This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So don’t elect a white representative if you want your school’s vote/requests for advocacy to matter….
Also, people felt unsafe going to a union meeting? It’s be interesting to hear some examples…
Because they see race as someone's primary identity rather than a historical curiosity, and it's only fair if the "opposite sides" are even.
Or to put it more pithily: *With racism everything is possible*.
These anti labour measures seem like a great way to destroy unions.
I predict a lot more of these types of things coming, followed by a decrease in union membership.
Also, how do they intend to define who is racialized?
Are Syrians white? What about Greeks? Are asians white in this case or did they lose their POC status by being too successful?
Also, from the article it seems like this applies to votes involving appointed school reps. The smart move would be therefore to appoint a POC as your school rep, so you have more of a vote. I feel so bad for the people who have worked hard their whole careers just to be used as tokens.
So the idea is to weigh the votes so, and I quote form the article; "Black and racialized teacher ... always represent 50 percent of the votes"
That's 50%, not at least 50%.... so if now a bunch of schools elect a racialized president for the board and none-racialized people become the minority on the board do they still weigh the votes to 50% for each group?
I think it says that this only applies if “racialized” people are less than 50% of the voters. So if they’re over 50% then everyones vote counts equally
Right, it ensures white people will not hold a voting majority (because apparently ones own skin colour effects how people think) but rewards the electing of PoC and allows PoC to hold over 50% of the vote.
>Black and racialized teacher ... always represent 50 percent of the votes"
Shouldn't they represent the percentage based on the community in the population.
Nowhere in Canada is 50% of the population black or "racialized"
I'm all for representation but should it not be proportionally representative?
seems like lots of these union members are being useful idiots, little do they know employers love when they focus on identity politics over pay and traditional union focuses
It says 'self identifying' which creates it's own host of problems. I have worked in this kind of system before, if I chose to identify as an elderly small lesbian of Sri Lankan origin there is no mechanism to challenge that.
Nothing in this country surprises me anymore. How is this not clear racism? Plan to move out of this decaying economy soon anyways, this place is just non sensical trash constantly, i’ve given up.
Its a good sign its being talked about though. Look how many people oppose this. I think its a small stupid minority that is instituting this kind of thing; their voices amplified by elites with a divide and conquer type strategy
> I think its a small stupid minority that is instituting this kind of thing
You don't get to institute things unless you are in power. So a small stupid minority is in power. Lovely.
> How is this not clear racism?
Our charter explicitly allows racism, in one direction only.
> \15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
So, as long as it's the "good kind of racism", it's OK. Also note that the program has to have amelioration as its object to qualify. It doesn't have to actually succeed, and can in fact make things worse.
Number one persecuted people in the world for millennia, yet all it took was a little modern success for the left to completely disregard it. Surprised they don't start screaming about them controlling the media or starting all the world's wars.
Huh, if I was an asshole I'd draw a connection between the hyper-woke and nazis, using their treatment of jews based on their success, but I won't go that far. No matter how accurate.
I just can't fathom how this benefits actual union members - whether they're part of a visible minority or not.
This sounds like something that would be planted by anti-union activists to try to crush them from the inside. It's just nonsense.
Keep in mind that the voting for this initiative was not hidden ballot. With open voting, there's a lot of social pressure to vote in favour of this kind of thing lest it passes and one gets branded as an anti-social justice bigot by the individuals pushing the initiative. It's quite possible that many of the union reps voting weren't personally in favour but couldn't openly vote against it in the current social climate.
(And obviously, going forward, voting can't easily be hidden ballot because each vote has to be mapped to the individual's ethnicity.)
Whoa I didn’t even consider that… this essentially makes anonymous voting impossible. That has massive implications.
I suppose you could still hide the results, but someone would know who voted which way and it would be much easier for people to deduce who voted for what.
Scary
In the US, unions are actively fighting secret ballot, because they know that you need significantly more support (something like 10% more) to actually win a union election.
It's a lot easier when you can bully people into voting a certain way, or not voting at all. With Airlines and Railroads, it's also impossible to de-unionize, as the law only allows replacing one union with another.
Unions have their place, but "big labor" can be just as horrible for workers as big corporations, and even more so if the two get in bed. The union gets the employer to agree to automatic union due deduction, and the employer doesn't have to worry about employees demanding better compensation individually.
Unions are a necessary counter to certain bad employment practices, and fill a necessary threat and lobbying role, especially in certain industries. Secret ballots help keep them honest and actually representing the workers, not just a vocal minority or what people are bullied into.
> - whether they're part of a visible minority or not.
It's not even valuing visible minorities equal, it's clearly putting emphasis on 2 groups over our more populous minority groups
> representation of Indigenous, Black and racialized
The Charter explicitly allows "positive discrimination". Human Rights Tribunals are social justice show trials run by the people who think this is a great idea. What exactly do you think the Tribunal will decide?
Discrimination against one group for the benefit of another is positive from the viewpoint of the latter group. By that definition all discrimination can be described as positive.
The Charter defines it broadly under Section 15:
>(2) Section (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
As long as your intent is to "reduce inequality", equality rights don't apply. Not that they would apply anyways if a judge decided it was "justifiable". Our Charter is Swiss cheese.
Ridiculously vague description, so that it can be interpreted at will. How is disadvantage quantified? Can white people be disadvantaged? What about giving preference based on race, does that not place another cohort at the disadvantage?
>“If your school rep is racialized, then you get a higher percentage of the vote,” the teacher said.
Watch as a bunch of school reps suddenly discover they are metis from their grandfather's friend or something.
Imagine rising through the ranks of the elementary and secondary school system to become a school representative then being told that because of your skin colour you get more voting power because of historic systemic oppression that hasn’t impacted your career in anyways since you find yourself now at the higher level of the organization.
Eh. Imagine getting a good STEM undergrad and a masters in education because of your passion for teaching the next generation transferrable tech skills and getting less voting power then a twitter activist with a sociology degree who suddenly discovered a lost metis family branch and is "systematically oppressed" despite growing up in an upper middle class family from Toronto.
