Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

[daftandbarmy]

Am I the only one who feels that nobody is being served with these latest developments?

Fortin is probably OK....

 

[TacticalTea]

Fortin is probably OK....

We don't know that he got the whole 6 million.

Could be 3-4.

On a general's salary with the national notoriety and prestige that came with leading the COVID fight, he probably would've made more long-term if he so desired and played his cards right, especially if you count the loss in legal fees.

Add to that the tarnished reputation, the waste of time and the hit to mental health, all of which count for more than just money, and I bet he would've far preferred for none of this to have ever happened.

Whatever the settlement amount, ultimately, it is I, the taxpayer, who is footing the bill because this government decided, once again, to play with the law instead of acting in the interests of justice. It disgusts me.

 

[OldSolduer]

Results of my former boss. Charges stayed because the process took too long. I have mixed feelings about this. I greatly admired LGen Cadieux and loved working for him, but unfortunately this charge will continue to haunt him because there was no resolution by the justice system. When he said that they was no assault, I believe him, but the victim did come forward with allegations of assault that she believed happened and that he was the culprit.

videoPlayer

www.ctvnews.ca

I have met General Cadieux several years ago - only briefly - and found him to be a pretty smart guy.

It seems there is NO presumption of innocence when a GOFO is named. "HE DID IT BURN THE WITCH" seems to be the default setting. Lets forget all about due process and convict them.
Everyone has the right to due process - and I see the process every day - but the higher in society you are the less it seems to be upheld.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I have met General Cadieux several years ago - only briefly - and found him to be a pretty smart guy.

It seems there is NO presumption of innocence when a GOFO is named. "HE DID IT BURN THE WITCH" seems to be the default setting. Lets forget all about due process and convict them.
Everyone has the right to due process - and I see the process every day - but the higher in society you are the less it seems to be upheld.

Tall Poppy Syndrome enters the chat. Some results of a survey connected to women in the workplace....

Tall Poppy Syndrome is impacting corporations, and it’s not just a women’s issue​

There’s a silent but significant syndrome wreaking havoc on corporations and their ability to promote, retain and engage top talent – and its impact is being felt globally.

Tall Poppy Syndrome (TPS) is a term referring to poppies that grow higher than others and are cut down to size so that they are the same height as the flowers around them. In the workplace, this occurs when people are attacked, resented or ostracized because of their success and/or achievements. Successful individuals are cut down, rather than celebrated, for their accomplishments.

Through the first international survey of its kind, Women of Influence+ heard from thousands of women across professions, industries and sectors to determine the effects of TPS on their lives, personally and professionally, and on the organizations in which they work.
The results were telling.

Of 4,710 women surveyed, nearly 90 per cent reported experiencing TPS at some point during their careers. TPS can manifest in different ways. It can look like being ostracized or made to feel ashamed or embarrassed because of your accomplishments. It can look like being bullied, knocked down or criticized for getting ahead. It can also look like others taking credit for work you’ve done or convincing you it’s best not to celebrate your success.

Undermined and penalized​

While the survey showed a large majority of women have experienced TPS at work, this is not just a women’s issue.
The effects of TPS are negatively impacting corporate culture, employee morale and most notably the bottom line. And it’s a problem that couldn’t be happening at a worse time. There is a gap in the workforce where many accomplished women used to be that is growing wider every day.

For women who are committed to forging ahead, TPS is a barrier to advancement that’s driving many to reconsider their career aspirations and places of employment. As one survey respondent said, “I was openly promised a promotion to the C-Suite and then later told I was too outwardly ambitious and excited for the opportunity, so I was not promoted. [Now], I’m completely checked out, embarrassed and looking for new jobs.”

To better understand this phenomenon, we must determine who is undermining and penalizing women, and why. The results of the survey indicate that these aggressions come from all levels of seniority – from co-workers, clients, vendors, managers and executives. They also come from people outside of the workplace, such as family and friends or mothers in the school yard. The majority of women report that those undermining them are men, but women are also cutting each other down and are more likely to do so to their peers, colleagues, and direct reports.

These findings beg the question: Why are we so uncomfortable with women’s success?

