
> Take white, north american people of european descent.  We have a history of having our kids strike out on their own at a certain age.  We expect it.  Chances are that many people of European desent have and know family members that have left their families to find a better life or just to start a better life.  I have family all over the place.
> 
> But in certain cultures you never leave the family or the community.  An example is the Inuit.  You are expected to be a productive member of the community and you help provide.  Leaving to join the CF isn't something you would consider.  What we try to do in the CF, is sell the CF as a way to gain skills that you can bring back and benefit your family and community.  But it's a tough sell.
> 
> In other cultures, parents are happy to keep their children around as long as they can.  Or you don't leave until you are married and so on.  These are cultural aspects that come into play and family is a huge part of it.
> 
> In Canada, we had two entire generations that went to war.  It wasn't just the army that went to war.  The whole country did.  Their sons and daughters, many of them joined in their wake and so on.  A lot of serving members proudly point to various family members that have served.  There is a history there and the perception of military service is different.
> 
> The thing is, that a lot of newer Canadians don't have that link.  It's not to say they aren't any loyal or proud but military service can be seen differently based on family and cultural history.



That's exactly the point, different families will work differently.  My inclination would be to look at environment and individual family dynamics/history, rather than normalize over an entire culture.  If a family shames military service, that's just how it is, but if the entire environment is sheltered from exposure to the canadian forces, a 1 hour presentation will hardly be enough, hehe.  I don't believe culture has too too much to do with it, with the understanding that culture is often derived from the environment where it is developed.


----------



## dimsum

pthebeau said:
			
		

> That's exactly the point, different families will work differently.  My inclination would be to look at environment and individual family dynamics/history, rather than normalize over an entire culture.  *If a family shames military service, that's just how it is, but if the entire environment is sheltered from exposure to the canadian forces, a 1 hour presentation will hardly be enough, hehe.*  I don't believe culture has too too much to do with it, with the understanding that culture is often derived from the environment where it is developed.



Exactly.  The question is then how to expose them without making it too obvious.  Different circumstances, but in Hong Kong (at least as long as I could remember) the police, whether Royal HK and post-handover, has always (with very few exceptions, such as the movie inspiration for The Departed) been portrayed as the "good guys" and at some point most kids want to be a police officer.  I haven't been back to HK in years, but I never noticed any specific "recruiting campaigns" for the HK Police; it's somewhat expected that they'll do well in applications.  Anyone who's been there recently can feel free to correct me.

This leads me to what I've been saying before; slowly instill the CF into the culture.  By that I mean just to be there in uniform, but not specifically a recruiting tent.  Definitely have the info if asked (even if it's just "call CFRC"), but the representation should work.  As you said, if the family shames military service then nothing will convince them, but if the family is at least ambivalent-to-supportive, then the fact that "there are others like us in uniform; there must be some reason they're doing this" may be able to sway them.  

This will take time but I don't see it taking a lot of $, especially if the members in that community are going to said events anyway.  But what do I know, I don't work for Recruiting Group  :blotto:


----------



## Jed

The best recruiters are our own soldiers. They should be seen in uniform, in public, doing the right things.

This is difficult though when you have wool headed politicians or media types coming up with slogans like: "Soldiers, with Guns, On our Streets"


----------



## mariomike

Jed said:
			
		

> The best recruiters are our own soldiers. They should be seen in uniform, in public, doing the right things.
> 
> This is difficult though when you have wool headed politicians or media types coming up with slogans like: "Soldiers, with Guns, On our Streets"



I do not recall seeing that ( except in photos of the 1970 FLQ Crisis in Montreal ), but I do remember this:

"Soldiers, with Guns Shovels, On our Streets"


----------



## Jed

I remember both events. Not sure if shoveling out TO was 'doing the right thing' though.  ;D  Probably the Winnipeg flood, Ontario ice storms or the Games security would be better.


----------



## Scoobydude

Crantor said:
			
		

> It isn't quite like that.  While it maybe true that no community can claim to be more family oriented, the way family works can differ.
> 
> Take white, north american people of european descent.  We have a history of having our kids strike out on their own at a certain age.  We expect it.  Chances are that many people of European desent have and know family members that have left their families to find a better life or just to start a better life.  I have family all over the place.
> 
> But in certain cultures you never leave the family or the community.  An example is the Inuit.  You are expected to be a productive member of the community and you help provide.  Leaving to join the CF isn't something you would consider.  What we try to do in the CF, is sell the CF as a way to gain skills that you can bring back and benefit your family and community.  But it's a tough sell.
> 
> In other cultures, parents are happy to keep their children around as long as they can.  Or you don't leave until you are married and so on.  These are cultural aspects that come into play and family is a huge part of it.
> 
> In Canada, we had two entire generations that went to war.  It wasn't just the army that went to war.  The whole country did.  Their sons and daughters, many of them joined in their wake and so on.  A lot of serving members proudly point to various family members that have served.  There is a history there and the perception of military service is different.
> 
> The thing is, that a lot of newer Canadians don't have that link.  It's not to say they aren't any loyal or proud but military service can be seen differently based on family and cultural history.




Thank you, I didn't mean to imply certain ethnicities are more family oriented than others. I just worded it wrong I suppose, what I was trying to get at is how family works is what's different. My bad sorry for the confusion guys lol 

As far as the cadet thing goes, I was in cadets for 7 years  And I'm in the process of joining the CF (hopefully). Yet there are a lot of indo-canadians in cadets who have no interest in joining the CF even though cadets gave them so many opportunities.


----------



## aesop081

Scoobydude said:
			
		

> Yet there are a lot of indo-canadians in cadets who have no interest in joining the CF even though cadets gave them so many opportunities.



Both organizations are completely different beats. One has little to no obligations and very little in the way of disruptions to normal life. It is not hard to understand why one appeals to people and the other does not.


----------



## cdnparatrooper

I was filling out the army application sheet, and It asked me if I'm a visible minority. I can understand if they asked me which race I am, but it asked if I was Caucasian or a minority. What's up with that?


----------



## PMedMoe

My guess is for stat purposes.


----------



## mariomike

CADPAT15 said:
			
		

> I was filling out the army application sheet, and It asked me if I'm a visible minority. I can understand if they asked me which race I am, but it asked if I was Caucasian or a minority. What's up with that?



This discussion may help explain.

Recruiting >  Diversity in recruitment  
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/106927.0


----------



## dapaterson

Purely for statistical information.


----------



## Emilio

I am truly sorry. I'm extremely disgusted by the viewpoints this article presents, and I would not give it more publicity by posting it on this site, if it were not for some very important reasons. First let me say being a resident of British Columbia and from a mostly immigrant community, our perception of the Canadian Military was that of a mostly white organization which was similar, if not the same as the American Military, especially in terms of its recruiting methods. When going through the educational system from elementary to high school (I only graduated last year), those stereotypes still held true. The CAF was seen as respectable through out our past (WW1, WW2, Peacekeeping), but never seen as a profession worth pursuing in the present.

Yet disturbing as it may sound I believe that our teachers along with civilian ignorance played a part in reinforcing the negative aspects associated with the Military. For those who don’t know the BCTF is an acronym for the British Columbia Teachers Federation. The Union which negotiates the pay and rights for teachers across B.C, and of course being a Teachers Union they have a direct influence over the children of BC. Though this article is the individual opinion of Marianne Neill, I as a recent high school graduate feel it is reflective of the opinion's of most teachers within the BCTF. So as I graduated, I looked back on high school and tried to understand why the military was not seen as much as an option as it should have been? Why there was only a single recruitment poster in the career center, which I did not realize was a recruitment poster until I walked into the recruiter’s office at the regiment I wish to join? And why such misinformation was allowed to be spread without any one to stopping it?

Marianne Neil, President of the Burnaby teachers' Association 
http://www.bctf.ca/publications/NewsmagArticle.aspx?id=21006



> Military recruitment and racism
> 
> By Marianne Neill
> 
> When I was in my early 20s, two of my brothers joined the reserves because they couldn’t find another summer job. In late August, when they returned, I was sitting on the front porch at my parents’ home, listening to one of them tell me about his summer. With the crickets chirping, and maple trees rustling above us, he told me a story that shattered my understanding of what it meant to be Canadian. My brother told me that during bayonet training, the sergeant had advised recruits to imagine there was a “____ big ugly gook” standing in front of them, and they were to “lunge and thrust” with their guns. For reservists, this had been only the beginning of a lesson in desensitization and dehumanization that crossed boundaries of decency in multiple ways.
> 
> Not all recruits have such sordid tales to tell. However, this story is a fragment in a culture of militarism that enables systemic racism in many different ways. Teachers must sensitize themselves to this if they are to pass on critical awareness to their students, and give them a fair chance to make informed choices about their lives.
> 
> My conversation with my brother took place during the years when the Canadian military was ostensibly a peacekeeping force. It is true that during the years when the military was publicly identifying with the peacekeeping role, there were missions that called that role into question. There have been questions about Canada’s role in the removal of Aristide from power in Haiti, and we are all well aware of atrocities committed by individual troops in Somalia. Nevertheless, the dissonance between public image and actualization during that time, gave our citizenry a platform for objection when our military strayed from the role we understood them to have.
> 
> Since 2002, the Canadian military has gradually transformed its public image from peacekeeping to war-fighting. The public has been non-reactive, largely because of the stealth with which the transformation was effected: an incremental, carefully planned public relations campaign that has shown us images of Canadian soldiers breaking down doors, and creeping through streets with guns, as well as rescuing women and children from vague disasters.
> 
> A war-fighting military is more reinforcing of systemic racism than a peacekeeping one. Peacekeepers help develop agency, autonomy, solidarity, and advocacy (the BCTF social justice lens) in the countries they contact. Though perhaps not always in reality, their role is conceived as antiracist. In contrast, war-fighters, even while protecting one group or population, seek to conquer another. Unlike police, soldiers do not discern between one individual and another, and are not constrained by a criminal justice system. Their job is to attack a group that has been identified as the enemy. Most often in wars, the enemy is a racially and/or culturally identifiable group. The aggressive and defensive nature of war-fighting, and its identification of the enemy on the basis of group membership, means the individuals who participate in it are going to be susceptible to racism. My brother’s story exemplifies this.
> 
> Clearly, I am not saying that all members of the military are racist. I am saying that the act of war-fighting is inherently racist. Fear and desensitization make individuals vulnerable to racism when they are in a war-fighting situation. This experience can stay with them in subtle ways after the crisis is over. A boundary once crossed is more easily crossed again.
> 
> In the last six years, since the Canadian military has begun to transform its public role, and has been structurally integrated with the American military in new ways, we have seen more soldiers come home in coffins than we had in 50 years of peacekeeping. Recruiting efforts have stepped up, and money has been spent on a massive advertising campaign to attract youth. Promises of free education, travel, and adventure, appeal especially to disadvantaged youth. Military leaflets offer the army as a way to fight boredom.
> 
> Recruiting campaigns target vulnerable groups. As such, they exploit inequities, including racism. Ads directed at Aboriginal youth are insidious in exploiting psychological needs. They promise the life of a warrior, manipulatively integrating military and Aboriginal iconography. Reserves and the Bold Eagle program for Aboriginal youth pay more than students could get for flipping burgers all summer. The Atlantic provinces produce more recruits because they are economically disadvantaged. Recruiting drives are more aggressive there. General Rick Hillier, who was Commander-in-Chief until 2007, openly advocated targeting immigrant populations for recruitment.
> 
> In a just society, youth would not be drawn to the military just because they have no other opportunity to have an education. There is a reason that disadvantaged groups are targeted by recruiters. It may have something to do with all the information recruiters don’t share with recruits, such as:
> 
> Military charges against Canadian forces members have risen as much as 62% since Canada started sending troops to Afghanistan. Absent without leave charges were the most frequent.
> The suicide rate among Canadian soldiers doubled from 2006 to 2007, and was triple that of the general population.
> Canada does not reveal the number of soldiers wounded so badly that they have to return home for treatment. However, during the first eight months of 2007, 108 members of the CF were eligible for an allowance given to people in this category.
> Finally, they do not mention the controversy over war as a solution, or the moral disturbance inherent in war-fighting. In a letter to the Toronto Star on October 9, 2008, Corporal Paul Demetrick wrote: “We respond to hostile fire by indiscriminate bombings and shelling of villages, killing innocent men, women, and children; we fire white phosphorous shells into vineyards… we hand over prisoners of war to Afghan authorities, who torture them; and we shoot and kill a two-year-old Afghan boy and his four-year-old sister… How can we inspire the Afghan people to respect liberty, democracy, equality for women, education for children, human rights, and respect for life when we are maiming and murdering them and destroying their homes, communities and the economy, and their country…?” War-fighting creates disturbance in the emotions of healthy people.
> 
> Economically disadvantaged youth are more willing to hear the promises and appreciate the opportunities offered by a military career, while ignoring negative messages. This is why they are targeted for recruitment, and why recruiters don’t bother wasting too much time trying to recruit the wealthy.
> 
> The injustice in recruiting to the military is effectively summarized in the concept of an economic draft. If you underfund universities and colleges, fail to support Aboriginal, immigrant, and refugee populations, and fail to guarantee a living wage, there is no need for conscription.
> 
> In this country, we like to believe we are a just society. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that enshrines equality rights. Yet, we do have systemic racism, and the nature of our military and its recruiting processes are one expression of it.
> 
> Marianne Neill is president of the Burnaby Teachers’ Association.



I will end my rant now but not without highlighting the last, most untrue and disgusting part of this article.

*"Economically disadvantaged youth are more willing to hear the promises and appreciate the opportunities offered by a military career, while ignoring negative messages. This is why they are targeted for recruitment, and why recruiters don’t bother wasting too much time trying to recruit the wealthy.

The injustice in recruiting to the military is effectively summarized in the concept of an economic draft. If you underfund universities and colleges, fail to support Aboriginal, immigrant, and refugee populations, and fail to guarantee a living wage, there is no need for conscription.

In this country, we like to believe we are a just society. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that enshrines equality rights. Yet, we do have systemic racism, and the nature of our military and its recruiting processes are one expression of it.” *


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

It seems you are a little upset that someone is calling into question the honour and integrity of an organization that you hold in very high esteem.  Take a step back and this about what I am saying below for a second:

Just one woman's opinion, at the end of the day I wouldn't read into it too much.  The thing with people like this is you are wasting your time if you think you are going to change the opinion she has of the military, even if it is an ignorant one.  Better to just ignore her rather then read her articles and fuel the fire so to speak.

Over the past month I have been in Ottawa a few times.  Multiple times now, I have been at the Delta Ottawa and have been approached by the same man while I was in uniform and given a mouthful of "how despicable I am for wearing the uniform, how I am just a baby-killer, etc, etc..."  The first time he confronted me I just ignored him, the second time I lost my cool and gave it back to him with a "piss off!  Get out of my face!" along with a few other choice words for him.  

I did get pretty mad the second time but looking back on it I probably shouldn't have.  I did see him again just last week but now instead of reacting to his rants I am as nice to him as possible which really irritates him  ;D

My point is, not everyone is going to have a high opinion of what you do in the military and for those that don't their isn't a whole lot you can do to change it.  Better to just laugh about it and not give a rats ass because it isn't a popularity contest.


----------



## Emilio

RoyalDrew said:
			
		

> It seems you are a little upset that someone is calling into question the honour and integrity of an organization that you hold in very high esteem.  Take a step back and this about what I am saying below for a second:
> 
> Just one woman's opinion, at the end of the day I wouldn't read into it too much.  The thing with people like this is you are wasting your time if you think you are going to change the opinion she has of the military, even if it is an ignorant one.  Better to just ignore her rather then read her articles and fuel the fire so to speak.
> 
> Over the past month I have been in Ottawa a few times.  Multiple times now, I have been at the Delta Ottawa and have been approached by the same man while I was in uniform and given a mouthful of "how despicable I am for wearing the uniform, how I am just a baby-killer, etc, etc..."  The first time he confronted me I just ignored him, the second time I lost my cool and gave it back to him with a "piss off!  Get out of my face!" along with a few other choice words for him.
> 
> I did get pretty mad the second time but looking back on it I probably shouldn't have.  I did see him again just last week but now instead of reacting to his rants I am as nice to him as possible which really irritates him  ;D
> 
> My point is, not everyone is going to have a high opinion of what you do in the military and for those that don't their isn't a whole lot you can do to change it.  Better to just laugh about it and not give a rats ass because it isn't a popularity contest.