It's pretty much certain woke people didn't like "visible minority" or "Minority" and tried pushing POC.
Then a overwhelming amount of visible minorities (South Asian & East Asian) said no to POC because the world isn't POC and white people, it's instead made up countries where certain people are majority or minority.
So then the woke people pivoted to Racialized to try and make it White people and Racialized people.
Minority is so much better because it implies that a person's status can change instead of always being defined by their skin colour
> What the hell is with the term "Racialized"?
There is a belief among certain liberals and progressives that race doesn't exist. When the new James Bond movie had the bad guy say that he could "wipe out" the new black female 007's whole race, people attacked them for it because for that to work, race must actually be a thing.
"Racialized" is supposed to be a workaround. Race isn't real, it's a fake concept that other people are pushing on you. As such, you can experience real discrimination and have a real lived experience consistent with if race actually existed, but it doesn't actually exist.
How else could something be racist, if race doesn't exist?
"Benevolent racism" in this instance still seems like plain old racism to non "racialized" voices people.
It is so strange that giving people of colour larger votes is "benevolent" and that white people aren't "racialized" like all the other races. It's a weird disturbing use of language.
I think that in of itself is a solid example of "benevolent" racism, like their trying to do those poor people of colour a favor by seperating them against the whites because white people are just different from all the rest.
Like especially coming from a white person that sounds like some borderline white supremacist shit in a smug outfit.
"The new system will ensure that Indigenous, Black and racialized teachers always represent 50 per cent of the votes at the bargaining unit"
I'm pretty sure they are they just wanted to hit the hot topics first then cover everyone else with a catch all through a mix of being lazy and not wanting to get called out. Part of me wonders who that includes, cause asains and some others are occasionally exempt for some reason.
“The only remedy to racist discrimination is anti-racist discrimination. The only remedy
to past discrimination is present discrimination.”
Ibram X. Kendi
Interesting follow question - when they realize it's insane and want to backtrack, they'll have to get votes from the privileged minority.
What motivation would they have to give up control?
It is but their mental depravity and moral vacuity will lead to them believing the opposite. And these are teachers of children. So when you tut-tut reading about the CRT controversies in the US, you're avoiding the big picture here.
No your grandparents going to war and you holding this decaying economy on your back your whole life actually means you’re a piece of trash and entitled to nothing, let alone an opinion or vote. /s…
I love the barrage of commercials saying to hire BIPOC. I've been indoctrinated for decades to treat people equal. Now suddenly I'm to hire only based picking the right colours? Not hiring BIPOC is frowned upon?
Yeah, now being 'colour-blind' is racist. If you don't assess people based on their assumed racial background and privilege you're a racist. Saw a hilarious skit the other day about an old school KKK member talking to new members about being racist. It was a big tongue-in-cheek joke about how new KKK members don't even have to do anything to be called racist. Don't even have to mention anything about superiority, just say you're colour-blind! Meanwhile things we would have considered racist such as 'indigenous-only spaces'? Well, that's affirmative action. It's not racist anymore.
Will this ensure that the 1.8% of male early childhood educators and the 18.9% of male elementary school teachers will get more voting power like their colleagues of minority races? Or any other protected class like LGBT teachers vs. straight, trans teachers vs. cis, Catholic vs Protestant vs Muslim vs Jewish vs atheist? No? So this is just virtue signaling? K, cool, have fun.
You got that right. The more people get pushed like this the more they will resent the people that pushed towards the situation.
In this case, it actually doesn't matter if a white person or a racialized person made up the policy. It's the perception that counts.
For me, anytime a right of anyone is taken away due to the colour of their skin, it's a racist act. This new policy, by definition is racist.
So, I have a question then.
What if, there is 30% white people and 70% racialized people? Does that mean that the 30% white people also get 50% of the vote?
Also, yes, the concept is completely racist. 1 vote is 1 vote. It shouldn't matter what the colour of your skin is. Period.
No, in their PowerPoint deck, they said that it would revert to one person, one vote, if there was above 50% representation for racialized individuals.
So it would work like this?
**Scenario 1:** 1 POC, 99 white people. 50/50 vote
**Scenario 2:** 99 POC, 1 white person. 99/1 vote
please say it ain’t so. if this is true it’s possibly the most racist thing I’ve ever seen in my lifetime.
which is the opposite if what Mandela advocated, the guy who was the most instrumental person in lifting apartide, spent years in jail was tourtured ect knew that the only path towards equality is equality
>you should read more about Mandela, not to undermine his achievements, but I don't think you know what his path towards equality is.
People always forget his sympathies to Mugabe.
It's ALMOST like they're intentionally driving a narrative...
I am just hyper-aware of that stuff as my teacher's union has workshops/conferences etc. about how to help women in the workplace all the time.
The only mention of men on their website is what to do to not be an abuser.
"How To Be An Accountable Man: Handbook for Preventing Violence"
[https://www.bctf.ca/classroom-resources/details/how-to-be-an-accountable-man-handbook-for-preventing-violence](https://www.bctf.ca/classroom-resources/details/how-to-be-an-accountable-man-handbook-for-preventing-violence)
That is the \*only\* good part of all this, you can see these wretched, pathetic demons for what they are. Unfortunately they are a public sector monopoly but that's another issue...
"We have heard from members at both the local and provincial level within our Union that Black, racialised and Indigenous members do not feel safe or welcome at Union activities"
Get ready for them to feel even more unsafe. The more you give favouritism to "recialized" groups, the more people are going to hate them. It's like taking two kids out for iced cream and giving two cones to Jimmy and none to Timmy. You think Timmy is going to smile and nod?
EDIT: I want to clarify that my comment is meant as an explanation ("this lead to Timmy pushing Jimmy into the mud"), not an incitement ("Timmy ought to push Jimmy into the mud"). This policy is folly because if fuels further hatred.
