- Reaction score
- 19,784
- Points
- 1,160
Here's the thing. Canada and its provinces have had fairly broad human rights legislation for many, many decades now. It sets a high bar for what has to be tolerated by society in general and governments and employers in particular. There is a strict standard of what duty every agency has to accommodate. Accommodation is rarely easy but compulsory none the less unless you can establish some bona fide occupational requirement. The CAF finds itself between a rock and a hard place in finding the right balance especially when trying to justify the universality of service concept when only a fraction of the force actually is involved in what we one could consider dangerous jobs.Regardless, there's no excuse for a CAF recruiting system, what should be a thorough selection gateway, to lower standards for anyone (recent immigrant or not) to the extent that we are apparently seeing here.
We went through this whole process back in the 1980s with admitting females to the "combat arms" trades and it wasn't a pretty process. There is a perpetual fear at the top end that the CAF will be brought kicking and screaming into another such process where outsiders - who just don't understand because they are all woke appointees - will make the decision. Risk aversion plays a large part here. One person's "lowered standards" is another person's "appropriate accommodation." The even bigger concern we should have isn't that we need a tighter selection gateway, but that we may have to institute even more demanding processes to accommodate - accept, train and employ - individuals who fail standards that we can't satisfactorily prove to be BFOR.