It’s a question that needs to be taken seriously. The effects of TPS can be significant and lasting. For example, women who have experienced TPS report increased stress (85.6 per cent), a negative impact on their mental health (73.8 per cent), lowered self-confidence (66.2 per cent) and feelings of isolation and burnout.

Tall Poppy Syndrome is impacting corporations, and it’s not just a women’s issue

Paid Post

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[TacticalTea]

Tall Poppy Syndrome enters the chat. Some results of a survey connected to women in the workplace....

Tall Poppy Syndrome is impacting corporations, and it’s not just a women’s issue​

There’s a silent but significant syndrome wreaking havoc on corporations and their ability to promote, retain and engage top talent – and its impact is being felt globally.

Tall Poppy Syndrome (TPS) is a term referring to poppies that grow higher than others and are cut down to size so that they are the same height as the flowers around them. In the workplace, this occurs when people are attacked, resented or ostracized because of their success and/or achievements. Successful individuals are cut down, rather than celebrated, for their accomplishments.

Through the first international survey of its kind, Women of Influence+ heard from thousands of women across professions, industries and sectors to determine the effects of TPS on their lives, personally and professionally, and on the organizations in which they work.
The results were telling.

Of 4,710 women surveyed, nearly 90 per cent reported experiencing TPS at some point during their careers. TPS can manifest in different ways. It can look like being ostracized or made to feel ashamed or embarrassed because of your accomplishments. It can look like being bullied, knocked down or criticized for getting ahead. It can also look like others taking credit for work you’ve done or convincing you it’s best not to celebrate your success.

Undermined and penalized​

While the survey showed a large majority of women have experienced TPS at work, this is not just a women’s issue.
The effects of TPS are negatively impacting corporate culture, employee morale and most notably the bottom line. And it’s a problem that couldn’t be happening at a worse time. There is a gap in the workforce where many accomplished women used to be that is growing wider every day.

For women who are committed to forging ahead, TPS is a barrier to advancement that’s driving many to reconsider their career aspirations and places of employment. As one survey respondent said, “I was openly promised a promotion to the C-Suite and then later told I was too outwardly ambitious and excited for the opportunity, so I was not promoted. [Now], I’m completely checked out, embarrassed and looking for new jobs.”

To better understand this phenomenon, we must determine who is undermining and penalizing women, and why. The results of the survey indicate that these aggressions come from all levels of seniority – from co-workers, clients, vendors, managers and executives. They also come from people outside of the workplace, such as family and friends or mothers in the school yard. The majority of women report that those undermining them are men, but women are also cutting each other down and are more likely to do so to their peers, colleagues, and direct reports.

These findings beg the question: Why are we so uncomfortable with women’s success?

It’s a question that needs to be taken seriously. The effects of TPS can be significant and lasting. For example, women who have experienced TPS report increased stress (85.6 per cent), a negative impact on their mental health (73.8 per cent), lowered self-confidence (66.2 per cent) and feelings of isolation and burnout.

Tall Poppy Syndrome is impacting corporations, and it’s not just a women’s issue

Paid Post

www.theglobeandmail.com

I don't buy this narrative one moment.

All women I've ever discussed workplace relations with have told me they've had mostly negative experiences with female supervisors, not male ones, and that other females are the most cutthroat towards females.

It is also my observation as a supervisor that females take equivalent negative feedback as a personal attack more so than males. And so may interpret as TPS what is actually just regular feedback.

None of this makes them unemployable or lesser employees, just different. My point is only that this article was manifestly written to push a delirious anti-patriarchy agenda, and not to improve workplace relations for anyone.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Fortin is probably OK....

Amazing how quickly you decided that all that he values is money, rather than reputation, relationships, a life's work, the impact of the violation of trust from an institution he sacrificed so much for.

And like as not you decided that without ever having met the man, let alone served with him.

Nice meme for a cheap shot though.

 

[rnkelly]

Amazing how quickly you decided that all that he values is money, rather than reputation, relationships, a life's work, the impact of the violation of trust from an institution he sacrificed so much for.

And like as not you decided that without ever having met the man, let alone served with him.

Nice meme for a cheap shot though.