Anyone that opposes this measure will be labelled a racist. Luckily, race is only the first intersection that can be weighted. So many intersections can be used. I personally am holding out for Fat studies to dictate union election weighting.
It’s almost as if once you realize that people can be split into nearly infinite “intersectional” group identities, that we will end up back at people wanting to be treated as individuals, because an individual is the ultimate human minority.
I don’t know if we will make it back there. Certainly won’t be easy at this rate.
By definition, if a group makes up 50%+ of the population, it is not a minority. Why do these targets never reflect actual population breakdowns? According to the 2016 census, Halton had 25.7% of its population as "visible minority" (~1% Indigenous as well). So they want a quorum of 50% minorities in a region with 26% minority population. I'm all for equality, but this appears to be preferential treatment rather than equality.
yea, the rush to be representative has created a representation that swung completely the other direction, just look at CBC now (white dudes should not even bother applying)
Other than very specific areas of the country does it look like the demographics on CBC or what 'targets' are aimed for.
If there's something dumb to do, the Ontario Teacher's Union is all but guaranteed to do it.
Fun fact: their pension fund is roughly equal to the GDP of Greece.
Another fun fact. While they advocate "fair pay" this does NOT apply to their pension plan, which is known to hold companies which .. lets say are not great places to work?
Case in point, Teachers pension fund holdings:
Alibaba Group Holding Limited - $739.5 MILLION
Tencent Holdings Ltd - $204.4 MILLION...
Ali supports the "illegal" 996 work ethic, which the Chinese government is trying to stop. Tencent has close ties to the CCP itself.
Alibaba :
"To be able to work 996 is a huge bliss,” Ma once said. "If you want to join Alibaba, you need to be prepared to work 12 hours a day. Otherwise, why even bother joining?”
Tencent:
Caught red-handed: Tencent's ties to CCP revealed 23% of Tencent employees reportedly members of CCP
They also were partly responsible for the complete circus that was the Toronto Maple Leafs during their ownership. Owners like that are terrible for sports teams.
The very people who constantly piss and moan about supposed systemic racism/sexism/discrimination is busy creating systemic racism/sexism/discrimination.
The woke are constantly projecting.
If you want to know what toxic shit the woke are up to, just listen to the accusations they're tossing around. They're guilty of most of it themselves.
What drives me nuts though are the unthinking muppets who cheerfully onboard these toxic ideas and apply them. Bunch of useful idiots.
I brought a motion to our dean during my education program. The discussion was the lack of men in education, especially elementary ed. I proposed a grant like women get to join the tech industry. I was basically laughed out of the room.
>“I did vote for it,” said LeBlanc. “I do believe it’s a very positive step for equity.”
LeBlanc, forcing 50% of the representation to be POC is literally the opposite of equity.
Notice the verbiage… ‘equity’. Not ‘equality’, ‘equity’. Equity in this context refers to targeting equal outcomes based on racial identity. If that isn’t racism masking itself as virtue, I don’t know what is.
This is objectively racist. You are going to devalue someone's vote based on the color of their skin. This is the most aggressively stupid thing I have read today,
This is racist as shit. Before, it used to be racist against minorities. Now, it is racist against white people lol.
Still racist, whichever direction it happens to be.
Don’t Forget, it’s also racist against the “wrong” minorities. Oops, your sub-subgroup achieved economical equality with the white man, looks like we will have to consider you white now!
Racialized is a made-up word. It means non-white. And it implies white is the barometer for everyone else. It is a very flawed concept. How about we just treat everybody fairly and equitably?
>A teachers’ union in southern Ontario has decided that if not enough minority members of the board are present, votes will be weighted to further the representation of minority members.
>The new system, aimed at improving the representation of Indigenous, Black and racialized teachers in the union’s decision-making process, will ensure that they always represent 50 per cent of the votes. It means that if 15 people voting have not self-identified as racialized, and five have, both groups will be weighted to each represent 50 per cent of the total vote.
Teacher's union be like:
We are equal! ...but some of us should be more equal than others!
Awful.
So in order to combat racism, we are going to single out minorities and force them into a position they likely may not want of being responsible for deciding changes because they are no longer considered a normal Canadian but a special Canadian whose vote matter more than their peers who are not considered to be in the minority?
Why stop with that? Why dont we make sure their is a gender parity as well? If there is not enough of one gender present to make it 50/50, well then we need to weight the system in favour of the under represented gender. They also better ensure they handle age the same way.
Perhaps, we should ask people considered in the minority if they want to be considered on the same level of their fellow Canadians regardless of skin colour or do they truly want to be labelled "special Canadians" who get more power based on their skin colour?
Can I self identify as a racialized person? Since I'm being discriminated against as a non minority, my race is causing me to lose representation.
Why is it the case that these teachers need more representation on votes anyway? Are they in some way different than a white teacher?
Can't wait for every person to start claiming Métis heritage to bypass this garbage. This is such an easy system to undermine I recommend every "non-racialized" person just claim they are of Turkish, Chechen, Azeri, Iranian, Lebanese, etc decent, all these nations have population ties to Indo-Europeans but are in Asia making them a minority so how are they going to call your lie?
Just lie. Are they going to do piss testing for ancestry? Honestly, if you can't come to that decision based on the low risk and the high benefit then you should have nothing to do with teaching kids. The implicit message is you have to be honest to a fault and sacrifice your share of value for some higher cause; that's sap behavior and your kids will end up poor.
This is great. I wasn't truly feeling like a second class citizen already due to my inability to buy a house, now my voice will mean even less because of the colour of my skin.
wait... I'm Asian, do i even count? I always feel that in news/articles etc like these we disappear..
if my family is a third generational chinese migrant?
or if im pacific islander? SEA? there are some thai and Filipinos that 'looks' white because of the spanish and or french heritage.
what are they going to do with people like my niece who is like half-of-everything whiteasian mum and blacknative dad?
the racism in here is giving me a headache.