Your correct, I'm a little steamed after reading something like that  . But I guess if you think about it for every one person against the CAF, there are a hundred people who love and respect our Military. Its just, the person writing this isn't some troll, it's somebody who has direct influence over our children. Somebody who could easily persuade a young man/women who wishes to be in the military to turn against it. Someone who is spreading misinformation to the people most likely to trust and believe her. Your right though, in the end we serve to defend defend free speech, even if it's from people like her  ;D. Thanks and ill try to keep my head on Captain.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Ms Neil is an archetypal representative of a subset of all Western societies ~ she is, most likely, a _silk stocking socialist_ if not an avowed Marxist, a rabid anti-American and one of those who expresses dismay at China's shift from Maoism to capitalism. Trust me, Emilio, we can find her like in Calgary, Toronto, and Halifax and in Boston, Dallas, London, Paris, Berlin, Sydney, Singapore and Auckland, too. We can also find her polar opposites ~ equally ill informed and equally prejudiced ~ at the other end of the socio-political spectrum, and in all the same places, and and they are equally unpleasant.

Remember the old adage about sheep, wolves and sheepdogs* ... we're the sheepdogs, she's one of the sheep. We defend her and her ideas just as we defend everyone else.

____
* See e.g. this, and, if you're really interested in the analogy borrow LTC (Ret's) Grossman's book, _On Combat_, from your public library.


----------



## Pusser

Ms Neil seems to have formed much of her opinion based on her brothers' brief experiences with one aspect of their training - not really a good basis upon which to form an opinion about a rather large and complex organization.  Although she raises a number of issues of merit, there are a few flaws in her reasoning:

1)  That the CF is targeting immigrant and aboriginal groups because they are economically disadvantaged and. therefore, easier to persuade.  Nonsense.  Current advertising is targeted at certain groups because we recognize that the CF population does not reflect the Canadian demographic.  Our recruiting efforts target non-traditional groups because we're trying not to be seen as an exclusively young white male enclave.

2) The the CF has moved from a predominantly peacekeeping to a warfighting force.  Nonsense.  The CF has always striven to be a balance multi-capable force.  Peacekeeping is an operation (one of many) not an occupation or vocation all on its own.  We carry out peacekeeping missions, but it is not (and never has been) our sole raison d'etre.  In fact, peacekeeping operations can only be properly conducted and are generally only successful when conducted by well-equipped, professional armed forces (who, coincidentally, are also well-situated to conduct warfighting missions).

3) That it is immoral to advertise only the positive sides of a career or vocation and not talk about the negative.  What field of endeavour ever recruits by telling prospective candidates about the bad parts?  Does the Plumbers Union talk about being showered in $hit from time to time when encouraging folks to become plumbers?  Does the Teachers Union talk about disrespectful students and uncooperative parents in their advertising for new teachers (or do they just concentrate on how they're "helping" to make a better community)?

Having said all this, I don't think any of us would ever be able to change Ms Neil's twisted views.


----------



## Emilio

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Ms Neil is an archetypal representative of a subset of all Western societies ~ she is, most likely, a _silk stocking socialist_ if not an avowed Marxist, a rabid anti-American and one of those who expresses dismay at China's shift from Maoism to capitalism. Trust me, Emilio, we can find her like in Calgary, Toronto, and Halifax and in Boston, Dallas, London, Paris, Berlin, Sydney, Singapore and Auckland, too. We can also find her polar opposites ~ equally ill informed and equally prejudiced ~ at the other end of the socio-political spectrum, and in all the same places, and and they are equally unpleasant.
> 
> Remember the old adage about sheep, wolves and sheepdogs* ... we're the sheepdogs, she's one of the sheep. We defend her and her ideas just as we defend everyone else.
> 
> ____
> * See e.g. this, and, if you're really interested in the analogy borrow LTC (Ret's) Grossman's book, _On Combat_, from your public library.



Thank you Sir, that link is exactly what I needed.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Another few years and any Caucasian living in Vancouver can truthfully check the "visible minority" box.


----------



## Jarnhamar

In Ms Neil's article she states



> The suicide rate among Canadian soldiers doubled from 2006 to 2007, and was triple that of the general population.



I thought that the suicide rate of Canadian soldiers was still below the national average?  Of course the article is also almost 4 years old.


----------



## PMedMoe

Here's a more recent study: http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/news/article.page?doc=suicide-and-suicide-prevention-in-the-canadian-armed-forces/hgq87xvu


----------



## Jarnhamar

Informative and appreciated thank you.


----------



## Emilio

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> In Ms Neil's article she states
> 
> I thought that the suicide rate of Canadian soldiers was still below the national average?  Of course the article is also almost 4 years old.



I wouldn't take anything Ms.Neil wrote in this article on much merit.


----------



## john10

Emilio said:
			
		

> I wouldn't take anything Ms.Neil wrote in this article on much merit.


 Why? Because she has a different opinion than you?

Grow up and drop your sense of entitlement. The last thing the CAF need is another whiny self-victimizing little twerp who thinks everything is owed to him and every one needs to agree with him just because he's a private in the reserves.


----------



## Emilio

john10 said:
			
		

> Why? Because she has a different opinion than you?
> 
> Grow up and drop your sense of entitlement. The last thing the CAF need is another whiny self-victimizing little twerp who thinks everything is owed to him and every one needs to agree with him just because he's a private in the reserves.



Since posting this article I came to my senses, and realized the views Ms.Neil shares are held by a very small minority of people.

But I saw something wrong written by a person of influence, so I exposed it to others, I stand by that.

I'm gonna turn the other cheek, and not insult you back, someone of your age should be above attacking an 18 year old.

And read my profile I'm not a private in the reserves. I'm not even enrolled, I'm a civilian at the moment and can say whatever the hell I like. 

I am not bound the the Code of Service Discipline.

But I still choose to follow it *(for the most part)*, even while being a civilian. 

At the moment I'm only bound by the rules of this site. If one day the CAF tells me to halt the sharing of my opinion, I will gladly do so. 

But until then do not tell me what I can and cannot do, because I will still do it.


----------



## john10

be quiet you little twerp.


----------



## Emilio

john10 said:
			
		

> be quiet you little twerp.



Very classy, You will get very far in life with that attitude.


----------



## krimynal

john10 said:
			
		

> be quiet you little twerp.



Where are you trying to go now ? Since he's not in the forces he should shut up ? are you serious ?

You are the reason why so many people hate our military personal , he didn't like what he read , so what , it's his point of view , he has all the rights to come out here and state them ....

now that he explains his point the only thing you have to answer his to call him name and telling him to shut up ?

you have a serious issue right there


----------



## john10

Emilio said:
			
		

> Since posting this article I came to my senses, and realized the views Ms.Neil shares are held by a very small minority of people.
> 
> But I saw something wrong written by a person of influence, so I exposed it to others, I stand by that.
> 
> I'm gonna turn the other cheek, and not insult you back, someone of your age should be above attacking an 18 year old.
> 
> And read my profile I'm not a private in the reserves. I'm not even enrolled, I'm a civilian at the moment and can say whatever the hell I like.
> 
> I am not bound the the Code of Service Discipline.
> 
> But I still choose to follow it *(for the most part)*, even while being a civilian.
> 
> At the moment I'm only bound by the rules of this site. If one day the CAF tells me to halt the sharing of my opinion, I will gladly do so.
> 
> But until then do not tell me what I can and cannot do, because I will still do it.



You didn't contribute anything to the issue of suicide rates. You just said it was false, based purely on the fact she doesn't like the army, and you do.

Before even being enlisted, you have a sense of entitlement about what people are allowed to say about the army.

Drop your sense of entitlement. We don't need whiny little self-victimizers in this army.


----------



## Emilio

john10 said:
			
		

> You didn't contribute anything to the issue of suicide rates. You just said it was false, based purely on the fact she doesn't like the army, and you do.
> 
> Before even being enlisted, you have a sense of entitlement about what people are allowed to say about the army.
> 
> Drop your sense of entitlement. We don't need whiny little self-victimizers in this army.



I didn't say it was false, I said her personal biases get in the way of factual reasoning and logic.

We also don't need people who blatantly insult others because of their viewpoints.

Drop your attitude,it's disgusting when coming out the mouth of a CAF employee. 

Or hopefully an ex-employee.


----------



## krimynal

john10 said:
			
		

> You didn't contribute anything to the issue of suicide rates. You just said it was false, based purely on the fact she doesn't like the army, and you do.
> 
> Before even being enlisted, you have a sense of entitlement about what people are allowed to say about the army.
> 
> Drop your sense of entitlement. We don't need whiny little self-victimizers in this army.



how is he a whiny self-victimizers ??? He is standing by what he said , he is saying hes not gonna try to hide away or look the other way .... he as by far a better judgment than you do , and at least once he states his opinion is not only trash talking like you do , hopefully one day someone will put you back to your place , it's not because you were the uniform that you are better than someone here ....

right now you are acting like a egomaniac freak that thinks that since he's in and this guy isn't that you are the master of truth ..... buddy .... to be honest , you are the kind of guy that I use to love to hate , I've grown since then , now I just know that you have no clue on how to interact with others and by acting like a total jerk you are trying to show off some kind a attitude so everyone will think that you are a tough dude !

it's just sad , stop the tough act and learn to respect other opinions , this is one of the 1st rule in the army , how about you go back to drawing board , maybe Basic is a little too far behind


----------



## muskrat89

> Drop your sense of entitlement. We don't need whiny little self-victimizers in this army.



Drop your personal attacks. You want to debate, debate the statements or opinions at hand. That goes for all of you. Keep it up and we'll lock  the thread. Easy, peasey.

Army.ca Staff


----------



## Microsung

My own input as a visible minority applying to the CAF.

In my community not that many people believe that the CAF has anything beyond, as someone previously said, army= infantry, airforce= pilot, and navy= sailor. 

In fact many people in my community completely discourage CAF employment, although 2nd and 3rd generations of immigrants like myself have become more attuned to the idea of becoming a member of the CAF. However, throughout our whole lives we have been directed towards civilian employment, CAF employment, as engineers, nurses, physicans, and etc. 

In addition there is sometimes misconceptions about career choice in the CAF, my family for example believed that the only careers across the army, airforce, and navy were only infantry! Their thought process, at least for my entire family (including extended) was army = infantry, airforce = infantry, and navy = infantry.

Just my little personal input.


----------



## Emilio

Microsung said:
			
		

> My own input as a visible minority applying to the CAF.
> 
> In my community not that many people believe that the CAF has anything beyond, as someone previously said, army= infantry, airforce= pilot, and navy= sailor.
> 
> In fact many people in my community completely discourage CAF employment, although 2nd and 3rd generations of immigrants like myself have become more attuned to the idea of becoming a member of the CAF. However, throughout our whole lives we have been directed towards civilian employment, CAF employment, as engineers, nurses, physicans, and etc.
> 
> In addition there is sometimes misconceptions about career choice in the CAF, my family for example believed that the only careers across the army, airforce, and navy were only infantry! Their thought process, at least for my entire family (including extended) was army = infantry, airforce = infantry, and navy = infantry.
> 
> Just my little personal input.



That is something I have noticed as well, but for a lot people in the public.

The only exception's being people who have family or friends in the Military, I don't think misconceptions about the CAF are drawn along ethnic lines. 

And It's only natural for parents to steer their children towards careers, which are not perceived as being "dangerous".


----------



## krimynal

Sadly a LOT of people think that way .... That's why the Forces are making more and more TV ads , are more and more present in the EXPO's and everything .... 

we don't need exposure , we need education on the matter , I always compared the Military as a city ... in a city you have doctors , lawyers , mechanics , etc. etc. etc. ... there are a LOT of career in the forces that nobody knows outside of the recruit.

When I first told my family I was gonna join , they assumed Military = Infantry = Death .....

So when I told them I wanted to probably go Artillery , they thought Artillery are just Infrantry with bigger weapons .... I spent pretty much 3 months showing them the difference , what it was , what the infantry was doing , what the artillery was doing , etc. etc. etc. .... 

it's not easy to show them and teach them , but that's why we , as recruit - current member and veteran , need to be there and teach them , when someone gets on your nerves about ignorance in the army , don't just tell them how stupid they are , try to understand his point of view , and then give him true examples of what it's like !


----------



## pbi

krimynal said:
			
		

> When I first told my family I was gonna join , they assumed Military = Infantry = Death .....
> 
> So when I told them I wanted to probably go Artillery , they thought Artillery are just Infrantry with bigger weapons .... I spent pretty much 3 months showing them the difference , what it was , what the infantry was doing , what the artillery was doing , etc. etc. etc. ....



Ok,  good intentions all around: I get it.   

Just be careful: don't try to fool yourselves or your families into believing the military is something that it isn't. Or (God forbid...) when your flag-draped casket is unloaded at Trenton, they may ask "WTF?"

Everybody  that I can think of in the military (except possibly musicians) is ultimately required to do one of three things: to kill; to support activities that kill, or to facilitate that support. That's why it's the Canadian "Armed" Forces.

It really isn't about getting a "good job" or learning cool skills you can sell later on civvy street, and if you sell it that way you're being disingenuous. Most first generation immigrant families are uncomfortable with the military. It's pretty natural: my Portuguese relatives were certainly like that when they first came to Canada. But, things will change. Check out any Army Reserve unit in Toronto (or any other major city): very, very diverse.
When I joined the Militia in Toronto in 1974, it was pretty white. Things change, but not overnight.


----------



## krimynal

trust me , they know I want to fight and do it , but they also now know the difference between someone whose on the frontline and someone in the artillery , not saying that anything wont happen to me.  But I'm also telling them that I want to make a career out of it , this is what I want to do for my life , this is the job I want to do for a whole career until I retire , and even then .....

like they know that if god-forbig something would of happen to me , at least I was doing what I wanted to do which was being in the military , I've been wanting to join since I was 10 ... I'm now 25 .... so trust me ... I told them about everything , the good and the ugly side .... But they also know some minor difference !

anyways !


----------



## Loachman

Artillery is a Combat Arm, as is Infantry. Guns may not be deployed as far forward, but FOO parties are.

The job of the Artillery includes killing, and many people on the other side will be seriously trying to kill you.

The practical definition of "front line" is quite variable, and sometimes there isn't one.

I cannot see why you attempt to distinguish between Infantry and Artillery in this way.


----------



## krimynal

Loachman , for us that are in the military , it is quite easy to understand , for someone who is working on a farm , and that never been into anything other than watching movie at the TV of army stuff it's quite big. 

as a combat arm I do know that I am going to fight , I do know that the other parties are gonna try to kill me and I do know that it's not an easy desk job.

if ever I become a FOO , then my job description is probably gonna change a lot , but as we speak right now , I'm in a reserve unit that is a field gun oriented , for the duration of my degree , then once I join the regular as an officer I will see where it leads me.

I just pointed out the big picture that usually artillery = BIG GUN with long range capacities , so you are not as close to the enemy as an infantry who uses small arms and does recon.


----------



## Loachman

In general, yes - but history is full of exceptions to everything.

And watch out for that counter-battery fire...

You may not have to be as close to the enemy, but they don't have to be as close to you.


----------



## krimynal

yeah , but if I tell them every exception , might as well tell them that I'm enrolling as infantry , because they won't make somekind of distinction between the 2 lol !


----------



## Pusser

Loachman said:
			
		

> In general, yes - but history is full of exceptions to everything.
> 
> And watch out for that counter-battery fire...
> 
> You may not have to be as close to the enemy, but they don't have to be as close to you.



From one of those oft-quoted lists of the laws of war:

"If the enemy is in range, so are you."