You have to admit that the media release says a lot though.

 

[FJAG]

Fortin is probably OK....

Actually he had a solid reputation as a soldier and is a highly intelligent and able individual. He could have gone further within the military and in industry afterwards. Monetarily, I doubt that the sum he received will come close to compensating him for his future earnings loss. That's before you even get to touch on his personal reputation and the years of bearing this burden that he's gone through.

These cases are lose-lose right from the get go.

 

[Happy Guy]

The end of the military career for MGen Fortin and perhaps the birth of a military analyst on TV.

Dany Fortin retires from Canadian Armed Forces after reaching settlement in lawsuit

Dany Fortin, who recently settled a lawsuit over how the Canadian military and federal government handled an allegation of sexual misconduct, has retired from the Armed Forces.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[Rifleman62]

The Canadian Armed Forces cleared him in an internal review process the next month, but he was not reassigned to a new posting and his terms of service were up last July.

Do you think that the government suggested/ordered the CF not to reassign or offer new terms of service to Fortin for nefarious reasons? Personally, I would not be surprised.

 

[Good2Golf]

Do you think that the government suggested/ordered the CF not to reassign or offer new terms of service to Fortin for nefarious reasons? Personally, I would not be surprised.

All GOFOs serve ‘at the pleasure of the Crown.’ IN the black and white of the policies, if the Crown doesn’t want them, it doesn’t have to keep them. Of course it would be understandable if people believed that there was something untoward behind the scenes such that Fortin, and in a different nexus, but outcome similar, Norman left CAF service with an undisclosed settlement.

Perhaps one day the public may be made aware who (single or multiple people ) were behind a particular activity line that may have had something less than altruistic reasons to go through decades and decades of old personnel files to see what could be made to stick to people that displeased them/their masters…

 

[ballz]

Amazing how quickly you decided that all that he values is money, rather than reputation, relationships, a life's work, the impact of the violation of trust from an institution he sacrificed so much for.

I think Fortin got screwed, but... there's a lot of CAF members who have experienced that and don't get as much as an acknowledgement for it, let alone a $6 million apology for it. I feel for Fortin but I don't feel any worse for him than I do for many others - it seems some people think a General getting done hard by the CAF is a travesty but for the many other lower ranks, it's just part of the business we're in.

Am I the only one who feels that nobody is being served with these latest developments?

Well, certainly not the complainant or the defendant in Cadieu's case.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sexual-assault-charge-stayed-trevor-cadieu-1.6991932

"Justice Larry O'Brien wrote in his written decision that "someone should be held accountable for allowing nine months to elapse before providing defence counsel with the complainant's first statement" to military police investigators.

"That someone is not defence counsel who each, orally and in writing, early and repeatedly requested the complainant's statement to little if any avail," O'Brien wrote. "It is not enough for the military to hand off 'the file' to the Kingston Crown office in July without providing essential disclosure."

The only people potentially being served here are Canadians who can see what a shitshow the CAF is at everything, but they aren't paying attention.

I also worked for Cadieu when I was at 3 Div HQ, in some cases directly on a few small things. I had/have a generally positive view of him although he made the exact same leadership failure I've seen time and time again in the CAF - failing to hold subordinates accountable even though he knew they were completely incompetent - and so I never got wrapped up too much in the celebrity-like status that he enjoyed out west... in fact I think it was not so good for him.

Anyway, I was paying attention to this one to see what the fact pattern was. That won't be happening now for better or for worse.


In Whalen's case, a few people on here seem to be acting like he was exonerated which is anything but the case. The evidence that did make it to Court suggests he failed as a leader and as a husband, or at least that's what his own words were in his own email to his subordinate, the authenticity of which was not disputed by the defence, who also agreed that the emails provided by the complainant.

I look forward to seeing anything in the written decision regarding why the emails between Whalen and the complainant were ultimately deemed not relevant enough to consider. Tough spot for the judge to be in, but it seems akin to getting off of a DUI on a legal technicality that's not indicative of whether or not the person was guilty, something I'm sure a lot of Whalen's loud supporters would normally be bitter about.