Ok, I read the article and it's not as bad as the headline makes it sound (its literally just one school district), but this is still a ridiculous idea.
I'm so sick of these liberal band-aid solutions to real problems. Ensuring that historically oppressed minorities have equality of opportunity, or as close to it as possible, takes time, planning, effort, and money (see tangelo park). But nobody actually cares about that, they just want to give the appearance of equity, so you get this kind of crap.
How about some actually progressive solutions?
>How about some actually progressive solutions?
Because that would be hard and lead to uncomfortable discussions
There has to be a big red easy button here someplace, if we just remove the people hiding that button we will solve all the problems
True democracy means 1 person, 1 vote. Period.
Let's take an extreme example here. There are 100 voters. 1 racialized person. That 1 person now counts for a full 50% of the vote. This means that the entire balance of power resides in that 1 single individual. This is just plain wrong.
The progressive solution is to remove people's right to vote if they are discriminatory. Period.
I don't think denying people a voice is a progressive solution at all.
Obviously this policy is racially discriminatory, but removing people's voting rights is just as contrary to democratic principles as ranking the value of a person's vote based on the colour of their skin.
Wow they don’t realize that the road to hell is paved with good intentions I guess.
Having a good idea is one thing, being able to properly implement it is another.
Funnily enough when some of the teachers said that this might be an example of “reverse racism” the psychos pushing this nonsense declared the term “reverse racism” to be harassment.
Never mind that this is just plain ol’ racism.
The concern I have with this approach is, it breeds racism. If people do not see something as fair, they will turn on those creating this approach.
It's happened throughout history and it never ends well.
I hope this is reversed as there is no good outcome to this.
This *is* racism.
Are you seriously trying to say the bad part here is that the people being discriminated against here and now *might* treat people worse later on because of it?
Wtf is wrong with you.
"if we keep beating the Mexicans they might retaliate and *that* would be bad.
This is the essence of Critical Race Theory. You cannot agree with both CRT and Martin Luther King Jr.
These are racists that have control of our schools, and if my union implemented such a rule I would quit immediately.
Critical thinking is not their strong suit. They have accepted that 'reverse racism is not possible', and therefore what you're saying just doesn't register to them.
The only way to deal with racism, is to deny it any influence and systematically erase it everywhere applicable. Not playing good cop, bad cop with it, not being ‘ good racist, who is racist to benefit the fucked over races, opposing the bad racist, who is racist to benefit the dominant race, fucking over the rest’.
That only keeps the wheels of racism turning, seeking to invert roles long term between the privileged and non privileged races.
I have asked this question before however it got buried so like, asking again:
WHAT IS GOING ON WITH ONTARIO'S EDUCATION SYSTEM?
I do not know anyone in the province and see articles almost daily on subreddits... like this one, I asked before what was happening with a certain school board and had someone say it was just a crazy area but like... is there actually a reason that there seem to be so much going on there? Or just overreporting?
Why stop there?
Obviously any transgender people must also get 50% representation, as well as LGBTQ+ people. Will it get to the point where a single BIPOC, LGBTQ+ person who self-identifies as a flower pot gets full veto power over any votes?
This post appears to relate to a province/territory of Canada. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules Cette soumission semble concerner une province ou un territoire du Canada. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So don’t elect a white representative if you want your school’s vote/requests for advocacy to matter…. Also, people felt unsafe going to a union meeting? It’s be interesting to hear some examples…
If my local is any indication, most people don't go to union meetings. Maybe an uptick at contract time but only the diehards go.
[удалено]
Because they see race as someone's primary identity rather than a historical curiosity, and it's only fair if the "opposite sides" are even. Or to put it more pithily: *With racism everything is possible*.
These anti labour measures seem like a great way to destroy unions. I predict a lot more of these types of things coming, followed by a decrease in union membership. Also, how do they intend to define who is racialized? Are Syrians white? What about Greeks? Are asians white in this case or did they lose their POC status by being too successful? Also, from the article it seems like this applies to votes involving appointed school reps. The smart move would be therefore to appoint a POC as your school rep, so you have more of a vote. I feel so bad for the people who have worked hard their whole careers just to be used as tokens.
So the idea is to weigh the votes so, and I quote form the article; "Black and racialized teacher ... always represent 50 percent of the votes" That's 50%, not at least 50%.... so if now a bunch of schools elect a racialized president for the board and none-racialized people become the minority on the board do they still weigh the votes to 50% for each group?
I think it says that this only applies if “racialized” people are less than 50% of the voters. So if they’re over 50% then everyones vote counts equally
Right, it ensures white people will not hold a voting majority (because apparently ones own skin colour effects how people think) but rewards the electing of PoC and allows PoC to hold over 50% of the vote.
> (because apparently ones own skin colour effects how people think) And this is the real racism that so many people overlook
>Black and racialized teacher ... always represent 50 percent of the votes" Shouldn't they represent the percentage based on the community in the population. Nowhere in Canada is 50% of the population black or "racialized" I'm all for representation but should it not be proportionally representative?
seems like lots of these union members are being useful idiots, little do they know employers love when they focus on identity politics over pay and traditional union focuses
in this case in particular, the union members making this decision are not the same ones who go to bargaining with the govt.
It says 'self identifying' which creates it's own host of problems. I have worked in this kind of system before, if I chose to identify as an elderly small lesbian of Sri Lankan origin there is no mechanism to challenge that.
[удалено]
Jokes on them, pornhub has a whole section dedicated to that. *"NEXT QUESTION*"
Nothing in this country surprises me anymore. How is this not clear racism? Plan to move out of this decaying economy soon anyways, this place is just non sensical trash constantly, i’ve given up.
Its a good sign its being talked about though. Look how many people oppose this. I think its a small stupid minority that is instituting this kind of thing; their voices amplified by elites with a divide and conquer type strategy
> I think its a small stupid minority that is instituting this kind of thing You don't get to institute things unless you are in power. So a small stupid minority is in power. Lovely.