Also, there's a reason EVERYONE in the CF is trained in the use of small arms...


----------



## Bluebulldog

krimynal said:
			
		

> Loachman , for us that are in the military , it is quite easy to understand , for someone who is working on a farm , and that never been into anything other than watching movie at the TV of army stuff it's quite big.
> 
> as a combat arm I do know that I am going to fight , I do know that the other parties are gonna try to kill me and I do know that it's not an easy desk job.
> 
> if ever I become a FOO , then my job description is probably gonna change a lot , but as we speak right now , I'm in a reserve unit that is a field gun oriented , for the duration of my degree , then once I join the regular as an officer I will see where it leads me.
> 
> I just pointed out the big picture that usually artillery = BIG GUN with long range capacities , so you are not as close to the enemy as an infantry who uses small arms and does recon. *RECCE* _There FTFY_
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is not only one of culture. Yes, many of the minority groups who are actively being sought after have a culture, and a history where military service was conscripted, or it was perceived as a last ditch career.
> 
> The larger problem is one of geography.
> 
> Minority populations by and large reside in urban environments. The rural and isolated areas are still largely populated by whites.
> 
> In urban environments the opportunities for education / career are extensive, whereas in the rural areas, they are limited. Joining the CF is seen by many in those areas as a great way to not only get career training, but get the heck out of Podunkville..and maybe see a little of the world. This has been the way of it for generations. Anyone wonder why there's a lot of Newfoundlanders in the CF? Same reason why there's a ton of them in the oil patch.
Click to expand...


----------



## pbi

krimynal said:
			
		

> trust me , they know I want to fight and do it , but they also now know the difference between someone whose on the frontline and someone in the artillery , not saying that anything wont happen to me.  But I'm also telling them that I want to make a career out of it , this is what I want to do for my life , this is the job I want to do for a whole career until I retire , and even then .....



Roger. Got it. Good luck.


----------



## ultimatewarrior

I just want to mention that what I'm about to discuss deals with a sensitive issue. I am a South Asian Muslim Male who has wanted to join the CAF for as long as I can remember. I graduated from a civilian university last year and applied to the Pilot trade as DEO. I went to CFB Trenton for Air Crew Selection and that is where I had an interesting experience, to say the least. The area of Trenton is predominantly white, and almost everyone I saw on the base was white. This is not something I did not expect, and I have never had any issues with anyone of a different race/religion since I was born and raised in this country, albeit in a more multicultural setting. I was also the only one of my ethnicity out of all the other candidates that arrived for Air Crew Selection, from different provinces. The Instructors and Invigilators were very accepting and kind, a long with many other individuals I met there (i.e. the Head Chef at the Officer's Mess, and others). But what I noticed was that no one else was interested in speaking to me, and by this I mean that I felt alienated and non-existent in that setting. Whether it was when I tried to speak to other people at the Officer's Mess (such as cadets and members), or other AS candidates, I felt ignored and unwanted. I have actually never felt this way before, growing up in the Greater Toronto Area. To me personally, it seemed like a form of tribalism, where someone 'different' was not being accepted. Of course, no one would say this to my face, but I felt it. While at university, I also noticed this sort of grouping behavior where people hung out with others of the same race/religion, but it wasn't so much of an issue since it was a highly multicultural setting. Anyways, I just feel the need to ask others who are in the military, does this sort of behavior exist? As much as I want to join the Forces and serve the country, I don't want to seem like an 'alien' who doesn't belong. I have a cousin in the USMC (he is enlisted), and he has told me that he has been treated unfairly and has had people ask him whether "he was in the right Army". I can understand why there's some level of distrust, but I don't know if it's to that great of an extent in the Canadian Armed Forces. I want to make sure that by joining the CAF I'm making the right decision, and that I will actually make life-long friends like so many claim, and that I will be treated equally. Any input is appreciated.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

IT DOES NOT.


----------



## ultimatewarrior

Well thanks Bruce, that's good to know.


----------



## Towards_the_gap

The only time I've seen a muslim encounter a negative reaction was when it was entirely his fault. Said individual lived quite a 'haram' lifestyle (booze, women, illicit drugs, chronic lateness, and I should think he was a bit behind on his zakat after all that), yet when the book was thrown at him for AWOL/discipline issues, he pulled every card for religious accommodation, ie halal meals, timings adjusted for daily prayers, etc etc. Now the accommodation of religion isn't what pissed anyone off, it was the hypocrisy of this individual who was quite blatantly 'pulling a card'.

Any other muslim I've met in the forces did his/her thing, nobody really cared about it, if anything it made the rounds easier in the mess cause it was one less alcoholic drink to buy. 

You might feel a bit 'outside the tribe' right now as a multi-cultural urbanite, but give it 6 months should you get in, you'll belong to a whole new tribe, one that doesn't give a crap who you pray to.


----------



## Sadukar09

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> The only time I've seen a muslim encounter a negative reaction was when it was entirely his fault. Said individual lived quite a 'haram' lifestyle (booze, women, illicit drugs, chronic lateness, and I should think he was a bit behind on his zakat after all that), yet when the book was thrown at him for AWOL/discipline issues, he pulled every card for religious accommodation, ie halal meals, timings adjusted for daily prayers, etc etc. Now the accommodation of religion isn't what pissed anyone off, it was the hypocrisy of this individual who was quite blatantly 'pulling a card'.
> 
> Any other muslim I've met in the forces did his/her thing, nobody really cared about it, if anything it made the rounds easier in the mess cause it was one less alcoholic drink to buy.
> 
> You might feel a bit 'outside the tribe' right now as a multi-cultural urbanite, but give it 6 months should you get in, you'll belong to a whole new tribe, one that doesn't give a crap who you pray to.



After all, we all believe in a little something in a cold, water filled trench.


----------



## EME Hopeful

I know racism and discrimination exist everywhere, but its kind of sad if its a problem (I don't know if it is or isn't and I'm not saying it is or is not, I'm still only in the application process) in the CF considering one of the interview questions is what's your view on it/would you have a problem working with people of a different race/religion/gender/ sexual orientation/etc.   I know some people lie but I would like to believe that the interviewers are more than able to screen those people out.

With regards to minority recruiting, and this is coming from a Canadian with Chinese heritage, I think its pure BS.  In no way should a person's gender/race/religion/etc play a part in their recruitment.  If they're the best person for the job, hire them.  If not, move on.  Lives are at stake here, and nothing short of the best available candidate is acceptable.

With that being said, if you want to diversify and more accurately reflect the image of the general population perhaps you need to start an education program.  A lot of the people in the so called minorities come from places where the military is "evil" so to speak.  Where they're used to enforce dictatorships, where they're used to unlawfully suppress the masses, where they're nothing but a bunch of violent people who harass/extort the civilians or other things that may leave a negative lasting image that could be passed down from generation to generation.  That is the trend that you need to break if you ever want to increase the numbers from a so called minority population.


----------



## dimsum

When I was in the Navy, one of our Muslim sailors would call up to the bridge before prayer times and ask which way the ship was facing, so he would know where to face in the cabin towards Mecca (if he wasn't working).  It seemed to work out.


----------



## RectorCR

Sadukar09 said:
			
		

> After all, we all believe in a little something in a cold, water filled trench.



Negative  >


----------



## George Wallace

RectorCR said:
			
		

> Negative  >



WAIT FOR IT!           ;D


----------



## Loachman

ultimatewarrior said:
			
		

> To me personally, it seemed like a form of tribalism, where someone 'different' was not being accepted. Of course, no one would say this to my face, but I felt it. While at university, I also noticed this sort of grouping behavior where people hung out with others of the same race/religion



People naturally tend to gather in groups that reflect themselves, which can be based upon race, gender, language, interests, or whatever, so I'd not read too much into that.

You may find that it takes a little more to break into a group, but once you are on your first course that should happen pretty quickly.

Few of us care what somebody's race*, religion*, ethnic origin*, gender, or any other differentiating factor is so long as they pull their weight and do their best.

*My personal exception to that rule - such groups tend to have different and tasy food, so bring some along.

Good luck, and welcome to the family.


----------



## DAA

Loachman said:
			
		

> Few of us care what somebody's race*, religion*, ethnic origin*, gender, or any other differentiating factor is so long as they pull their weight and do their best.



While I would have to agree with most of Loachman's statement above with the exception of the "other differentiating factor".

Wearing a "green" uniform, I always feel uncomfortable hanging out with the Air Force and Navy guys, so I usually only do that when none of my kind are around to see it.


----------



## Strike

Loachman said:
			
		

> *My personal exception to that rule - such groups tend to have different and tasy food, so bring some along.



Oh yes!  It makes unit pot lucks that much better!


----------



## EME Hopeful

DAA said:
			
		

> While I would have to agree with most of Loachman's statement above with the exception of the "other differentiating factor".
> 
> Wearing a "green" uniform, I always feel uncomfortable hanging out with the Air Force and Navy guys, so I usually only do that when none of my kind are around to see it.



Ah, I've been waiting for someone to say that for a while now....  took a lot longer than I figured it would


----------



## ultimatewarrior

Thanks for the replies everyone. I'm still pushing forward with my application since joining the CAF is something I've always wanted to do. 

P.S. I'll be sure to bring some biryani and butter chicken to future potlucks.


----------



## Emilio

ultimatewarrior said:
			
		

> Thanks for the replies everyone. I'm still pushing forward with my application since joining the CAF is something I've always wanted to do.
> 
> P.S. I'll be sure to bring some biryani and butter chicken to future potlucks.



YES 

please do.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

DAA said:
			
		

> While I would have to agree with most of Loachman's statement above with the exception of the "other differentiating factor".
> 
> Wearing a "green" uniform, I always feel uncomfortable hanging out with the Air Force and Navy guys, so I usually only do that when none of my kind are around to see it.



It can even go farther than that.  My SLC was all 'green DEU' folks, but in the mess, etc you'd usually see folks in groups that were related/semi-related; cbt arms, CSS would tend to end up at the same tables especially after supper if a few pints were happening.  I'd say mostly because of common discussion/gripe points being the conversation. 

I guess once you see it happen for X amount of years, you don't really notice it because it's "normal".

I see it in the AF too;  different folks of the same trades but from different Sqn's talking/eating together in the mess, and even at the Sqn level at something like a Sqn brief.  People just tend to congregate with their own kind.


----------



## brihard

ultimatewarrior said:
			
		

> Thanks for the replies everyone. I'm still pushing forward with my application since joining the CAF is something I've always wanted to do.
> 
> P.S. I'll be sure to bring some biryani and butter chicken to future potlucks.



Butter chicken is friggin' delicious. I'm gonna make the effort soon to learn how to make it.


----------



## Robert0288

Brihard said:
			
		

> Butter chicken is friggin' delicious. I'm gonna make the effort soon to learn how to make it.



Sorry Brihard, had to be done.  ;D


----------



## Delaney1986

Robert0288 said:
			
		

> Sorry Brihard, had to be done.  ;D



Oh, the irony of spelling "Failure" wrong....lol
 ;D


----------



## Robert0288

I just copied and pasted from the internet.  I can't correct the spelling inside of a picture.


----------



## Delaney1986

Robert0288 said:
			
		

> I just copied and pasted from the internet.  I can't correct the spelling inside of a picture.



Wasn't referring to you....was referring to the picture


----------



## eaglehawkdown

Good day all.

 I have a question that I would like to ask and yes I did some research and looking to try and find an answer but was not coming up with anything. Does any one know what the number of minorities are that are either in the application process or are currently working with the CAF. I'm trying to see if they hire any people with ethnic backgrounds less than say "whites" or "blacks" . It seems that finding a job while having a ethnic name on the application can seem like it would take much longer than someone that had a name like mike smith.

Just curious.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Canadian Forces to reduce ‘unattainable’ targets for recruitment of women, visible minorities



> While auditors found the percentage of new recruits enrolled in basic training each year who were women has fallen from 15.58 per cent to 12.67 per cent between 2008 and 2011, women’s overall representation in the military grew from 13.59 per cent to 13.68 per cent.
> 
> Progress on increasing the representation of visible minorities also “falls well short,” defence officials reported, even though the number has increased steadily from 2.83 per cent in 2008 to 3.86 per cent in 2011.





> The number of aboriginals in the Canadian Forces has grown steadily from 1.96 per cent in 2008 to 2.16 per cent 2011, and unlike with targets for women and visible minorities, defence officials had considered the target for aboriginals “achievable.”



See also this paper:

Can the Canadian Forces Reflect Canadian Society? by Captain (N) Hans Jung


----------



## brihard

eaglehawkdown said:
			
		

> Good day all.
> 
> I have a question that I would like to ask and yes I did some research and looking to try and find an answer but was not coming up with anything. Does any one know what the number of minorities are that are either in the application process or are currently working with the CAF. I'm trying to see if they hire any people with ethnic backgrounds less than say "whites" or "blacks" . It seems that finding a job while having a ethnic name on the application can seem like it would take much longer than someone that had a name like mike smith.
> 
> Just curious.



The CF doesn't care what colour, race, ethnicity or creed you are. The system is extremely bureaucratized and painfully slow- but that same thing has protected it from prejudice or how many vowels your name has/lacks.


----------



## lee465

eaglehawkdown said:
			
		

> Good day all.
> 
> I have a question that I would like to ask and yes I did some research and looking to try and find an answer but was not coming up with anything. Does any one know what the number of minorities are that are either in the application process or are currently working with the CAF. I'm trying to see if they hire any people with ethnic backgrounds less than say "whites" or "blacks" . It seems that finding a job while having a ethnic name on the application can seem like it would take much longer than someone that had a name like mike smith.
> 
> Just curious.




The only reason I can see why people with ethnic backgrounds may take longer to process is because they lived outside of Canada for extended periods. Other than that, race/background does not really factor in. I am of Korean descent but was born and lived in Canada my whole life. My initial application took less than 6 months to process but had to be closed due to the lack of openings for the position I desired.


----------



## George Wallace

After reviewing your posts, I have a strong feeling that you have several other problems holding up your application that are not at all related to being a minority.  This could be one:



			
				eaglehawkdown said:
			
		

> I have a parent living outside of Canada hes been out for over 10 years and I myself have not left Canada in over 10 years. And the right people I emailed I am referring to the recruiting office staff that I was dealing with and who gave me their card to contact them.



You have also had problems with passing the CFAT, which could also be a factor, not at all related to being a minority.


----------



## PumpKickr

Well, this isn't good: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/systemic-racism-in-canadian-forces-needs-inquiry-veterans-say-1.2571614

While I would never claim that the CAF is free of racists, I have a hard time accepting a claim that there is _systemic_ racism or that there would be institutional barriers to a POCs progression.  I just don't see it.


----------



## Stoker

PumpKickr said:
			
		

> Well, this isn't good: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/systemic-racism-in-canadian-forces-needs-inquiry-veterans-say-1.2571614
> 
> While I would never claim that the CAF is free of racists, I have a hard time accepting a claim that there is _systemic_ racism or that there would be institutional barriers to a POCs progression.  I just don't see it.



In my 25 years in the forces I have never seen any racism. I'm sure it exists as the forces has the same problems of society in general. Looking at the news story from the first page of a letter that's displayed, seems some of the problem was a posting out west when he wanted Greenwood and the per was blaming it on racism. When he was out west in a posting he probably did not want, said he was harassed.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

I think this has already been a story a few years ago if I remember..........


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Yup.  If at first you don't succeed...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

" between 2001 and 2012, there were 290 cases of racism complaints within the Canadian Forces and 129 of those cases were won by the complainants"

Personally, that's pretty outstanding...............that sure doesn't sound "systematic" to me.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I think this has already been a story a few years ago if I remember..........


You DO remember correctly ....
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/105137.0;all

Stand by for merge....


----------



## George Wallace

I have been following this for a bit on FaceBook.  Some of the posters have known the two in this news article, and have commented that it was not a matter of race, but a problem of personalities.  They posted that the person was an obnoxious 'asshole' and was treated as such by those who came in contact with them.  This looks very much like a couple of persons who have an obnoxious personality manipulating the system by using the "minority card" ( this is not just a problem of people using the "race card", but also the "gender card", the "religion card", etc. ) to get their own way.


