Employment Equity in the CFL

[ModAdmin]

It's both racist and discriminatory. Racist because it uses race to determine who it applies to and discriminatory because it discriminates against those who it doesn't apply to. 

The EEA states...

"The purpose of this Act is to achieve equality in the workplace so that no person shall be denied employment opportunities or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability and, in the fulfilment of that goal, to correct the conditions of disadvantage in employment experienced by women, Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities by giving effect to the principle that employment equity means more than treating persons in the same way but also requires special measures and the accommodation of differences."

It further states...

"Every employer shall implement employment equity by:

    (a) identifying and eliminating employment barriers against persons in designated groups that result from the employer's employment systems, policies and practices that are not authorized by law."

Seems that the intent of the Act is to correct a situation that was inequitable to some people and create a balanced approach to employment.

Is your solution to scrap the Act and go back to what many believe was discrimination?

[TBURGESS]

The EEA states...

"The purpose of this Act is to achieve equality in the workplace so that no person shall be denied employment opportunities or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability and, in the fulfilment of that goal, to correct the conditions of disadvantage in employment experienced by women, Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities by giving effect to the principle that employment equity means more than treating persons in the same way but also requires special measures and the accommodation of differences."

It further states...

"Every employer shall implement employment equity by:

    (a) identifying and eliminating employment barriers against persons in designated groups that result from the employer's employment systems, policies and practices that are not authorized by law."

Seems that the intent of the Act is to correct a situation that was inequitable to some people and create a balanced approach to employment.

Is your solution to scrap the Act and go back to what many believe was discrimination?

It says no groups shall be denied employment opportunities, then states which special groups get special opportunities.

It pretends that there are two equally qualified people for jobs and that employer's should hire the special group over the other one.

It pretends that companies, run by white people, should have the same demographics as the population. It doesn't apply to companies run by the special groups. IE: It doesn't try to change their ethnic make up. Hint: It shouldn't try to do either.

It pretends that equity, which is being just and fair, is giving special groups special rights.

It suggests that inequality means "too few of the special groups being hired".

The act is Canada's version of Affirmative Action & it applies to very few businesses. The CFL is not covered by it. It's more that you and yours want to apply it to the CFL than me wanting to get rid of it.

I want to get rid of it because it's a white guilt based, racist & discriminatory. It doesn't make up for the past, doesn't apply to everyone or to every business & doesn't make any kind of dent in the problem. A few hundred less qualified folks aren't going to make it easier for the next generation.

[ModAdmin]

It says no groups shall be denied employment opportunities, then states which special groups get special opportunities.

It pretends that there are two equally qualified people for jobs and that employer's should hire the special group over the other one.

It pretends that companies, run by white people, should have the same demographics as the population. It doesn't apply to companies run by the special groups. IE: It doesn't try to change their ethnic make up. Hint: It shouldn't try to do either.

It pretends thatess equity, which is being just and fair, is giving special groups special rights.

It suggests that inequality means "too few of the special groups being hired".

The act is Canada's version of Affirmative Action & it applies to very few businesses. The CFL is not covered by it. It's more that you and yours want to apply it to the CFL than me wanting to get rid of it.

I want to get rid of it because it's a white guilt based, racist & discriminatory. It doesn't make up for the past, doesn't apply to everyone or to every business & doesn't make any kind of dent in the problem. A few hundred less qualified folks aren't going to make it easier for the next generation.

I guess we have different opinions on the EEA then.

[TBURGESS]

I guess we have different opinions on the EEA then.

I guess you have White Guilt and I don't.

[ModAdmin]

I guess you have White Guilt and I don't.

I guess you really don't know very much about me.

[blue_gold_84]

Aaaaaand still nothing. LOL

I guess we have different opinions on the EEA then.

You have the right one.

Terry has yet to actually present evidence the EEA is discriminatory and would rather resort to repeatedly using fabricated nonsensical terms like white guilt, virtue signaling, and reverse racism.

[TBURGESS]

Aaaaaand still nothing. LOL

You have the right one.

Terry has yet to actually present evidence the EEA is discriminatory and would rather resort to repeatedly using fabricated nonsensical terms like white guilt, virtue signaling, and reverse racism.

Just cuz you can't make sense of white guilt, virtue signalling and reverse racism (Actually I'd argue that all racism is simple racism, including reverse racism) doesn't mean they don't exist.

Just cuz you can't understand the evidence that the EEA is discriminatory doesn't mean it isn't.

The EEA discriminates against the non-special groups. Lets try this one last time. If there was an act that said White males must be given special rights you'd be able see the discrimination, racism and sexism in it because it's obvious. The same holds true when you give different groups special rights, but you refuse to admit it.

I guess you really don't know very much about me.

You're right I don't know you, but I do know that your opinion matches either white guilt or being one of the special groups.

[Jesse]

Just cuz you can't make sense of white guilt, virtue signalling and reverse racism doesn't mean they don't exist.

They don't exist.

They are catch phrases for people who don't want to upset the status quo and are afraid to not have all the advantages they once did.

With that, I'll be bowing out of this discussion. I will no longer give this counter-argument a platform for their discourse. I recommend others do the same.

Always open to DMs for respectful discussion.

[blue_gold_84]

Just cuz you can't make sense of white guilt, virtue signalling and reverse racism (Actually I'd argue that all racism is simple racism, including reverse racism) doesn't mean they don't exist.

Just cuz you can't understand the evidence that the EEA is discriminatory doesn't mean it isn't.

The EEA discriminates against the non-special groups. Lets try this one last time. If there was an act that said White males must be given special rights you'd be able see the discrimination, racism and sexism in it because it's obvious. The same holds true when you give different groups special rights, but you refuse to admit it.
You're right I don't know you, but I do know that your opinion matches either white guilt or being one of the special groups.

What evidence? You have presented absolutely none.

Your woefully insufferable opinions being feebly passed off as factual despite no factual data to back any of them is not a good look.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

They don't exist.

They are catch phrases for people who don't want to upset the status quo and are afraid to not have all the advantages they once did.

With that, I'll be bowing out of this discussion. I will no longer give this counter-argument a platform for their discourse. I recommend others do the same.

Always open to DMs for respectful discussion.

The point made repeatedly is this situation does not really apply to the Als coaching situation or the CFL in general.

[pjrocksmb]

If you want impactful change, the EEA isn't what your looking for. It just applies to a small group of businesses that deal with Government contracts. It doesn't cover most businesses in Canada including the CFL. A few hundred jobs isn't Rider math, it's a reasonable guesstimate.

The EEA is virtue signalling. Give jobs to a few people, who otherwise wouldn't get the jobs, because we understand how racism affected & affects their families. What evolved people we are.

No, I don't think that companies need to or even should match the local demographics. That's not what the EEA does anyway. It says that white owned companies should match the local demographics, but people of colour, natives, & women can totally ignore the demographics. I think companies should hire the best candidates period. Full stop.

Please don't use the term "natives" on here

And for the the record I don't agree with anything you have posted in this thread

[ModAdmin]

The thread will be locked as there is are repetitive comments to the discussion and I don't think more can be gained by letting the discussion continue.  Nothing is perfect in life and while the EEA may have deficiencies, it is an attempt to correct a previously unbalanced situation that negatively affected a groups or groups of people.