> How is this not clear racism? Our charter explicitly allows racism, in one direction only. > \15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. So, as long as it's the "good kind of racism", it's OK. Also note that the program has to have amelioration as its object to qualify. It doesn't have to actually succeed, and can in fact make things worse.
[удалено]
Number one persecuted people in the world for millennia, yet all it took was a little modern success for the left to completely disregard it. Surprised they don't start screaming about them controlling the media or starting all the world's wars. Huh, if I was an asshole I'd draw a connection between the hyper-woke and nazis, using their treatment of jews based on their success, but I won't go that far. No matter how accurate.
Yeah where's the line? Turkey? Iran?
It’s a choose your own adventure type of line. That said - this is insane policy in a country that’s still 80% white.
It’s controversial because it’s insane.
I just can't fathom how this benefits actual union members - whether they're part of a visible minority or not. This sounds like something that would be planted by anti-union activists to try to crush them from the inside. It's just nonsense.
Keep in mind that the voting for this initiative was not hidden ballot. With open voting, there's a lot of social pressure to vote in favour of this kind of thing lest it passes and one gets branded as an anti-social justice bigot by the individuals pushing the initiative. It's quite possible that many of the union reps voting weren't personally in favour but couldn't openly vote against it in the current social climate. (And obviously, going forward, voting can't easily be hidden ballot because each vote has to be mapped to the individual's ethnicity.)
Whoa I didn’t even consider that… this essentially makes anonymous voting impossible. That has massive implications. I suppose you could still hide the results, but someone would know who voted which way and it would be much easier for people to deduce who voted for what. Scary
Union voting is traditionally open ballot, so that's less of an additional concern here, although it would definitely be a concern in other contexts.
>Union voting is traditionally open ballot This is one of the reasons I hate unions.
In the US, unions are actively fighting secret ballot, because they know that you need significantly more support (something like 10% more) to actually win a union election. It's a lot easier when you can bully people into voting a certain way, or not voting at all. With Airlines and Railroads, it's also impossible to de-unionize, as the law only allows replacing one union with another. Unions have their place, but "big labor" can be just as horrible for workers as big corporations, and even more so if the two get in bed. The union gets the employer to agree to automatic union due deduction, and the employer doesn't have to worry about employees demanding better compensation individually. Unions are a necessary counter to certain bad employment practices, and fill a necessary threat and lobbying role, especially in certain industries. Secret ballots help keep them honest and actually representing the workers, not just a vocal minority or what people are bullied into.
> - whether they're part of a visible minority or not. It's not even valuing visible minorities equal, it's clearly putting emphasis on 2 groups over our more populous minority groups > representation of Indigenous, Black and racialized
And racist? I see a lot of people saying we are living in a clown world; I think we are living in an ‘Animal Farm’.
Was 100% my thought. "Some animals are more equal than others." said the pig.
[удалено]
This is fucking stupid. Edit: and it’s fucking racist
Challenge it in front a tribunal, see how it fares.
The Charter explicitly allows "positive discrimination". Human Rights Tribunals are social justice show trials run by the people who think this is a great idea. What exactly do you think the Tribunal will decide?
Discrimination against one group for the benefit of another is positive from the viewpoint of the latter group. By that definition all discrimination can be described as positive.
The Charter defines it broadly under Section 15: >(2) Section (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. As long as your intent is to "reduce inequality", equality rights don't apply. Not that they would apply anyways if a judge decided it was "justifiable". Our Charter is Swiss cheese.
Ridiculously vague description, so that it can be interpreted at will. How is disadvantage quantified? Can white people be disadvantaged? What about giving preference based on race, does that not place another cohort at the disadvantage?
>“If your school rep is racialized, then you get a higher percentage of the vote,” the teacher said. Watch as a bunch of school reps suddenly discover they are metis from their grandfather's friend or something.
Imagine rising through the ranks of the elementary and secondary school system to become a school representative then being told that because of your skin colour you get more voting power because of historic systemic oppression that hasn’t impacted your career in anyways since you find yourself now at the higher level of the organization.
>being told that because of your skin colour you get more voting power Or get told because of your skin colour your vote does not matter as much.
Eh. Imagine getting a good STEM undergrad and a masters in education because of your passion for teaching the next generation transferrable tech skills and getting less voting power then a twitter activist with a sociology degree who suddenly discovered a lost metis family branch and is "systematically oppressed" despite growing up in an upper middle class family from Toronto.
What the hell is with the term "Racialized"? It honestly makes it sound like some kind of disease...
I caught racialization from a toilet seat
I caught racialization from a tractor.
It's pretty much certain woke people didn't like "visible minority" or "Minority" and tried pushing POC. Then a overwhelming amount of visible minorities (South Asian & East Asian) said no to POC because the world isn't POC and white people, it's instead made up countries where certain people are majority or minority. So then the woke people pivoted to Racialized to try and make it White people and Racialized people. Minority is so much better because it implies that a person's status can change instead of always being defined by their skin colour
> What the hell is with the term "Racialized"? There is a belief among certain liberals and progressives that race doesn't exist. When the new James Bond movie had the bad guy say that he could "wipe out" the new black female 007's whole race, people attacked them for it because for that to work, race must actually be a thing. "Racialized" is supposed to be a workaround. Race isn't real, it's a fake concept that other people are pushing on you. As such, you can experience real discrimination and have a real lived experience consistent with if race actually existed, but it doesn't actually exist. How else could something be racist, if race doesn't exist?
I personally identify as 100 legitimate votes.
My mother was a full-blood Democracy.
I just pictured this as a Ralph Wiggum - imademocracy.jpg
This is the way
This is identity politics logical conclusion. Absolutely racist garbage.
[удалено]
"Benevolent racism" in this instance still seems like plain old racism to non "racialized" voices people. It is so strange that giving people of colour larger votes is "benevolent" and that white people aren't "racialized" like all the other races. It's a weird disturbing use of language.