----------



## PuckChaser

First line in the letter from the article says he wasn't posted to Greenwood from QL3 because of race? Or is it because Greenwood is one of 50 postings new traffic techs can get and isn't a particularly busy place for someone to practice new skills...?


----------



## Transporter

The headline for this article, and the assertions that Ombudsman Marin stated that there was systemic racism in the CF, are grossly inaccurate and misleading; he said no such thing. What he did say was: _"We have identified two systemic issues that could be pursued further, the first being: what is the CF's role and responsibility with respect to assisting with the integration of members and their dependants, specifically those that are visible minorities, into the community? The second issue concerns CF's policy with respect to independent or higher level review of harassment complaints and more specifically of racism, with the aim of identifying systemic racism or discrimination. At present, the existing policies are either silent or lacking."_

So, the Ombudsman identified systemic issues with how the CF handles integration of minorities into the community and how it investigates harassment complaints... NOT SYSTEMIC RACISM within the CF.

For the reporter to twist this around reflects either gross incompetence or deliberate sensationalism (or perhaps both), for which there should be no tolerance in professional journalism. Sadly, we see this more and more often today.


----------



## AirDet

Transporter said:
			
		

> For the reporter to twist this around reflects either gross incompetence or deliberate sensationalism (or perhaps both), for which there should be no tolerance in professional journalism. Sadly, we see this more and more often today.



This is how the North American media sells papers/adds/commercials/etc. There is no more journalistic integrity.

My Wife has a degree in journalism and she's a visible minority. She's the first to attack such dribble at the hands of the MSM.

For the record, if I ever suspected anyone in my chain were treating our people in a racist manner I would put an end to it immediately. Nothing degrades the brotherhood and team work of our units faster than racism. To ignore it in our units would be a gross failure of leadership.


----------



## Gramps

w


			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> First line in the letter from the article says he wasn't posted to Greenwood from QL3 because of race?



Or maybe he wasn't posted to YZX because of his posting preferences that he gave to the career manager while on his QL3. If you list bases in N.S, Ontario, and B.C, then you've told your career shop that you are open to a posting anywhere. I am certain Mr. Fowler does not expect that someone on this site was also on the same QL3 as he was.


----------



## Lightguns

Everytime NS papers want increase their minority readership. Wally pops up. He is the story that keeps on giving because can't tell the full truth in public. Time to let it go Wally.


----------



## Nemo888

Problem is as a white guy in Canada I almost never see the racism around me. I'm treated well so I never think about it. When I was in Asia and the subject of super annoying racism that almost made me beat the crap out of one or two people it was a very different story. I remember being wound up by some racist ass in a bar with some local friends and one of the girls at the table looking amazed and saying she had never seen racism in her country. I saw it most days I was there. It's something to remember when I hear things like this.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Don't be stupid............assholes in a bar is a whole different kettle of fish of systemic workplace racism.


----------



## Nemo888

I also had to pay more for consumer goods in many stores and pay larger bribes to local officials. It was systemic and mostly invisible to those not targeted. To the point that many naive locals did not think it existed. They wondered why I was such an angry guy some days. My wife accused me of reverse racism. We were out buying a coke and as luck would have it the shop keeper shorted me on my change by about 20 Canadian cents thinking I would not notice. I let her go on her tirade and then gave the the receipt and my change and asked her to count it. Best argument win in the marriage IMO. It was very educational to be treated like that.


----------



## Franko

Back on topic.

The Army.ca Staff


----------



## a_majoor

I wonder if anyone is investigating the media for "Systemic" stupidity for flogging these stories?


----------



## Scott

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> I also had to pay more for consumer goods in many stores and pay larger bribes to local officials. It was systemic and mostly invisible to those not targeted. To the point that many naive locals did not think it existed. They wondered why I was such an angry guy some days. My wife accused me of reverse racism. We were out buying a coke and as luck would have it the shop keeper shorted me on my change by about 20 Canadian cents thinking I would not notice. I let her go on her tirade and then gave the the receipt and my change and asked her to count it. Best argument win in the marriage IMO. It was very educational to be treated like that.



I thought Bruce told you not to be stupid.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Scott said:
			
		

> I thought Bruce told you not to be stupid.



Yah, that is like screaming at the rain to stop being wet.....

dileas

tess


----------



## AirDet

You know, whenever there is a slow news week they go digging for dirt on their favourite kick bag... DND. What really sucks is even if there is only one person doing something wrong we all get painted with the same brush of guilt.

When I first joined 3 decades ago there was some racism. Then again I think the level was pretty much the same as in Canadian society. So my question is, how do we stack-up against Canadian society today?


----------



## Fishbone Jones

All anyone has to do is read the top of the thread to see what everyone thinks of this bogus theme. Normal, educated and tolerant people refused to buy into the idiotic rhetoric supplied by the original poster.

Some people will humilate themselves for the smallest amount of money and publicity.

This is simply another case that proves that hypthesis.


----------



## AirDet

recceguy said:
			
		

> All anyone has to do is read the top of the thread to see what everyone thinks of this bogus theme. Normal, educated and tolerant people refused to buy into the idiotic rhetoric supplied by the original poster.
> 
> Some people will humilate themselves for the smallest amount of money and publicity.
> 
> This is simply another case that proves that hypthesis.



 :goodpost:


----------



## pbi

I'm a middle class old white guy, so maybe I'm automatically disqualified from commenting. But I can only say what I've seen.

When I joined the Reserve in Toronto 1974, racism was alive and well. The very few visible minority types we had in the unit were really expected to just "be cool" and put up with racist jokes, stereotyping, etc. That applied also to "ethnicism" against Caucasian race members such as Italians (not much...) and Portuguese (quite a bit).

By the time I transferred to the Regular Army in 1982, the complexion of my Reserve unit had changed, radically. We had visible minority soldiers at all ranks up to RSM and Major, with more coming in all the time. The last time I visited the unit it was a mirror of the city itself.

In the Regular Army I did see a bit of "legacy" overt racism, but when people made a stupid comment in the presence of a visible minority member, they quickly apologized or othewise acted as though they knew it was wrong. As far as racism in  merit boards or in career decisions, I can safely say that I never saw any evidence of it on any board I ever sat on at sub-unit, unit, brigade, Area or national level. Maybe that doesn't mean it didn't exist covertly, or existed on boards I wasn't on, but I wonder.

One telling thing I did see was in 38 CBG HQ, when we were visited by another one of those diversity/equity/etc travelling roadshows. We had assembled a group of soldiers of various rank levels (and visible minority status) to participate in the session. A young black NCO made a comment that stuck with me. He said words to the effect of  "Why do we need Black Soldier Day, or Aboriginal Soldier Day, or Women Soldier Day? Why not just have Good Soldier Day, and stop calling attention to the differences?"

My feeling is that most visible minority soldiers I have ever served with have felt the same way.

I should also say that I have seen one or two cases where individuals have made formal complaints about race-based discrimination. In those very few cases, I felt that the "race card" was being played as a fear-mongering tactic. Not to belittle cases where such discrimination was real, but only to say I think it was rare.

To me, all this says more about the true nature of the CAF than the original complaint at the head of this thread does. Unless things have changed a whole lot since I got out, what soldiers really care about is whether or not the troop beside them has their **** squared away, not what colour/religion/ethnicity/sex they are.


----------



## George Wallace

pbi said:
			
		

> One telling thing I did see was in 38 CBG HQ, when we were visited by another one of those diversity/equity/etc travelling roadshows. We had assembled a group of soldiers of various rank levels (and visible minority status) to participate in the session. A young black NCO made a comment that stuck with me. He said words to the effect of  "Why do we need Black Soldier Day, or Aboriginal Soldier Day, or Women Soldier Day? Why not just have Good Soldier Day, and stop calling attention to the differences?"



I remember that "Diversity Training".  When our Sqn went through the presentations on "X's and Y's" we all left with the opinion that showing us presentations on how we were all different was counterproductive; where they should have been demonstrating to us why we were all the same instead.  The overall consensus of our group was "We all wear green, who cares about what you are under the uniform."  So we came to much the same conclusions as your group did; we should not to be pointing out our differences, but to reinforce why we are the same.


----------



## blackberet17

AirDet said:
			
		

> [...] Then again I think the level was pretty much the same as in Canadian society. So my question is, how do we stack-up against Canadian society today?



Should we "stack up" against Canadian society? Or should we not be above Canadian society, as it were, and represent a higher moral and ethical standard?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

blackberet17 said:
			
		

> Or should we not be above Canadian society, as it were, and represent a higher moral and ethical standard?



I can't quite put it into words yet but that line of thought is bugging me........


----------



## Edward Campbell

I'm older than most, in my 70s. I will affirm that, for as long as I have lived, Canadians have been racist. I will also affirm that _racism_ is 'normal' throughout North America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia ~ East and South Asia, anyway. We, humans, all seem to fear the _others_, those who don't look and sound like us, or, at the very least, to _prefer_ the familiar, those who do look and sound like us ~ birds of a feather, and all that.

When I first served there were very few ~ some, always, but never many ~ blacks or Asians in the CF. But there were lots of aboriginals. My _sense_ was that some overt racism was always present, even at _high_ levels, especially in speech ~ I'm sure that damned near every aboriginal soldier, back in the 1960s, was used to being called "chief," or something. But, generally, and again in my memory, they were treated with as much respect (or lack of same) as other soldiers. Just like everyone else some aboriginal soldiers were outstanding and some were bums ~ in exactly the same proportions as every one else.

My personal experience, over a long life with a lot of overseas service, including in Africa and Asia, has taught me that people, humans, are all pretty much alike: smart and stupid, honest and venal, skilled and inept, brave and cowardly in exactly the same proportions. What differs, in different cultures, is how we treat one another.

My personal experience, again, is that the CF is slightly more of a _meritocracy_ than are other parts of society. Sure there is some overt racism and there are some evident racists but, broadly and generally, soldiers are respected, or not, and promoted, or not, based on what they know and how they perform their duties, not on the colour of their skin or their religion.

Do some people experience racism? Yes, I'm sure they do. Is it systemic? No. Should we investigate complaints? Yes, absolutely! And we should report our findings, publicly ~ whether they make us look good or not so good.


----------



## a_majoor

blackberet17 said:
			
		

> Should we "stack up" against Canadian society? Or should we not be above Canadian society, as it were, and represent a higher moral and ethical standard?



This was the sort of attitude which powered "militarism" in Germany and indeed much of Europe during the mid to late 1800's until the Great War. Soldiers and soldiering was held to be a higher calling, and military service was thought to be "the school of the nation", which brought skills, discipline and nationalistic fervor to the troops, which then diffused through society as they returned to civilian life.

Considering the state of education at the time, skills and discipline were probably good things to offer, and since many nations were only recently formed (Germany, Italy), generating a common national identity may have been considered very important as well. Of course, as with everything else, these attributes are good in moderation, and bad when taken too far. I wouldn't mind seeing *some* of the attributes of skills, discipline and forging a national identity being stressed more, and considering that the Armed Forces are only a miniscule fraction of the Canadian population, the dangers of militarism taking over Canadian society can be considered minimal.


----------



## blackberet17

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I can't quite put it into words yet but that line of thought is bugging me........



It bugs me too, hence the post.

I am all too well aware we are a reflection of the Canadian population at large (something discussed briefly in the Cpl Bloggins thread), stuffed into a smaller pool. Therefore, our members are a reflection of said Canadian population, warts and all.

Will all of the trg soldiers receive, the awareness classes we must attend, etc etc etc...one would think/hope/pray? we were above stooping so low as to denegrate, belittle, discriminate, harass, victimize, bully, torment, our fellow soldiers.

And yet we are not. Male and female soldiers are sexually assaulted on our bases and our messes. Bullying still occurs. Racial and sexual taunts are still used.

Should we not be better than that?


----------



## pbi

blackberet17 said:
			
		

> Should we "stack up" against Canadian society? Or should we not be above Canadian society, as it were, and represent a higher moral and ethical standard?



Higher, probably. But sure as hell not a lower one.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

blackberet17 said:
			
		

> It bugs me too, hence the post.
> 
> I am all too well aware we are a reflection of the Canadian population at large (something discussed briefly in the Cpl Bloggins thread), stuffed into a smaller pool. Therefore, our members are a reflection of said Canadian population, warts and all.
> 
> Will all of the trg soldiers receive, the awareness classes we must attend, etc etc etc...one would think/hope/pray? we were above stooping so low as to denegrate, belittle, discriminate, harass, victimize, bully, torment, our fellow soldiers.
> 
> And yet we are not. Male and female soldiers are sexually assaulted on our bases and our messes. Bullying still occurs. Racial and sexual taunts are still used.
> 
> Should we not be better than that?



So course's just make everything go away?  Just like making crime illegal has gotten rid of it...............

The only recourse we have as an institution is to punish and expel those who won't meet the level of ethics that we require of them. Anything else is just pathetic window dressing.


----------



## OldSolduer

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> The only recourse we have as an institution is to punish and expel those who won't meet the level of ethics that we require of them. Anything else is just pathetic window dressing.



Well said and I fully agree.


----------



## AirDet

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> So course's just make everything go away?  Just like making crime illegal has gotten rid of it...............
> 
> The only recourse we have as an institution is to punish and expel those who won't meet the level of ethics that we require of them. Anything else is just pathetic window dressing.



Here here! :goodpost:


----------



## blackberet17

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> So course's just make everything go away?  Just like making crime illegal has gotten rid of it...............
> 
> The only recourse we have as an institution is to punish and expel those who won't meet the level of ethics that we require of them. Anything else is just pathetic window dressing.



No, courses will never make it go away. Leopards don't change their spots, and neither do racists, sexual predators, etc.

Punishment and expulsion requires two things: a CoC willing to do so, and victims willing and unafraid to come forward.


----------



## TCBF

If one truly believes that quotas are necessary for nation building, then I would recommend Conscription.

However, let us assume conscription to be a non-starter. 

I recommend that the Governor-General send letters to the community leaders of the three ethnic groups mentioned in the story, encouraging them to pull their weight.

Comments?


----------



## RedcapCrusader

Good start would be quoting and hyperlinking the article so we have a good reference point.


----------



## mariomike

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> Good start would be quoting and hyperlinking the article so we have a good reference point.



This may be it.

"Overall interest in military careers low for Black, Latin-American and Filipino Canadians"
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/12/30/overall-interest-in-military-careers-low-for-black-latin-american-and-filipino-canadians/


----------



## George Wallace

Quotas.  We don't have to go far to see what affects quotas have on organizations.  We see them everywhere.  "Most Qualified" is overturned/overruled by "Visable Minority" in so many instances in our society today that we are often creating more problems than solutions.  We are promoting incompetence over competence with such philosophies.   Monty Python nailed this philosophy that our Government is promoting with Monty Python - Silly Olympics.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Or, we accept the fact that there is little interest in those communities in serving Canada and move on.   If they aren't interested in serving, they aren't.  Let's stop trying to balance things from the PC side and recruit the best people.

I am not a fan of the "X-Canadian" terms.  I don't refer to myself as a Scottish-English Canadian.


----------



## George Wallace

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Or, we accept the fact that there is little interest in those communities in serving Canada and move on.   If they aren't interested in serving, they aren't.  Let's stop trying to balance things from the PC side and recruit the best people.
> 
> I am not a fan of the "X-Canadian" terms.  I don't refer to myself as a Scottish-English Canadian.



For the most part I agree with you.  At the same time, we can look at Primary Reserve units and see that these statistics are skewed.  There are units in Toronto that prove these stats to be totally out to lunch.  The primary reasons for lack of recruitment across Canada from the various "minorities" is their lack of exposure to the CAF.  Where there are no military bases, nor Reserve units, there naturally is little interest or knowledge of the CAF.   Downsizing of the Reserves in the 1970's, with the closure of small town Armouries, and the successive closure of CAF bases across the nation over the last five decades have removed the CAF presence from the majority of communities in the country.  