In the end, open justice - much like the rest of democracy - isn't perfect but it's clearly the least worst option so far, despite how much people on this site gripe about it.

 

[Edward Campbell]

If you read the ENTIRE LGen Whelan decision, which for some god forsaken reason I did, the judge implies, without out right saying it, that the military may have transferred the case to the civilian court knowing that the time spent on the military would not constitute a delay defence, and would therefore contribute to the overall time in a section 11(b) application, the implication being that while the military could have let this case stay within military lines, they chose to transfer it to the civilian side in the hope that the case would get thrown out under a section 11(b) application for taking too long to conclude.

I wonder if there will be something similar when the report comes out from this case...

And here, in there National Post, is another side of the story.

 

[KevinB]

And here, in there National Post, is another side of the story.

The only part I agree with (and view is credible) is the following.

If given the chance, I ask, what would or could Whelan do to revive the CAF’s esprit d’corps.


“There is no vision (for the CAF) other than a social experiment agenda. We’ve substituted what should be operational effectiveness and ability with culture,” he laments, “and that doesn’t resonate with people.”

 

[QV]

And here, in there National Post, is another side of the story.

And another. Why is Lieutenant-General Whelan being court martialed?

Curious, of all the GOFO's sidelined with sexual assault allegations, what has the rate of conviction for that been?

 

[OldSolduer]

It seems there is NO presumption of innocence when a GOFO is named. "HE DID IT BURN THE WITCH" seems to be the default setting. Lets forget all about due process and convict them.
Everyone has the right to due process - and I see the process every day - but the higher in society you are the less it seems to be upheld.

And here, in there National Post, is another side of the story.

I stand by what I said - the higher in rank the more you're likely to be crucified before the facts are out.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I stand by what I said - the higher in rank the more you're likely to be crucified before the facts are out.

From personal experience, walking down past a newspaper box and seeing unsubstantiated allegations about yourself on the front page is absolutely brutal (and mine weren't even any kind of ethical or sexual misconduct; it was basically IT security infraction that got trumped up).

That was a single story that ran for a day, resulted in no charges or even a real investigation (other then some admin), and still comes up years later.

I wasn't a senior person but the CAF left me to dangle in the wind and did FA when it was all said and done, so left a black mark on my career and reputation for essentially a misunderstanding by a student reporter that ran away. I eventually got a private (off the record) apology from the paper but that was about it.

I can't even imagine the feeling of something like that, and I don't think I would trade the settlement for what you'll go through in this kind of high profile crucifixion.

 

[KevinB]

I stand by what I said - the higher in rank the more you're likely to be crucified before the facts are out.

The difference here is that Whelan was guilty as fucking sin, but isn’t paying the piper due to the evidence being not admitted.

 

[FJAG]

The difference here is that Whelan was guilty as fucking sin, but isn’t paying the piper due to the evidence being not admitted.

That's a bit of a strange view. If the evidence isn't admissible then he can't be guilty of anything. The last time I looked our justice system considered everyone innocent until proven guilty based on admissible evidence and not on rumours coming out by leakers. I'll be honest, even the drivel reported in the press left me unimpressed that there could have been a conviction.

 

[btrudy]

That's a bit of a strange view. If the evidence isn't admissible then he can't be guilty of anything. The last time I looked our justice system considered everyone innocent until proven guilty based on admissible evidence and not on rumours coming out by leakers. I'll be honest, even the drivel reported in the press left me unimpressed that there could have been a conviction.

Ehhhh... this to me seems like an overtly pedantic argument based upon occupational specific usage of a term, while ignoring the actual common definition / usage of said term.

Whether or not someone did that thing is a matter of objective truth; did that person actually do that thing or not. Whether or not the justice system can be convinced of that, even when evidence can get tossed or trials tossed for taking too long, etc, is another matter.

If you've got a better word to replace "guilty" with in that sentence that means "totally actually did do that thing he was accused of doing" without carrying the connotation of "is / will be found culpable of doing that thing in a court of law", I'm open to suggestions, but for most people the word guilty has far more to do with whether or not someone did something, and not with whether or not they've convicted at trial.

If the evidence isn't admissible, he certainly can't be found guilty, but he can BE guilty.