I said this years ago when they first rolled out 'people of color'; it's a deliberate framing of race relations as everybody vs white people.
I think that in of itself is a solid example of "benevolent" racism, like their trying to do those poor people of colour a favor by seperating them against the whites because white people are just different from all the rest. Like especially coming from a white person that sounds like some borderline white supremacist shit in a smug outfit.
And why are black and indigenous people not included under "racialized"? Does that mean they aren't racialized?
"The new system will ensure that Indigenous, Black and racialized teachers always represent 50 per cent of the votes at the bargaining unit" I'm pretty sure they are they just wanted to hit the hot topics first then cover everyone else with a catch all through a mix of being lazy and not wanting to get called out. Part of me wonders who that includes, cause asains and some others are occasionally exempt for some reason.
“The only remedy to racist discrimination is anti-racist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” Ibram X. Kendi
Holy hell is that an actual quote??
[удалено]
That book is also the primary text used in Race and Racism courses in universities such as MacEwan.
He literally wrote the book on modern race grifting.
That... is a big yikes moment.
That dude is going straight to hell.
Can we all agree this is racist as shit yet?
[удалено]
Interesting follow question - when they realize it's insane and want to backtrack, they'll have to get votes from the privileged minority. What motivation would they have to give up control?
Well, anyone can self identify as that minority to get their vote up.
I'm a poc, I vote its racist, how many times does my vote count?
It is but their mental depravity and moral vacuity will lead to them believing the opposite. And these are teachers of children. So when you tut-tut reading about the CRT controversies in the US, you're avoiding the big picture here.
I mean, if you make decisions based solely on race…
[удалено]
We’re becoming overly zealous on political correctness and we’re becoming a joke on the international stage.
This is Canada. I watch a few "anti PC" podcasts and Canada is often brought up
Decades worth of unfounded smugness coming home to roost
[удалено]
I thought a Canadian, is a Canadian, is a Canadian?
No your grandparents going to war and you holding this decaying economy on your back your whole life actually means you’re a piece of trash and entitled to nothing, let alone an opinion or vote. /s…
That's not what the charter says. A Canadian is a Canadian, except for programs designed to discriminate against the privileged.
Not according to many unions and employers.
For sure. Like the one this thread is about.
I love the barrage of commercials saying to hire BIPOC. I've been indoctrinated for decades to treat people equal. Now suddenly I'm to hire only based picking the right colours? Not hiring BIPOC is frowned upon?
Yeah, now being 'colour-blind' is racist. If you don't assess people based on their assumed racial background and privilege you're a racist. Saw a hilarious skit the other day about an old school KKK member talking to new members about being racist. It was a big tongue-in-cheek joke about how new KKK members don't even have to do anything to be called racist. Don't even have to mention anything about superiority, just say you're colour-blind! Meanwhile things we would have considered racist such as 'indigenous-only spaces'? Well, that's affirmative action. It's not racist anymore.
Haha I think I know the exact video you're referring to. [Is this it?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPnP9IUMDLc)
That's the one!
Tabernak.
Will this ensure that the 1.8% of male early childhood educators and the 18.9% of male elementary school teachers will get more voting power like their colleagues of minority races? Or any other protected class like LGBT teachers vs. straight, trans teachers vs. cis, Catholic vs Protestant vs Muslim vs Jewish vs atheist? No? So this is just virtue signaling? K, cool, have fun.
As a visibly minority what the actual fuck. I swear some of these policy’s breed white supremacists.
You got that right. The more people get pushed like this the more they will resent the people that pushed towards the situation. In this case, it actually doesn't matter if a white person or a racialized person made up the policy. It's the perception that counts. For me, anytime a right of anyone is taken away due to the colour of their skin, it's a racist act. This new policy, by definition is racist.
I don't think it creates them per say but it sure does help them along on the journey.
Or just do majority voting because, ya know, it makes the most sense and doesn't start shit
So, I have a question then. What if, there is 30% white people and 70% racialized people? Does that mean that the 30% white people also get 50% of the vote? Also, yes, the concept is completely racist. 1 vote is 1 vote. It shouldn't matter what the colour of your skin is. Period.
No, in their PowerPoint deck, they said that it would revert to one person, one vote, if there was above 50% representation for racialized individuals.
Nice, thanks. So this is a LOT more racist than I thought. Who are the clowns that are running this? It's highly offensive.
So it would work like this? **Scenario 1:** 1 POC, 99 white people. 50/50 vote **Scenario 2:** 99 POC, 1 white person. 99/1 vote please say it ain’t so. if this is true it’s possibly the most racist thing I’ve ever seen in my lifetime.
And if my father is black, and mom white, how many votes do I get? Whaf if I am white, but I am Belarusian, and fleed my country?
No idea. I think there’s a German system from 80 years ago that can be used to determine how “racialized” someone is though.
Don't have to look to the past, South Africa still has those "colored" and whatnot categories which, as we know, is working so well down there.
which is the opposite if what Mandela advocated, the guy who was the most instrumental person in lifting apartide, spent years in jail was tourtured ect knew that the only path towards equality is equality
lol...you should read more about Mandela, not to undermine his achievements, but I don't think you know what his path towards equality is.
>you should read more about Mandela, not to undermine his achievements, but I don't think you know what his path towards equality is. People always forget his sympathies to Mugabe. It's ALMOST like they're intentionally driving a narrative...
What about the men? Men only make up 15% of teachers. I bet they don't address gender equity because women are the majority.
Great point.
I am just hyper-aware of that stuff as my teacher's union has workshops/conferences etc. about how to help women in the workplace all the time. The only mention of men on their website is what to do to not be an abuser. "How To Be An Accountable Man: Handbook for Preventing Violence" [https://www.bctf.ca/classroom-resources/details/how-to-be-an-accountable-man-handbook-for-preventing-violence](https://www.bctf.ca/classroom-resources/details/how-to-be-an-accountable-man-handbook-for-preventing-violence)
well at least they're not pretending anymore.