Other points that factor into the equation would be the economic state of a Region that may encourage or discourage recruitment; as well as the amount of distractions and opportunities offered in major urban centers that direct potential recruits to other employment and activities. 

The "face" of the CAF is no longer all "white".  If the changes that have happened in the last few decades are not fast enough, nor representative of the demographics of the nation; rushing it along with quotas is not the solution.   Time and events will more likely be the main contributors to the CAF more accurately reflective of the nation's demographics.


----------



## TCM621

Many minority communities are openly hostile, distrustful or have very vocal elements of the same. In some cases, it is cultural based on behaviours of "the army back home"  in others it is based on perceived injustice by the government or it representatives. There is literally nothing the Cf can do to fix that besides what we are doing now. Be professional and awesome. We need to show these communities that their opinions of the military do not apply to today's Canadian Forces.


----------



## George Wallace

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Many minority communities are openly hostile, distrustful or have very vocal elements of the same. In some cases, it is cultural based on behaviours of "the army back home"  in others it is based on perceived injustice by the government or it representatives. There is literally nothing the Cf can do to fix that besides what we are doing now. Be professional and awesome. We need to show these communities that their opinions of the military do not apply to today's Canadian Forces.



So very true.  Lack of exposure, as I mentioned, is not going to solve this.  Where a Reserve and/or Reg Force presence is found, you find more acceptance amongst the public.  Isolation from such exposure tends to allow such beliefs that our military is the same as that of their former country, just by association as being a military, only allows those beliefs to fester.


----------



## CougarKing

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Or, we accept the fact that there is little interest in those communities in serving Canada and move on.   If they aren't interested in serving, they aren't.  Let's stop trying to balance things from the PC side and recruit the best people.
> 
> I am not a fan of the "X-Canadian" terms.  I don't refer to myself as a Scottish-English Canadian.



I just had to chip in and add that this National Post article strongly misrepresents the Filipino diaspora. Wherever Filipinos have immigrated, whether it is Canada, the US, Australia, or any developed country, there is a propensity to serve in the military of the adoptive country. 

In contrast, while the article cites these three ethnic groups as being under-represented in the CAF, they are very visible in the US military. 

In the case of Filipino-Americans, many of that diaspora group were actually the offspring of the thousands of Filipino recruits into the US Navy before Subic Naval base in the Philippines closed. Many thousands of their children have continued the tradition, to the point that one Filipino-American even became the commanding officer of the carrier USS _Abraham Lincoln_. Others have reached flag and general rank in the US military, such as General Antonio Taguba.

Even in Israel, which has its own Filipino diaspora, there are Filipino members of the IDF. This includes Sgt. Urilinda.

Going back to the Canadian context...apparently those who wrote this article had never heard of Riza Santos, the Filipino-Canadian beauty queen who not only won contests such as the Miss Universe Canada 2013 pageant, but was formerly in the Canadian Forces. Here are some pictures of her.












Those who wrote this article probably didn't bother to look at the reserve units in Winnipeg, Calgary or Vancouver, each of which have their own sizable Filipino diasporas. Riza Santos was an Army reservist from Calgary.

Eye in the Sky,

Also, to add to what you said about "hyphenated" Canadians, I agree with you. I don't identify myself as Filipino-Canadian, or Filipino-Chinese-Canadian, but just Canadian. However, in any western society, members of a minority group will often stick to labels more for the sake of just differentiating themselves from other minority groups, or *to differentiate themselves from more recent arrivals of the same ethnic group who are not yet citizens. Citizenship, to those not born here, is seen as a badge of "having made it"...thus the need to add "-Canadian" to their ethnic group identifier*.  

Of course,* the issue of hyphenated-(place adoptive country name identifier here) may be seen as one of divided loyalties. I say it depends on the individual and while some immigrants do have divided loyalties (for example, Tamil-Canadians who covertly sent funds to the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka before), many others still identify themselves as Canadian first.  *


----------



## The Bread Guy

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> Those who wrote this article probably didn't bother to look at the reserve units in Winnipeg, Calgary or Vancouver, each of which have their own sizable Filipino diasporas.


That's what happens when broad-stroke assumptions are made based on nationally-aggregated stats instead of detailed study - and that's not just a _reporter_ issue, either.

Thanks for the REST of the story on the Filipino diaspora.


----------



## TCBF

S.M.A., 

You provide more useful information than the original article does, that is for sure. In my years of service, I met Canadians from a lot of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. I also came to believe that the urban Reserve units were best positioned to draw a good cross-section of their local communities.

When I was teaching at CFLRS in the late 1990s, at one point we had a series of good professional development briefings related to the shrinking pool of potential recruits and the necessary approaches needed to draw from what one might call 'non-traditional' sources. During a briefing by a recruiting officer, I suggested that we take successful examples from our operational units and send them back to their cultural communities to drum up some interest. She basically f_cked me off, going on a song and dance routine about limited funding and units not wanting to loan their troops out to a recruiting drive. Her CYA lost her what was initially a sympathetic audience. 

I think our entire recruiting and selection bureaucracy is even more of a self-licking ice cream cone than VAC was. I see hope for VAC. Our recruiting and selection system is centrally staffed by those whom the DND is too lazy to fire.


----------



## TCM621

TCBF said:
			
		

> S.M.A.,
> 
> You provide more useful information than the original article does, that is for sure. In my years of service, I met Canadians from a lot of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. I also came to believe that the urban Reserve units were best positioned to draw a good cross-section of their local communities.
> 
> When I was teaching at CFLRS in the late 1990s, at one point we had a series of good professional development briefings related to the shrinking pool of potential recruits and the necessary approaches needed to draw from what one might call 'non-traditional' sources. During a briefing by a recruiting officer, I suggested that we take successful examples from our operational units and send them back to their cultural communities to drum up some interest. She basically f_cked me off, going on a song and dance routine about limited funding and units not wanting to loan their troops out to a recruiting drive. Her CYA lost her what was initially a sympathetic audience.
> 
> I think our entire recruiting and selection bureaucracy is even more of a self-licking ice cream cone than VAC was. I see hope for VAC. Our recruiting and selection system is centrally staffed by those whom the DND is too lazy to fire.


That is great idea. As I said earlier a lot of communities are openly hostile or have vocal hostile elements. I knew a bunch of guys who used to instruct for the Raven program, one of the CF's programs to recruit more First Nations. The program requires the participation of Elders. Some of the Elders would actively work against the goal of recruiting these kids. They knew it was going to happen but they were the people who volunteer. What they need is people from that community who are enjoying a life in the CF to counter negative opinions from that community.  
If you want Natives, or Filipinos or Laotians , show them people like them who love the CF.


----------



## ModlrMike

Clearly they didn't bother to interview anyone at my unit. One of the most ethnically diverse units I've ever belonged to.


----------



## mariomike

An article about diversity in recruitment from 2008 that I found of interest.

"This does not mean that a draw towards military service is totally discarded. On the contrary, surveys have shown interest, but this interest is often higher in the reserves, where the primacy of family, higher education, and professional (respectable) careers can still be pursued within the civilian sector.":
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no3/jung-eng.asp

Can the Canadian Forces Reflect Canadian Society?

by Captain (N) Hans Jung


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Maybe this whole "should reflect Canadian society" idea is for the birds.

People who are interested in joining, try to join.  Simple.

Stop trying to make everything so fucking politically correct.  It should be about one thing and one thing only, recruiting the BEST people of those who apply.

We have rusty LSVWs, 30 years old MPAs, ships that need replacing and never enough people to crew all of those.  Seems to me this whole topic should be on the back burner to FAR more important things.

I am tired of these PC attempts to 'make everything percentage perfect'.  Who gives a fuck as long as we get the best people we can get.


----------



## PotentialOfficerCadet

Hi Everyone,

Long time reader, first time poster.

I am very interested in joining the reserves as an Infantry Officer.

I have been thinking about it for a long time, I have read through the CF website and this forum but as you may have guessed from the title of the thread, I am a proud canadian citizen who is a member of a visible minority.

I am a little bit concerned about how I will be treated by my peers and superiors.

Can you please put my mind at ease by sharing your experiences?

Thank you.


----------



## Tibbson

If you are a decent person you'll be treated as such.  If you are an idiot...the same rationale applies.  Race is irrelevant.


----------



## dimsum

To add to what Schindler's Lift said, don't go in expecting to be treated any differently (including positive discrimination) since you're part of a visible minority.  

That being said, what specifically are your concerns?


----------



## McG

I can't help wonder if the response of only 16 of 230 canvased individuals is not a sign that things are not as bad as the report suggests.  I don't doubt racism occurs and I agree all incidents are unacceptable, but I don't see the evidence supporting the conclusion that it is systemic.  I guess the next big investigation will be to confirm or refute this anecdote based report.


> *Indigenous military members endure 'systemic' racism, report claims*
> Draft report obtained by CBC News calls for investigation into allegations by Indigenous members
> By Ashley Burke, CBC News
> 13 Dec 2016
> 
> Indigenous members of the Canadian military face "systemic racism," according to a draft report obtained by CBC News that calls for an external review.
> 
> "We strongly believe there is a systemic issue within the Department of National Defence (DND) and Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) that is rampant throughout all ranks and elements of Land, Air Force and Navy and this issue is serious enough that an external review is imminent," reads the document prepared by the Defence Aboriginal Advisory Group and handed to the former commander of the Canadian Army, Lt.-Gen. Marquis Hainse, in the spring.
> 
> Of the 230 Indigenous military members canvassed by the advisory group, only 16 responded, reporting 40 incidents.
> 
> Despite the low response rate, the group said the problem is widespread and many incidents go unreported over fear of reprisal.
> 
> The advisory group is calling for an independent investigation similar to the one retired Supreme Court justice Marie Deschamps conducted on allegations of sexual misconduct in the military.
> 
> Deschamps released a scathing report in April 2015 that found sexual misconduct to be "endemic" across the Forces. The military has since launched Operation Honour to eliminate inappropriate behaviour in the military.
> 
> "There have been examples of abuse of authority," according to the Aboriginal advisory group's latest report.
> 
> "This is not the military our Aboriginal members signed up for and this is not the military they dedicated their lives to. Victims are being forced out of the military, yet the aggressors continue on — some excelling at their careers."
> 
> Hainse was briefed on the draft report, and on May 10 members of the advisory group met with the former commander to talk about issues raised in the document, the Canadian Armed Forces confirmed.
> 
> "The CAF does not tolerate discrimination and any instance of discrimination is one too many," wrote a Forces spokesperson in a statement to CBC News.
> 
> "Any case of [discrimination] is extremely serious," said military ombudsman Gary Walbourne.
> 
> "If this is actually as rampant as that report would lead you to believe, it needs to be stomped out of the organization."
> 
> Walbourne said his office stands ready to help Indigenous military members and could launch its own investigation if any of them file an official complaint.
> 
> News of the draft report comes at a time when the military is actively trying to recruit and retain Indigenous members. These allegations of racism won't help, Walbourne noted.
> 
> The draft report includes anecdotes and allegations branded "rather disturbing and undoubtedly inexcusable" by its author.
> 
> In one case, a man alleged he missed his son's birth when the military denied his request to attend a sacred naming ceremony.
> 
> "I was told by the course director that my religion is not recognized by the military," he wrote. "I was furious. I missed the birth of my only son."
> 
> Others reported encountering the worst racism they'd ever faced, and described being regularly singled out, harassed and called derogatory names.
> 
> "I was on a military … course and I had several guys call me a dirty wagon burner and a squaw, another called me Tonto. I told staff and nothing was done," one Indigenous member told the advisory group.
> 
> A former Inuk soldier told CBC News about the racial abuse she endured before leaving the military in 2015. Esther Wolki said she was treated like "trash" by her superiors during her career at CFB Shilo in Manitoba.
> 
> "Words like redskin, or brownie or savage," said Wolki by phone from Paulatuk, N.W.T. "I was mostly stunned because it was higher-ups that were saying stuff like that."
> 
> When Wolki reported the harassment she was told to toughen up. The military did investigate her allegations of racism, harassment and a sexual assault, but she said nothing was ever done about it.
> 
> "It did almost cause a successful suicide," said Wolki. "It felt really bad. I felt because it's been said to me so many times, I actually believed it, that I'm a worthless, horrible person and that I don't deserve to be in the military."
> 
> Since leaving the military her life has "gone downhill," Wolki said.
> 
> "I don't see a reason to get out of bed. It's been really bad," said Wolki, who claimed she's not getting the help she needs for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder from Veterans Affairs.
> 
> The military ombudsman said he has investigated three cases of discrimination against Indigenous members over the last year. In two of the cases, the military acted swiftly and corrected the problem, he said. The third investigation is continuing.
> 
> "I get angry, that I have a member of the Canadian Armed Forces who has signed a contract to lay his life on the line on our behalf and to experience this type of behaviour," Walbourne said.
> 
> He said he hopes members of the Aboriginal advisory group or the Indigenous community will come forward to his office with these new findings and evidence to support it.
> 
> CBC requested an interview with the Canadian Armed Forces, but no one was made available to discuss the draft report.
> 
> The advisory group's civilian co-chair who authored the report said she's unable to speak to the media.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/canada-military-indigenous-racism-report-1.3891862


----------



## beachdown

...well then, how does one going about establishing that "systematic racism" might actually be a thing within the CAF? I mean just because a survey  conducted only shows a small number doesn't mean it's not there, and lets not forget that not everyone will be willing to tell their story for the fear of repercussion.

As the saying goes...racism is OVERT in the US, but COVERT in Canada. Just like the other thread about sexual assault, unless someone actually walks in the shoes of the person(s) enduring that sexual assault / racist treatment, then you aren't actually in a position to speak to it.

On one hand we are saying "no doubt racism occurs", then the next we are asking for "evidence". Sounds like the old classic line that some people use....."I'm not a racist, but......"


----------



## PuckChaser

Its very easy, you use the Madam Deschamps model: Interview only your target demographic, ignore anyone who doesn't confirm your already defined conclusion, tar entire CAF with "systematic" problem in media because the people you are accusing can't defend themselves in the media.


----------



## McG

beachdown said:
			
		

> ...well then, how does one going about establishing that "systematic racism" might actually be a thing within the CAF?


Get results from a statistically significant, random sample of the population whose experience you want to understand. 



			
				beachdown said:
			
		

> On one hand we are saying "no doubt racism occurs", then the next we are asking for "evidence".


Yes because "occurs" does not equal "systemic" and the report concluded "systemic" despite 214 queried individuals who did not feel they saw/experienced anything worth responding about.

... but clearly you believe there is a systemic problem.  Do you have arguments or observations to support that theory?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

And to add to MCG, you also make sure, if you are going to rely on individual's "anecdotes" that you investigate fully the circumstances of those "anecdotal events" from all sides so you can confirm it corresponds to the "feeling" of the aggrieved party.

Just to give you an example: One individual claiming racism because he did not get to attend the "sacred naming ceremony" of his child, without proper complete picture, does not constitute an example of racism. I have friends in the Navy, white Anglo-saxon Protestants: they each missed the births and baptisms of their three, and in one case four, children because they were at sea. It's called operational imperatives (or as they put it in Master and Commander: "requirements of the service permitting ...").

So all we are saying here is before jumping to conclusions of "systemic" problems without a statistically significant sample and without, for  the anecdotes, knowing all the facts from all sides, do your home work.

BTW, it is interesting to see that the report from the committee is presented to Land Force Commander but pretends to cover the Air Force and Navy as well. We don't even know if any of the 16 people who agreed to participate include anyone from those two elements, or even if the some 230 people contacted to start with included any one from those two elements. I would normally conclude that a committee reporting to the commander of the Army would have investigated something in the Army only.


----------



## Jed

Why don't we fire up the Spanish Inquisition mindset?  Let's all whip ourselves senseless so we can send the proper virtue signalling to the powers that be.

Gawd, if society, and in particular, the military community continues to run down these politically correct rabbit holes we will be lucky to have a functioning military organization let alone a world class organization.