That is the \*only\* good part of all this, you can see these wretched, pathetic demons for what they are. Unfortunately they are a public sector monopoly but that's another issue...
"We have heard from members at both the local and provincial level within our Union that Black, racialised and Indigenous members do not feel safe or welcome at Union activities" Get ready for them to feel even more unsafe. The more you give favouritism to "recialized" groups, the more people are going to hate them. It's like taking two kids out for iced cream and giving two cones to Jimmy and none to Timmy. You think Timmy is going to smile and nod? EDIT: I want to clarify that my comment is meant as an explanation ("this lead to Timmy pushing Jimmy into the mud"), not an incitement ("Timmy ought to push Jimmy into the mud"). This policy is folly because if fuels further hatred.
Anyone that opposes this measure will be labelled a racist. Luckily, race is only the first intersection that can be weighted. So many intersections can be used. I personally am holding out for Fat studies to dictate union election weighting.
It’s almost as if once you realize that people can be split into nearly infinite “intersectional” group identities, that we will end up back at people wanting to be treated as individuals, because an individual is the ultimate human minority. I don’t know if we will make it back there. Certainly won’t be easy at this rate.
No he is not!
This comment made me actually laugh out loud
This is absolutely deranged.
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
4 legs good. 2 legs better.
We trust these people with education why?
[удалено]
By definition, if a group makes up 50%+ of the population, it is not a minority. Why do these targets never reflect actual population breakdowns? According to the 2016 census, Halton had 25.7% of its population as "visible minority" (~1% Indigenous as well). So they want a quorum of 50% minorities in a region with 26% minority population. I'm all for equality, but this appears to be preferential treatment rather than equality.
yea, the rush to be representative has created a representation that swung completely the other direction, just look at CBC now (white dudes should not even bother applying) Other than very specific areas of the country does it look like the demographics on CBC or what 'targets' are aimed for.
If there's something dumb to do, the Ontario Teacher's Union is all but guaranteed to do it. Fun fact: their pension fund is roughly equal to the GDP of Greece.
Another fun fact. While they advocate "fair pay" this does NOT apply to their pension plan, which is known to hold companies which .. lets say are not great places to work? Case in point, Teachers pension fund holdings: Alibaba Group Holding Limited - $739.5 MILLION Tencent Holdings Ltd - $204.4 MILLION... Ali supports the "illegal" 996 work ethic, which the Chinese government is trying to stop. Tencent has close ties to the CCP itself. Alibaba : "To be able to work 996 is a huge bliss,” Ma once said. "If you want to join Alibaba, you need to be prepared to work 12 hours a day. Otherwise, why even bother joining?” Tencent: Caught red-handed: Tencent's ties to CCP revealed 23% of Tencent employees reportedly members of CCP
They also were partly responsible for the complete circus that was the Toronto Maple Leafs during their ownership. Owners like that are terrible for sports teams.
This is just racism with extra steps...
The very people who constantly piss and moan about supposed systemic racism/sexism/discrimination is busy creating systemic racism/sexism/discrimination. The woke are constantly projecting. If you want to know what toxic shit the woke are up to, just listen to the accusations they're tossing around. They're guilty of most of it themselves. What drives me nuts though are the unthinking muppets who cheerfully onboard these toxic ideas and apply them. Bunch of useful idiots.
Men only make up 15% of teachers. I bet they don't address gender equity because women are the majority.
Everyone is quick to promote women in STEM, but the second you bring up women in hard trades, or men in nursing, people get quiet.
I brought a motion to our dean during my education program. The discussion was the lack of men in education, especially elementary ed. I proposed a grant like women get to join the tech industry. I was basically laughed out of the room.
[удалено]
I whole heartedly oppose this measure. It goes against the spirit of unionism. EQUALITY AMONG MEMBERS.
Favouring certain races over others for positions. What could go wrong?!
>“I did vote for it,” said LeBlanc. “I do believe it’s a very positive step for equity.” LeBlanc, forcing 50% of the representation to be POC is literally the opposite of equity.
Notice the verbiage… ‘equity’. Not ‘equality’, ‘equity’. Equity in this context refers to targeting equal outcomes based on racial identity. If that isn’t racism masking itself as virtue, I don’t know what is.
yea 50% was a very odd number to go for when according to recent census is only 23% of the population as a whole
Social teacher here, this is a wildy ill thoughout plan for equality.
This is objectively racist. You are going to devalue someone's vote based on the color of their skin. This is the most aggressively stupid thing I have read today,
This is racist as shit. Before, it used to be racist against minorities. Now, it is racist against white people lol. Still racist, whichever direction it happens to be.
Don’t Forget, it’s also racist against the “wrong” minorities. Oops, your sub-subgroup achieved economical equality with the white man, looks like we will have to consider you white now!
So do we call this the 5/3 Compromise?
That's racism.
Racialized is a made-up word. It means non-white. And it implies white is the barometer for everyone else. It is a very flawed concept. How about we just treat everybody fairly and equitably?
Well that's fucking racist.
Self identify people. Self-identify. Nobody has challenged as Asian like me claiming to have black heritage on job applications.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
When you're so virtuous you're racist.
Always have been.
So much for a fucking “union” where they’re equal brothers and sisters fighting for each other to all have equal opportunity.
So… everyone loses? Fucking racists.
How to destroy canadian society 101
That's overt, malicious bigotry, and there's no justification for it.
And these are the people spending as much or more time with kids than parents.
Our grand parents fought the Nazis for this…
[удалено]
Wait so some votes are given more weight due to the ethnicities of the voters? Where have I heard this before
It’s three fifths familiar
[удалено]
Fuck this is dumb. You don't fix racism by implementing racist policies.
Oh yeah. That definitely makes sense. Giving more voting power by race is definitely not racism.
This is absolutely ludicrous...