----------



## mariomike

Indigenous military members endure 'systemic' racism

See also,

Institutional Racism In The Canadian Armed Forces?!  
http://army.ca/forums/threads/315.0
13 pages.


----------



## PuckChaser

I'll add that there's definitely systematic racism in the CAF. Its so systematic, that 2 Bde sat in a drum circle on parade and was presented with a real old tomahawk from some First Nations elders to take with them on their next deployment.

An entire Bde of racists!


----------



## The Bread Guy

A new Class Action ...


> Systemic racial discrimination and harassment are the basis of a class action filed in the Federal Court by Stewart McKelvey on behalf of three former members of the Canadian Forces. The Plaintiffs, who propose to represent all persons in Canada who have been enrolled as members in the Canadian Forces and who are or who identify as racial minorities, visible minorities or Aboriginal peoples, allege that the Canadian Forces, from top to bottom, has failed to protect racial minorities and Aboriginals from racism within the ranks.
> 
> "When individuals enroll in the Canadian Forces, they expect to serve, advance and protect the ideals we value and enjoy as Canadians – equality, fundamental justice and human dignity," said Scott Campbell, co-counsel representing the Plaintiffs. "But our clients allege that the very institution we trust to bring these ideals to the world, has denied them, and those they represent, these basic human rights."
> 
> The Statement of Claim outlines the racial harassment and discrimination the Plaintiffs endured while serving as members in the Canadian Forces across Canada and on international soil.  The Statement of Claim also details the resulting injuries, losses and emotional trauma they still endure.
> 
> "This filing is a defining moment for Canadian Forces members who have experienced racial harassment and racial discrimination," said Chris Madill, co-counsel representing the Plaintiffs. "We intend to shine a bright light on the alleged behaviours and institutional practices described in the Statement of Claim."
> 
> The Statement of Claim alleges that the Canadian Forces is liable for this systemic racial discrimination and harassment, in part because such conduct breaches the equality rights guaranteed by section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
> 
> The Plaintiffs and their counsel will seek to have the action certified by the Federal Court as a class action and expect others who have experienced racial discrimination and harassment in the Canadian Forces will join the class action.


Statement of Claim (31 pg PDF) here - the allegations haven't been proven in court yet.


----------



## daftandbarmy

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I'll add that there's definitely systematic racism in the CAF. Its so systematic, that 2 Bde sat in a drum circle on parade and was presented with a real old tomahawk from some First Nations elders to take with them on their next deployment.
> 
> An entire Bde of racists!



Oh come on now, we know that you were just patronizing that poor old First Nations gentleman for your own selfish, white guy purposes, right?  :sarcasm:


----------



## RedcapCrusader

MCG said:
			
		

> I can't help wonder if the response of only 16 of 230 canvased individuals is not a sign that things are not as bad as the report suggests.  I don't doubt racism occurs and I agree all incidents are unacceptable, but I don't see the evidence supporting the conclusion that it is systemic.  I guess the next big investigation will be to confirm or refute this anecdote based report.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/canada-military-indigenous-racism-report-1.3891862



There's approximately 2300 Aboriginal members in the CAF, 230 were canvassed (10%), yet only 16 responded.

While the other 214 either chose not to respond, or did not have the opportunity to respond; it begs the question why wasn't a larger sample size selected?

Could it be that the other 214 saw the survey and said "this is silly"? Or were they afraid to respond because they have been victims of racism and discrimination?

Either way, it's an awfully small respondent group to call anything systematic.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

So, a survey followed by a lawsuit. So surprising.


----------



## beachdown

In the link below...1 mbr is aboriginal and the other 2 are Black. Just because a survey was carried out and some people responded, it doesn't mean there isn't systematic racism in the CAF. It's always going to be able to prove when the racism is subliminal i.e. a Caucasian supervisor dealing with a number of minorities.

If this supervisor say grew up in a small town with no exposure to minorities, or was done wrong in the past by a certain minority group, you can't tell me that their judgement dealing with minorities won't be effected by their experience. People are afraid of the unknown/what they don't know....this is a fact!

Yes, we've heard people claim to "just see people as they are and not the colour", but this is just smoke screen.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-former-military-members-launch-suit-alleging-systemic-racism-in-forces-1.3215528


----------



## beachdown

If am hearing you right....stories like this should not be brought to light, but instead be covered up because it doesn't happen here in Canada, and it's only a US, European issue? As much as we will all like to bury our heads in the sand and this we all get along, unfortunately there is a lot of xenophobia and racism here in Canada and most of the time it's carried out by products (kids) of immigrants from way back.

People forget that their parents/grandparents emigrated here from somewhere in the first place.



			
				Thucydides said:
			
		

> I wonder if anyone is investigating the media for "Systemic" stupidity for flogging these stories?


----------



## beachdown

After years of status quo....Toronto joined the ranks of other cities that have a minority as their chief. Vancouver had a Chinese guy as the chief for a while and am sure other cities do as well. 

OP...a minority CDS at time soon? Probably won't happen in our lifetime. As you alluded to, nobody is dumb enough these days to go up to someone and show their racist inclination, but the system can be used to hold back minorities from getting ahead in the CAF. I mean what is the number of visible minorities past the rank of MWO or LCol in all the CAF elements?




			
				recceguy said:
			
		

> I don‘t go around with my eyes closed, but personally I have‘nt seen it in a long, long time. If you have proof it‘s happening, act like a soldier, step to the line and report it, don‘t complain about it. If your going to try stir that pot here, you‘ll need a bigger stick!


----------



## dimsum

beachdown said:
			
		

> OP...a minority CDS at time soon? Probably won't happen in our lifetime. As you alluded to, nobody is dumb enough these days to go up to someone and show their racist inclination, but the system can be used to hold back minorities from getting ahead in the CAF. I mean what is the number of visible minorities past the rank of MWO or LCol in all the CAF elements?



I'm a visible minority (hence the username - it's a clue to what ethnicity I am) and I don't go around thinking there are glass/bamboo ceilings for us in the military.  Sure, there may not be many CWOs or Flag Officers of visible minority, but perhaps that's because there are fewer visible minorities, and therefore fewer to promote/choose from for senior ranks?  Are you suggesting that we start promoting some to GOFO or CWO level purely on colour - obviously a rhetorical question.

And there has at least been one GOFO - Commodore (ret'd) Hans Jung, former Surgeon General.


----------



## George Wallace

beachdown said:
			
		

> If am hearing you right....stories like this should not be brought to light, but instead be covered up because it doesn't happen here in Canada, and it's only a US, European issue? As much as we will all like to bury our heads in the sand and this we all get along, unfortunately there is a lot of xenophobia and racism here in Canada and most of the time it's carried out by products (kids) of immigrants from way back.
> 
> People forget that their parents/grandparents emigrated here from somewhere in the first place.



What exactly is your agenda?  

Are you a minority who happens to think that ALL WHITES are racists?  If so, that makes you an even bigger RACIST.  Whites do not have a monopoly on racism.  Many minorities are far more racist.

Are you an "Apologist" who thinks that we have to apologize for all the transgressions made by our forefathers five centuries ago?

What exactly is your agenda?


----------



## beachdown

....Would you say the same to Jews that went through the holocaust? There is no agenda, I'm just looking at the discussion from transparent angle as oppose to a covert angle. Nobody said "all Whites are racist", this is something you are purporting on here 



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> What exactly is your agenda?
> 
> Are you a minority who happens to think that ALL WHITES are racists?  If so, that makes you an even bigger RACIST.  Whites do not have a monopoly on racism.  Many minorities are far more racist.
> 
> Are you an "Apologist" who thinks that* we have to apologize for all the transgressions made by our forefathers five centuries ago?*
> 
> What exactly is your agenda?


----------



## Pusser

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Sure, there may not be many CWOs or Flag Officers of visible minority, but perhaps that's because there are fewer visible minorities, and therefore fewer to promote/choose from for senior ranks?



In other words, they're in the minority?   ;D


----------



## Journeyman

beachdown said:
			
		

> In the link below...1 mbr is aboriginal and the other 2 are Black. Just because a survey was carried out and some people responded, it doesn't mean there isn't systematic racism in the CAF. It's always going to be able to prove when the racism is subliminal i.e. a Caucasian supervisor dealing with a number of minorities.


Correct, and it _just as equally_  doesn't mean there is.  That's the point of those who've bothered trying to respond to you, despite you being 'stuck on send'; probably Caucasian supervisors taking a break from burning crosses on their lawns and pining away for their minority-free small towns.   :



			
				beachdown said:
			
		

> There is no agenda, I'm just looking at the discussion from transparent angle as oppose to a covert angle.


 :stars:   WTF does that even mean?



			
				beachdown said:
			
		

> Nobody said "all Whites are racist", this is something you are purporting on here


...well except for those Caucasian supervisors, with minority troops.


----------



## mariomike

beachdown said:
			
		

> Toronto joined the ranks of other cities that have a minority as their chief. Vancouver had a Chinese guy as the chief for a while and am sure other cities do as well.



Are you comparing Canadian police diversity stats to CAF?

Jul 14, 2016 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/police-diversity-canada-1.3677952


----------



## Jarnhamar

beachdown said:
			
		

> ....Would you say the same to Jews that went through the holocaust?


Are you suggesting whatever situation you went through is on par with Jews surviving the holocaust?


> There is no agenda


There clearly is even if it's not malicious.


> Nobody said "all Whites are racist", this is something you are purporting on here


You've obviously never read any of the narrative from Black Lives Matter or left-wing politics.

[quote author=Journeyman]
 :stars:   WTF does that even mean?

[/quote]

Stacking up on the corner of a glass building?


----------



## dimsum

beachdown said:
			
		

> There is no agenda, I'm just looking at the discussion from transparent angle as oppose to a covert angle. Nobody said "all Whites are racist", this is something you are purporting on here



From your rant about visible minorities not being able to progress (and the "how many past MWO/LCol are of visible minority") post, I'd say there's a pretty clear agenda.


----------



## Blackadder1916

beachdown said:
			
		

> OP...a minority CDS at time soon? Probably won't happen in our lifetime. . . . . .



Well, since it's been (just about) 15 years since the OP made the comment to which you are now replying and that poster has been gone so long from these means that his info has now been erased from view, perhaps his "lifetime" has now passed.  Is there some specific reason you reached back that far to add comment?

Just to be facetious, didn't we already have a "minority" CDS - Gen Hillier.  As much as we of the Newf persuasion are hailed as good fellows and having the reputation of making good soldiers, there was (and perhaps still is) a lingering impression that we weren't as smart or as well suited for high rank as those Anglophones from regions with less identifiable accents.


----------



## dimsum

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Well, since it's been (just about) 15 years since the OP made the comment to which you are now replying and that poster has been gone so long from these means that his info has now been erased from view, perhaps his "lifetime" has now passed.  Is there some specific reason you reached back that far to add comment?



Yeah - it's called "reaching".


----------



## Jarnhamar

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Well, since it's been (just about) 15 years since the OP made the comment to which you are now replying


 :facepalm:


----------



## daftandbarmy

I'm pretty sure our current Defence Minister is a good example of how biased the CF and Canadian culture is against visible minorities i.e., solidly equal opportunity biased.


----------



## George Wallace

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Just to be facetious, didn't we already have a "minority" CDS - Gen Hillier.  As much as we of the Newf persuasion are hailed as good fellows and having the reputation of making good soldiers, there was (and perhaps still is) a lingering impression that we weren't as smart or as well suited for high rank as those Anglophones from regions with less identifiable accents.



Just as facetious, the CDS after him was a Ukrainian.   :warstory:


----------



## ModlrMike

> Quote from: recceguy on January 19, 2002, 12:00:00



That's got to be the winningest necropost ever.


----------



## brihard

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure our current Defence Minister is a good example of how biased the CF and Canadian culture is against visible minorities i.e., solidly equal opportunity biased.



Reasonably sure being Sikh is a leg up in Vancouver.  ;D But that said, and levity aside- you know better than to put up a straw man like that. There will be anecdotes in either direction. Some of x historically disadvantaged group in the CAF will do quite well, some will do quite poorly. x group might be GLBT, might be people of colour, might be women, whatever.

The CAF reflects society. Society in the past has been systemically racist, and in some ways may well still be. Ipso facto, the CAF has had some issues with same, though in some ways we have sought to be leaders in advancing past that. In nay case, even if we pretended that at this moment there is no longer any racism in the CAF, and if we accept that at some point in the indeterminate past the CAF likely reflected the racism that was systemic in society, then it must follow that there has been an evolution from outright racism towards equality that nonetheless, through improvement not being total and complete, has left some members of those groups subject to some rather terrible treatment. We have already seen a number of accounts come out where members were subjected to racial abuse and where chains of command did not act when their attention was brought to it, despite there being clear service offences committed. I believe in large part that these things happened. This lawsuit would appear to reflect a lot of grievances that are somewhat historical in nature, going back many years, before the possible generational shift that we are in the later stages of at this time and which *I think* is bringing improvements.

I can absolutely guarantee that anyone who says 'this didn't happen' and tries to portray these troops as whiners will end up on the wrong side of history on this one. Our institution moves forward through the painful and public airing of stale, dirty laundry, and we're in a glut of that right now. I would humbly suggest that this may be one of those cases where those of us who have not experienced this discrimination should probably just STFU and listen to those who have. Let the courts be the triers of fact as they're supposed to be, and make sure that we as professionals carry on and continue to be the positive change we want to see within our institution.


----------



## Blackadder1916

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just as facetious, the CDS after him was a Ukrainian.   :warstory:



Oh, I thought he was of Polish heritage . . . I seem to recall that the Poles made a bit of a fuss over him (_as one of their own done good_) when he made an official visit there a few years back and they later presented him with one of their orders.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

I think Brihard has a good post. With that said, the issue at hand is: is the CF systemically racist (ie by official or unofficial policy) or does it just contain normal people who fall somewhere on the racism spectrum ( in other words, I will posit that all humans are racist, but is it to degree that really matters in day-to-day social and work interactions?).

I have personally seen no evidence of official policy in my 30 years in the CF that would support the theory that the CF is systemically racist. In actual fact, the organization seems to bend over backwards to accommodate those of different cultures. Merit boards which determine promotions have no method of determining the racial background of the files in front of them- there are no pictures of the candidates.

Now, have I met people within the CF who have displayed unacceptably racist conduct? Yes I have. Sometimes, it has been racism of the thoughtless jokey kind that is nonetheless hurtful and unacceptable. On rare occasion, it has been something worse.

While it is easy to state that there is a zero tolerance for racism, achieving that aim is difficult because we are recruiting indivuals from a broad strata of Canadian society and they bring theirs views, opinions and prejudices into the organization. In a perfect world, we can change those views. In the real world, the most we can hope for is that they not display or act upon inappropriate thoughts and opinions and that they suffer consequences if they do.


----------



## Journeyman

Brihard said:
			
		

> I would humbly suggest that this may be one of those cases where those of us who have not experienced this discrimination should probably just STFU and listen to those who have.



So even though you acknowledge that the lawsuit appears to reflect a lot of past-tense grievances, and that we are likely improving, we should simply cede the argument and allow everyone to be tarred with the same brush?  I disagree  (equally humbly  ).

Beachdown has effectively stated that Caucasian supervisors dealing with minorities, or who grew up in a small town, are racist -- subliminally or otherwise; including "it's a fact!" (with exclamation mark, which apparently makes it true).  That very statement is both racist and stupid intellectually unsupported.  If anyone posted a racist comment like "_identifiable group x_  are lazy thieving drunks... (even with 'it's a fact!',)" they would be well on their way to being banned.

Now, I've never been a proponent of group punishments for shit I never did.  And basing this "fact" on a survey that's even more statistically lame than the Deschamps report is probably what we should expect when no one calls BS.

While I personally have no issues with women, 'people of colour,' GLBT troops in the military, I _do_  have serious heartache with stupidity.  While I concur that there are legitimate grievances out there, this thread is not remotely supportive of the way ahead.


Edit:  What SKT wrote, only more rabid and  :brickwall:  on my part.


----------



## mariomike

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> In a perfect world, we can change those views.



Something I remember from over 44 years ago.

That we were recruited from a society with many prejudices.

"I cannot change your beliefs, but if you treat anyone with disrespect, I can change your employment!”

End of lesson. Took about 60 seconds.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Mario, I freely admit I stole that from you. It is a good method of dealing with workplace misbehaviour.


----------



## RedcapCrusader

beachdown said:
			
		

> After years of status quo....Toronto joined the ranks of other cities that have a minority as their chief. Vancouver had a Chinese guy as the chief for a while and am sure other cities do as well.
> 
> OP...a minority CDS at time soon? Probably won't happen in our lifetime. As you alluded to, nobody is dumb enough these days to go up to someone and show their racist inclination, but the system can be used to hold back minorities from getting ahead in the CAF. I mean what is the number of visible minorities past the rank of MWO or LCol in all the CAF elements?



Why does it matter how many women or minorities have become RSMs or Generals? Wouldn't you rather the most qualified personnel be selected to fill the job, rather than just promote people to fill a "visible diversity quota"?


----------



## PuckChaser

LunchMeat said:
			
		

> Why does it matter how many women or minorities have become RSMs or Generals?



Because its current year.


----------



## mariomike

LunchMeat said:
			
		

> Why does it matter how many women or minorities have become RSMs or Generals?



Not for me to say "why".
But, for anyone interested, the statistics begin on page 22,

CANADIAN FORCES EMPLOYMENT EQUITY 
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2014/mdn-dnd/D3-31-2012-eng.pdf

Men 
Women
Aboriginal People 
Visible Minorities 
Persons with Disabilities

MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS
REPRESENTATION PER MILITARY RANK - OFFICERS and NON-COMMISSIONED MEMBERS


----------



## blacktriangle

BS. At least two commanders I've had were female or a visible minority. Both at the GOFO level now. I don't think they would have wanted it handed to them, either.


----------



## mariomike

These stats are 2011– 2012.

I believe they are the most recent statistics available.

To view the stats, click, "Continue to pdf."
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2014/mdn-dnd/D3-31-2012-eng.pdf



			
				Spectrum said:
			
		

> BS.



I don't know why they keep stats. 
But, they are obviously going to a lot of time and trouble to do so.  That's some very detailed record keeping. Must be important to someone(s).  

More on the recent case,
http://www.680news.com/2016/12/23/three-former-military-members-launch-suit-alleging-systemic-racism-forces-2/


----------



## Eye In The Sky

beachdown said:
			
		

> If this supervisor say grew up in a small town with no exposure to minorities, or was done wrong in the past by a certain minority group, you can't tell me that their judgement dealing with minorities won't be effected by their experience. People are afraid of the unknown/what they don't know....this is a fact!



And I say BULLSHIT.  I am a white guy from a relatively small town, and I've had subordinates that are from minority groups and I treat them the same as anyone else...how they perform and get along with other people.  If they are awesome, they are awesome.  If they are hammerheads, they are hammerheads.

I didn't need any special training and surveys, I had a really simple thing back in the day called 'The 10 Principles of Leadership' to guide me on how I conducted myself as a Jnr/Snr NCO (the 3 Ms...Mission, Men, Myself).  My recruit serial in Cornwallis 27 years ago had people from all across the country and different backgrounds, some of them Native/Aboriginal, and guess how they were treated?  Depended on how they performed and got along with people.  Wow.  With no special training either!!

This "from top to bottom, systemic" line is utter BULLSHIT.  Are there people in uniform that don't act IAW our Military Ethics/Ethos?  There are, there is no doubt.  But what people like me, Average Joe White Guy in Uniform, are tired of is being told we are all rapists, racist hunks of trash who can't use common sense and have had parents and communities who didn't bring us up as decent Canadians.

Make the message accurate and I'll stand behind it; _*there is a problem with SOME people in uniform who have actions and attitudes that do not follow the ones demanded by the CAF*_.  I've got 27 years in, serving in Army, Air and Navy units, both Reg and Reserve, and this 'systemic top to bottom' message is false.  Have I witnessed racist comments, harassment, etc?  Yup...but I can count those on 1 hand over 27 years in the mob.  

The worst one I witnessed personally was a superior (NCM) who referred to a group of about 5 of us (Snr NCOs on a course) as 'you $#(&* white guys', the year was 2003.  He was an Aborginal / Native Canadian.  Should that = 'all Aboriginal/Native service members are racist toward @&(*@#@ white guys?  It didn't, and doesn't to me to this day.  That wouldn't be fair to the _rest_ of the Aboriginal/Native service members, would it?  

Should there now be a survey and public outcry because I would answer the survey truthfully and state I was on the receiving end of a racist comment by a Native Canadian superior at least once, and suggest it "is top to bottom, and every Aboriginal / Native service member is part of it"?  

Full stop;  it is not top to bottom, systemic and 'everyone'.  I am tired the wide brush crap, pointed at ANY group in the CAF.


----------



## mariomike

Harjit Sajjan says he ‘faced a lot of racism’ while in Canadian military
http://globalnews.ca/news/3129853/canadian-military-racism-harjit-sajjan-isis-mosul/
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, the first Sikh-Canadian to command a Canadian army regiment, said he never experienced racism before joining the military.

“I finally found out what racism was when I joined the military,” Sajjan told Global News in a one-on-one interview.


----------



## Jed

mariomike said:
			
		

> Harjit Sajjan says he ‘faced a lot of racism’ while in Canadian military
> http://globalnews.ca/news/3129853/canadian-military-racism-harjit-sajjan-isis-mosul/
> Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, the first Sikh-Canadian to command a Canadian army regiment, said he never experienced racism before joining the military.
> 
> “I finally found out what racism was when I joined the military,” Sajjan told Global News in a one-on-one interview.



Wow!  That is telling. I find this very, very hard to believe that he did not experience racism prior to going in the military and subsequently the military life exposed him to said racism. 

I suspect he has succumbed to social and political pressure to tow the perceived party line at the expense of the troops.

It it certainly alters my very positive impression I had of him when he first took on the job. Kind of like when Pres. Obama came in and eight years later you can't wait for him to just go away. Absolutely nothing to do with racism.

Needless to say this is just my personal opinion and I would never express it if I was still in a uniform in service to the Country.


----------



## mariomike

Jed said:
			
		

> Kind of like when Pres. Obama came in and eight years later you can't wait for him to just go away.



Then, it's a good thing he can't be re-elected to a third term! He won his second term by a popular vote margin of 5 million votes and 332 electoral votes.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Jed said:
			
		

> Wow!  That is telling. I find this very, very hard to believe that he did not experience racism prior to going in the military and subsequently the military life exposed him to said racism.



I don't know, think about it.  Maybe when he joined the Reserves, it was one of the times he was out of his 'cultural community' for any length of time, and mixed in with others who are Canadian but identify as "XYZ-Canadian", and those cultural backgrounds don't care for each other.  

Disclaimer - I have no idea of the MNDs personal history at all, but just trying to demonstrate a scenario this is plausible.  I think it is certainly possible, maybe more so in the Reserve than Regular world.


----------



## RedcapCrusader

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I don't know, think about it.  Maybe when he joined the Reserves, it was one of the times he was out of his 'cultural community' for any length of time, and mixed in with others who are Canadian but identify as "XYZ-Canadian", and those cultural backgrounds don't care for each other.
> 
> Disclaimer - I have no idea of the MNDs personal history at all, but just trying to demonstrate a scenario this is plausible.  I think it is certainly possible, maybe more so in the Reserve than Regular world.



I'm not buying it either.

He grew up in Vancouver in the 70's and 80's where there was rampant anti-Indian/Sikh behaviours going on. It only got worse in the 90's with the rise of his high school classmate Bindy Johal and the following gang wars initiated by the Punjabi Mafia.

He joined VPD in 1999, I'm sure there was no shortage of some of those racist types there too, just in the same that Baltej Singh Dhillon faced when the Supreme Court ruled that the RCMP had to permit the wearing of the turban. He has had and continues to have a very successful career, but not without some racist bumps in the road.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Jed said:
			
		

> Wow!  That is telling. I find this very, very hard to believe that he did not experience racism prior to going in the military and subsequently the military life exposed him to said racism.



At first glance I found that statement very hard to believe too.  Moved to Canada at 5 and was 19 before he experienced racism? There's no way.
I did some reading and found a mention in an interview in Huffpost where he said "he hadn't faced racist comments as much because he'd grown up in a very multicultural part of Vancouver. But in the military, it was a new thing back then, so it came as a bit of a shock to me."

I think when he says "“I finally found out what racism was when I joined the military,” it was poor wording in an attempt to exemplify how bad the racism was.


----------



## Jed

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> At first glance I found that statement very hard to believe too.  Moved to Canada at 5 and was 19 before he experienced racism? There's no way.
> I did some reading and found a mention in an interview in Huffpost where he said "he hadn't faced racist comments as much because he'd grown up in a very multicultural part of Vancouver. But in the military, it was a new thing back then, so it came as a bit of a shock to me."
> 
> I think when he says "“I finally found out what racism was when I joined the military,” it was poor wording in an attempt to exemplify how bad the racism was.



I sincerely hope that was the case.  I will be on watch and shoot before I form a rock solid personal opinion.


----------



## mariomike

> August 14, 2019
> Global News
> 
> Defence minister requests probe into racism in the Armed Forces
> https://globalnews.ca/news/5766066/defence-minister-racism-armed-forces/
> OTTAWA — Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has asked Canada’s military ombudsman to investigate racism in the Canadian Forces following several high-profile incidents and a report linking service members to right-wing extremist and hate groups.


----------



## Navy_Pete

What are the 'several recent high profile' incidents?  The proud boys thing was in 2017, nothing else comes to mind.

There are already all kinds of policies to deal with this specifically, what is the ombudsman supposed to look at exactly?  Not politics, my arse; pull the other one.

30 out of 75k members is 0.04%, and 2 have already been released.  Presumably the CoC of the other 28 are capable of using the existing tools to deal with it. With all the ongoing mental health, suicide and other issues seems like the Ombudsman's time could be better spent.


----------



## Blackadder1916

As noted in the linked article they refer to having received the background for their story through recent Access to Information requests.

The following are probably the related ATI requests.

https://open.canada.ca/en/search/ati/reference/cbf3cf450a88aa11e364726020ac9da3


> Organization: National Defence
> 
> Year: 2019
> 
> Month: May
> 
> Request Number: A-2018-01522
> 
> Request Summary: Briefing notes to the MND/CDS/COS/DM/ADM/GOFOs 2015-present related to right wing, alt-right, nationalist, anti-immigrant, or Nazi, neo-Nazi, citizen militia, white supremacist, white nationalist, anti-Semitic, anti-Indigenous groups or individuals w/ CA
> 
> Disposition: Disclosed in part
> 
> Number of Pages: 32



https://open.canada.ca/en/search/ati/reference/2fbd7d101c60d78050f90313768c9e10


> Organization: National Defence
> 
> Year: 2019
> 
> Month: May
> 
> Request Number: A-2018-01844
> 
> Request Summary: All reports, briefing notes and memos prior to 1 January 2018 dealing (exclusively or among other things) with extreme-right movements and their infiltration into the CAF / presence among CAF members.
> 
> Disposition: Disclosed in part
> 
> Number of Pages: 129



Since they are already completed requests, they are available for "informal requests" on-line.   Having made such requests in the past, they've usually been sent out within 2 to 3 weeks.


----------



## observor 69

A news item relevant to this discussion:

"After several high-profile incidents, military's ombudsman investigating racism in Canadian Armed Forces

"Steve Morrisey devoted years of his career toward making the Canadian military a more friendly place for Indigenous members. Now, he's warning them to avoid it at all costs — at a time when the Department of National Defence is trying to recruit more Indigenous people.

The civilian employee at the DND filed a harassment complaint in 2015, alleging his military superior at Canadian Forces Base Halifax used racist terms. A DND investigation found there were two instances of harassment."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/halifax-dnd-worker-harassment-1.5246159

Based on my personal experience this report contains many of the thoughts and feelings one goes through when being harassed. A well written article.


----------



## Journeyman

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> What are the 'several recent high profile' incidents?  The proud boys thing was in 2017, nothing else comes to mind.


If I were cynical.....  

….I'd suggest the sailor with the "Infidel" tattoo and the need for LPC to be seen doing something positive before the election are the 'incidents.'


----------



## Jarnhamar

Not just an infidel tattoo, an infidel tattoo in the shape of a gun.

anic:


----------



## mariomike

For reference, ( open source online )



> Canadian military police intelligence report, "White Supremacy, Hate Groups, and Racism in the Canadian Armed Forces," Nov. 29, 2018.
> 
> Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
> https://www.scribd.com/document/411721989/White-Supremacy-Hate-Groups-and-Racism-in-The-Canadian-Armed-Forces
> 
> "Extremists in our ranks"
> https://www.cjnews.com/perspectives/opinions/farber-extremists-in-our-ranks



More discussions of the report,
https://www.google.com/search?ei=37RWXajRI46QsAW8q52gCA&q=%22White+Supremacy%2C+Hate+Groups%2C+and+Racism+in+The+Canadian+Armed+Forces%22+&oq=%22White+Supremacy%2C+Hate+Groups%2C+and+Racism+in+The+Canadian+Armed+Forces%22+&gs_l=psy-ab.12..35i39.18678.39269..41137...1.0..6.1826.9273.0j4j1j3j0j2j4j1j1......1....1j2..gws-wiz.....6.5G3SLMM5sws&ved=0ahUKEwjovKLLxIfkAhUOCKwKHbxVB4QQ4dUDCAo#spf=1565963531576


----------



## Jarnhamar

> But it said while 16 members of the armed forces had been linked to hate groups, and another 37 were alleged to have engaged in racist or hate-motivated conduct between 2013 and 2018, that represented only 0.1 per cent of the military population.



16 out of 95,000 active and reserve members? 
Whats the criteria to be "linked" to a hate group anyways?


----------



## OldSolduer

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Not just an infidel tattoo, an infidel tattoo in the shape of a gun.
> 
> anic:



Let's really drill down and see how many members of the Public Service and any contractor with the Federal government bear scrutiny.

And the RCMP.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

FFS......when you want to investigate something FOR REAL you don't announce it to the freakin' world. 
"Hey, Hells Angel guys, we're going to investigate your Ottawa chapter, and here are the undercovers we're letting you patch in".


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> FFS......when you want to investigate something FOR REAL you don't announce it to the freakin' world.
> "Hey, Hells Angel guys, we're going to investigate your Ottawa chapter, and here are the undercovers we're letting you patch in".



Oh......  Nobody told you?

This isn't a real investigation, it's political theatre  8)


----------



## Brad Sallows

>Let's really drill down and see how many members of the Public Service and any contractor with the Federal government bear scrutiny.

I'd rather challenge the adults to set a threshold.  Zero is commendable, but always hard to reach (diminishing returns).  Given reasonably diligent policies to unmask and evict undesirables but which are nonetheless unlikely to achieve perfection, what is the boundary at which the government response is "Yes, we know there are always going to be some problem individuals; yes, we will deal with these people if they are brought to our attention by means outside our own; no, we are not going to increase efforts beyond what we already do" ?


----------



## Jarnhamar

It sure seems like toxic leadership and a culture of sweeping garbage under the rug is doing a heck of a lot more damage to the CAF than these hate groups.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Oh......  Nobody told you?
> 
> This isn't a real investigation, it's political theatre  8)



Couldn't agree more.


----------



## Halifax Tar

This didnt seem to make much of a slash in the media.


----------



## Singh47

I've experienced people trying to use the system against me as a way to force me to give up my faith.

This didn't make a splash in the media because Sikh are fair game for harassment as long as you couch it in terms of liberalism, secularism etc.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Singh47 said:
			
		

> I've experienced people trying to use the system against me as a way to force me to give up my faith.
> 
> This didn't make a splash in the media because Sikh are fair game for harassment as long as you couch it in terms of liberalism, secularism etc.