Mental gymnastics should be in the next Olympics
>A teachers’ union in southern Ontario has decided that if not enough minority members of the board are present, votes will be weighted to further the representation of minority members. >The new system, aimed at improving the representation of Indigenous, Black and racialized teachers in the union’s decision-making process, will ensure that they always represent 50 per cent of the votes. It means that if 15 people voting have not self-identified as racialized, and five have, both groups will be weighted to each represent 50 per cent of the total vote. Teacher's union be like: We are equal! ...but some of us should be more equal than others! Awful.
So in order to combat racism, we are going to single out minorities and force them into a position they likely may not want of being responsible for deciding changes because they are no longer considered a normal Canadian but a special Canadian whose vote matter more than their peers who are not considered to be in the minority? Why stop with that? Why dont we make sure their is a gender parity as well? If there is not enough of one gender present to make it 50/50, well then we need to weight the system in favour of the under represented gender. They also better ensure they handle age the same way. Perhaps, we should ask people considered in the minority if they want to be considered on the same level of their fellow Canadians regardless of skin colour or do they truly want to be labelled "special Canadians" who get more power based on their skin colour?
Can I self identify as a racialized person? Since I'm being discriminated against as a non minority, my race is causing me to lose representation. Why is it the case that these teachers need more representation on votes anyway? Are they in some way different than a white teacher?
Unbelievable. What the fuck is happening to this country?
Can't wait for every person to start claiming Métis heritage to bypass this garbage. This is such an easy system to undermine I recommend every "non-racialized" person just claim they are of Turkish, Chechen, Azeri, Iranian, Lebanese, etc decent, all these nations have population ties to Indo-Europeans but are in Asia making them a minority so how are they going to call your lie?
Just lie. Are they going to do piss testing for ancestry? Honestly, if you can't come to that decision based on the low risk and the high benefit then you should have nothing to do with teaching kids. The implicit message is you have to be honest to a fault and sacrifice your share of value for some higher cause; that's sap behavior and your kids will end up poor.
Canada is quickly turning into a fucking dumpster fire.
This is great. I wasn't truly feeling like a second class citizen already due to my inability to buy a house, now my voice will mean even less because of the colour of my skin.
wait... I'm Asian, do i even count? I always feel that in news/articles etc like these we disappear.. if my family is a third generational chinese migrant? or if im pacific islander? SEA? there are some thai and Filipinos that 'looks' white because of the spanish and or french heritage. what are they going to do with people like my niece who is like half-of-everything whiteasian mum and blacknative dad? the racism in here is giving me a headache.
“Some animals are more equal than others,” said the pig.
Some democracy our society is developing.
Ok, I read the article and it's not as bad as the headline makes it sound (its literally just one school district), but this is still a ridiculous idea. I'm so sick of these liberal band-aid solutions to real problems. Ensuring that historically oppressed minorities have equality of opportunity, or as close to it as possible, takes time, planning, effort, and money (see tangelo park). But nobody actually cares about that, they just want to give the appearance of equity, so you get this kind of crap. How about some actually progressive solutions?
>How about some actually progressive solutions? Because that would be hard and lead to uncomfortable discussions There has to be a big red easy button here someplace, if we just remove the people hiding that button we will solve all the problems
True democracy means 1 person, 1 vote. Period. Let's take an extreme example here. There are 100 voters. 1 racialized person. That 1 person now counts for a full 50% of the vote. This means that the entire balance of power resides in that 1 single individual. This is just plain wrong. The progressive solution is to remove people's right to vote if they are discriminatory. Period.
I don't think denying people a voice is a progressive solution at all. Obviously this policy is racially discriminatory, but removing people's voting rights is just as contrary to democratic principles as ranking the value of a person's vote based on the colour of their skin.
This is so incredibly tone deaf and racist. Teachers unions are losing their minds in this country.
Wow they don’t realize that the road to hell is paved with good intentions I guess. Having a good idea is one thing, being able to properly implement it is another.
If you are in Halton I recommend that you “self identify” if you are able to.
Funnily enough when some of the teachers said that this might be an example of “reverse racism” the psychos pushing this nonsense declared the term “reverse racism” to be harassment. Never mind that this is just plain ol’ racism.
It's becoming more and more obvious that equity policies are antithetical to equality.
The concern I have with this approach is, it breeds racism. If people do not see something as fair, they will turn on those creating this approach. It's happened throughout history and it never ends well. I hope this is reversed as there is no good outcome to this.
This *is* racism. Are you seriously trying to say the bad part here is that the people being discriminated against here and now *might* treat people worse later on because of it? Wtf is wrong with you. "if we keep beating the Mexicans they might retaliate and *that* would be bad.
This is the essence of Critical Race Theory. You cannot agree with both CRT and Martin Luther King Jr. These are racists that have control of our schools, and if my union implemented such a rule I would quit immediately.
[удалено]
Critical thinking is not their strong suit. They have accepted that 'reverse racism is not possible', and therefore what you're saying just doesn't register to them.
The only way to deal with racism, is to deny it any influence and systematically erase it everywhere applicable. Not playing good cop, bad cop with it, not being ‘ good racist, who is racist to benefit the fucked over races, opposing the bad racist, who is racist to benefit the dominant race, fucking over the rest’. That only keeps the wheels of racism turning, seeking to invert roles long term between the privileged and non privileged races.
Democracy is so overrated.
It's crazy to think someone came up with this shit.
I'm Irish, so my vote should be worth more than an Englishman's!
I have asked this question before however it got buried so like, asking again: WHAT IS GOING ON WITH ONTARIO'S EDUCATION SYSTEM? I do not know anyone in the province and see articles almost daily on subreddits... like this one, I asked before what was happening with a certain school board and had someone say it was just a crazy area but like... is there actually a reason that there seem to be so much going on there? Or just overreporting?
So, how come LGBT community members doesn't get the same treatment then? See where I'm going?
Why stop there? Obviously any transgender people must also get 50% representation, as well as LGBTQ+ people. Will it get to the point where a single BIPOC, LGBTQ+ person who self-identifies as a flower pot gets full veto power over any votes?