I'll call BS on the part in yellow.


----------



## OldSolduer

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I'll call BS on the part in yellow.



That was my reaction EITS.

The first Orthodox Sikh was enrolled in 1986. He was not well received at that time. Since then CAF has made several changes to ensure its an inclusive military.


----------



## Remius

I would add that NO ONE is fair game for harassment for any reason no matter how you couch it.


----------



## Brad Sallows

Except the Dutch.


----------



## OldSolduer

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Except the Dutch.


Or carnies

Small hands, smell like cabbage.....


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> Or carnies
> 
> Small hands, smell like cabbage.....



And Newfies....

Common, everyone loves a good Newfie joke!

"A Newfie is hanging from a tree by one arm, how do you get him down?"

"That's easy!  Just wave at him"

 ;D

Also, Newfies basically make up the majority of the CAF, so like you can't really knock someone for making fun of them.  They are liable in turn, to get ganged up on!


----------



## Remius

Ok, so the Dutch, carnies and I assume Dutch Carnies as well as Newfies.

Anyone else? 

Narnians? 

What about what side we support on the Planet Cheron? (You really need to google this if you want to catch the reference...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_That_Be_Your_Last_Battlefield


----------



## daftandbarmy

Every organization has implicit biases in operation. Here are some ideas about how to get around that:

https://hbr.org/2018/10/two-powerful-ways-managers-can-curb-implicit-biases


----------



## Jed

All I know is we have to stop picking on those Fantasians.


----------



## observor 69

Excellent article :
Defence minister says joining military taught him 'how intense racism can be'

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/defence-minister-says-joining-military-taught-him-how-intense-racism-can-be-1.4973407


----------



## daftandbarmy

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> Excellent article :
> Defence minister says joining military taught him 'how intense racism can be'
> 
> https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/defence-minister-says-joining-military-taught-him-how-intense-racism-can-be-1.4973407



Unlike the Vancouver City Police, of which he was also a member?


----------



## PuckChaser

You would think as the MND he'd want to pick his words carefully about the institution he's responsible for? Hard to see how that headline is going to help attraction and recruiting of minorities in the CAF...


----------



## MilEME09

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You would think as the MND he'd want to pick his words carefully about the institution he's responsible for? Hard to see how that headline is going to help attraction and recruiting of minorities in the CAF...



Better story would of been, if he experienced it, and is now head of the department. What has he done to combat the issue.


----------



## daftandbarmy

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Better story would of been, if he experienced it, and is now head of the department. What has he done to combat the issue.



I recall a couple of Sikh soldiers joining our Reserve infantry unit in the Lower Mainland, in the mid-90s. They were good soldiers, and looked to units like the BCRs (Sajan's unit) as an example of racial integration, which gave them the confidence to join up. 

I had a good discussion with one of them who approached me wondering about career progression and other prospects 'just because I wear a turban'. He hadn't experienced any racially motivated incidents in the unit, we beasted everyone equally , so I pointed to that as an example of what he'd likely encounter further on in his career. There's always the chance of some kind of incident but, if it happened, it was more likely due to individual issues than an institutional bias.

He had checked out the police (can't remember which one) as well and wasn't as happy with their track record of racial tolerance. He was pursuing a professional designation of some kind, and I pointed out that the time he'd require to do that successfully might be more of a barrier to his military progression interests.


----------



## Jay4th

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> And I say BULLSHIT.  I am a white guy from a relatively small town, and I've had subordinates that are from minority groups and I treat them the same as anyone else...how they perform and get along with other people.  If they are awesome, they are awesome.  If they are hammerheads, they are hammerheads.
> 
> I didn't need any special training and surveys, I had a really simple thing back in the day called 'The 10 Principles of Leadership' to guide me on how I conducted myself as a Jnr/Snr NCO (the 3 Ms...Mission, Men, Myself).  My recruit serial in Cornwallis 27 years ago had people from all across the country and different backgrounds, some of them Native/Aboriginal, and guess how they were treated?  Depended on how they performed and got along with people.  Wow.  With no special training either!!
> 
> This "from top to bottom, systemic" line is utter BULLSHIT.  Are there people in uniform that don't act IAW our Military Ethics/Ethos?  There are, there is no doubt.  But what people like me, Average Joe White Guy in Uniform, are tired of is being told we are all rapists, racist hunks of trash who can't use common sense and have had parents and communities who didn't bring us up as decent Canadians.
> 
> Make the message accurate and I'll stand behind it; _*there is a problem with SOME people in uniform who have actions and attitudes that do not follow the ones demanded by the CAF*_.  I've got 27 years in, serving in Army, Air and Navy units, both Reg and Reserve, and this 'systemic top to bottom' message is false.  Have I witnessed racist comments, harassment, etc?  Yup...but I can count those on 1 hand over 27 years in the mob.
> 
> The worst one I witnessed personally was a superior (NCM) who referred to a group of about 5 of us (Snr NCOs on a course) as 'you $#(&* white guys', the year was 2003.  He was an Aborginal / Native Canadian.  Should that = 'all Aboriginal/Native service members are racist toward @&(*@#@ white guys?  It didn't, and doesn't to me to this day.  That wouldn't be fair to the _rest_ of the Aboriginal/Native service members, would it?
> 
> Should there now be a survey and public outcry because I would answer the survey truthfully and state I was on the receiving end of a racist comment by a Native Canadian superior at least once, and suggest it "is top to bottom, and every Aboriginal / Native service member is part of it"?
> 
> Full stop;  it is not top to bottom, systemic and 'everyone'.  I am tired the wide brush crap, pointed at ANY group in the CAF.



I know this is a bit of a necro-quote, But I must say that I feel exactly the way EITS described back in 2016.  Especially this week after reading the "Defence Team Message" Monday morning at work. Felt like we were all being called racists.
I expect a new "Named Mission" similar to Operation Honour, new training sessions etc.


----------



## Kilted

Jay4th said:
			
		

> I know this is a bit of a necro-quote, But I must say that I feel exactly the way EITS described back in 2016.  Especially this week after reading the "Defence Team Message" Monday morning at work. Felt like we were all being called racists.
> I expect a new "Named Mission" similar to Operation Honour, new training sessions etc.




I've been thinking about that. I think that it would actually have the potential to have more negative consequences then positive ones. Maybe there would be fewer incidents. However, I worry that it may erode trust to a certain degree. Troops may become worried about talking to troops that are different then them in case something they said might be taken the wrong way and they would be kicked out of the military because of it.  And then the potential issues on courses, where sub-par troops might have one more option to unjustly go after an instructor.


----------



## NavalMoose

Frankly, that message from the Deputy Minister is insulting


----------



## Jarnhamar

NavalMoose said:
			
		

> Frankly, that message from the Deputy Minister is insulting



Emails that open with "team"  ;D

"I'll/we'll do better" has become an automated response.


----------



## daftandbarmy

A great example of an organizational culture that is probably not resulting in optimal levels of employee motivation, largely because of indirect motivations (like 'the letter') as described in this article:


How Company Culture Shapes Employee Motivation

Academics have studied why people work for nearly a century, but a major breakthrough happened in the 1980s when professors Edward Deci and Richard Ryan from the University of Rochester distinguished the six main reasons why people work. We built on their framework and adapted it for the modern workplace. The six main reasons people work are: play, purpose, potential, emotional pressure, economic pressure, and inertia.

The work of many researchers has found that the first three motives tend to increase performance, while the latter three hurt it. We found that the companies most famous for their cultures — from Southwest Airlines to Trader Joe’s — maximize the good motives, while minimizing the bad ones.

Play is when you are motivated by the work itself. You work because you enjoy it. A teacher at play enjoys the core activities of teaching — creating lesson plans, grading tests, or problem solving how to break through to each student. Play is our learning instinct, and it’s tied to curiosity, experimentation, and exploring challenging problems.

Purpose is when the direct outcome of the work fits your identity. You work because you value the work’s impact. For example, a teacher driven by purpose values or identifies with the goal of educating and empowering children.

Potential is when the outcome of the work benefits your identity. In other words, the work enhances your potential. For example, a teacher with potential may be doing his job because he eventually wants to become a principal.

Since these three motives are directly connected to the work itself in some way, you can think of them as direct motives. They will improve performance to different degrees. Indirect motives, however, tend to reduce it.

Emotional pressure is when you work because some external force threatens your identity. If you’ve ever used guilt to compel a loved one to do something, you’ve inflicted emotional pressure. Fear, peer pressure, and shame are all forms of emotional pressure. When you do something to avoid disappointing yourself or others, you’re acting on emotional pressure. This motive is completely separate from the work itself.

Economic pressure is when an external force makes you work. You work to gain a reward or avoid a punishment. Now the motive is not only separate from the work itself, it is also separate from your identity.

Finally, inertia is when the motive is so far removed from the work and your identity that you can’t identify why you’re working. When you ask someone why they are doing their work, and they say, “I don’t know; I’m doing it because I did it yesterday and the day before,” that signals inertia. It is still a motive because you’re still actually doing the activity, you just can’t explain why.
These indirect motives tend to reduce performance be

These indirect motives tend to reduce performance because you’re no longer thinking about the work—you’re thinking about the disappointment, or the reward, or why you’re bothering to do it at all. You’re distracted, and you might not even care about the work itself or the quality of the outcome.

We found that a high-performing culture maximizes the play, purpose, and potential felt by its people, and minimizes the emotional pressure, economic pressure, and inertia. This is known as creating total motivation (ToMo).

https://hbr.org/2015/11/how-company-culture-shapes-employee-motivation


----------



## TCM621

Jay4th said:
			
		

> I know this is a bit of a necro-quote, But I must say that I feel exactly the way EITS described back in 2016.  Especially this week after reading the "Defence Team Message" Monday morning at work. Felt like we were all being called racists.
> I expect a new "Named Mission" similar to Operation Honour, new training sessions etc.



In the last couple of years, I have been called a racist and a rapist by my leadership just for the act of being a part of the organization they lead. I must have missed that principle of leadership.


----------



## Underway

Jay4th said:
			
		

> I know this is a bit of a necro-quote, But I must say that I feel exactly the way EITS described back in 2016.  Especially this week after reading the "Defence Team Message" Monday morning at work. Felt like we were all being called racists.
> I expect a new "Named Mission" similar to Operation Honour, new training sessions etc.





			
				Tcm621 said:
			
		

> In the last couple of years, I have been called a racist and a rapist by my leadership just for the act of being a part of the organization they lead. I must have missed that principle of leadership.



I'm not sure how to respond to this without being personal, as it relates to personal feelings.

If you got that you were personally being called out for being racist from that letter then you've done some significant mental gymnastics or have strong confirmation bias tendencies.  There was an acknowledgement that there is institutional racism in the CAF.  

If you haven't seen or heard a racist joke, comment or behaviour since you joined then you either don't know what racism is, or you've had a blessed career.  If you haven't stepped in to say something or stop something that you've seen then you are complicit in racist behaviour.  

To avoid "the throwing of the stones" I have been complicit to racist behaviour. Over my 20+ years, I have seen the email chains with jokes that I just deleted and didn't say anything.  I've overheard conversations with racist elements and said nothing to avoid rocking the boat. Anyone who deployed to Afghanistan has def'n heard racist comments/names regarding the Afghans.  It was impossible to avoid them.  I didn't take action every time for various reasons.  Valuing a relationship, not wanting to rock the boat, chain of command issues, I was busy, maybe I was a coward etc...

Does that make me personally a racist?  Not by the traditional definition, no.  But by the definition further down in the dictionary which describes racism as "a system of advantage based on skin colour", yes.  Because I have the ability to ignore that stuff without it effecting me.  Which is something very hard to acknowledge, because I pride myself on treating everyone based on their personality and performance.  I'm bothered by racist behaviour and the colour of your uniform is more important than the colour of your skin. But it does make me one of the people who propped up institutional racism.  Because doing nothing allows the system to continue to exist.

I can do better.  So can all of us.

As for leadership principles, perhaps a suggestion.  Less worrying about personal hurt feelings and more worrying about your team and the institution.


----------



## dimsum

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/army-hateful-conduct-racism-1.6234699


----------



## KevinB

While I think Gen Eyre is a fantastic commander, the reporting policy has been in place for a long long long time.
   I recall that directive shortly after the Somalia Inquiry wrapped up.

The problem lies rooted in the fact the Military is a terrible arbitrary of policy - as quite often issues get ignored by the CoC, and there is no outside review of reports or concerns.

 I mean color me not shocked that this is still an issue.


----------



## CBH99

I don’t mean to be dismissive at all.  I also just don’t want to feed into any sensationalism the media has spun on the issue.

Statistically speaking, the number of cases deemed serious enough for further investigation is small compared to an organization of roughly 100,000 ppl.  

If racist comments or other nonsense is being reported mostly at the junior ranks (for simplicity sake) - could it simply be that some newer recruits are joining the military with ignorant attitudes?  Like some always have?

If that is the case, then perhaps the military is _potentially_ a good place for these folks to end up… as it gives the military a chance to rectify this behaviour, with a heavy hand if necessary.  

It may also change the attitudes of some members who have some racist beliefs, but have kept it quiet - as they will have more experience interacting with the ethnic groups they have these beliefs about.  

I haven’t met many people who work with members of various ethnic groups on a regular basis, who remain steadfastly racist.  If they do, it’s perhaps more an issue of a lack of introspective thinking - which is something we can always encourage, but can’t force or enforce.  


I don’t want to be dismissive or pretend the issue doesn’t exist.  But the media is also clearly on a witchhunt these days, looking for any social issue it can spin - with the military and law enforcement agencies being good places for them to look for stories.  (Access to information policies, formal processes, etc.)

If a member says something racist or does something racist, it should be reported.  And that member should face dismissal or serious consequences if not dismissed.  Period.  (Isn’t this already how things are being done?)


----------



## Booter

I hope everyone here is consistent between believing the recent stories about the GOFOs and this about the junior ranks. 🤷‍♀️


----------



## OldSolduer

CBH99 said:


> I don’t want to be dismissive or pretend the issue doesn’t exist.  But the media is also clearly on a witchhunt these days, looking for any social issue it can spin - with the military and law enforcement agencies being good places for them to look for stories.  (Access to information policies, formal processes, etc.)
> 
> If a member says something racist or does something racist, it should be reported.  And that member should face dismissal or serious consequences if not dismissed.  Period.  (Isn’t this already how things are being done?)


I would say that its not the media on a witch hunt. The media is reporting what has been told to them. 

Racism in the CAF is not new. I think we all know that.  I recall a number of years ago a MCpl called a soldier a very racist name. It was reported to the CoC - he was charged (I don't recall the NDA - 129 is my best guess). He was found guilty and part of his sentence was to research and write a 1000 word essay to the OC about why racism is incompatible with military service. 

It seemed to change his attitude.


----------



## dimsum

OldSolduer said:


> He was found guilty and part of his sentence was to research and write a 1000 word essay to the OC about why racism is incompatible with military service.


The "American History X" punishment.  Nice.


----------



## CountDC

"I would say that its not the media on a witch hunt. The media is reporting what has been told to them."

Can't fully agree with this once I read the article and noted the media made sure they had a quote that despite most of the cases as new members painted the picture of it as the military culture.  The way I am reading it is that rather than these members coming in with the issue they are saying it is something they are learning from the military as part of our ingrained culture. 

Barbara Perry, an expert on far-right groups at Ontario Tech University, said the finding deserves closer scrutiny.

"Something is happening," she said. "I mean, it comes back to the culture. Right? What is the culture that has been built up? We've heard a lot of that around sexual assault.


----------



## Brad Sallows

With people with a substantial pulpit pounding the "everything is institutionally racist" drum, it's reasonable to expect a lot of signals from people immersed in that stew who subsequently join the CAF.  Expect more in future.


----------



## OldSolduer

People with racist and sexist attitudes usually join with those issues. BUT if they are allowed to fester and infect others is on the CAF.


----------

