11779 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Like the old buys club that runs your favourite soccer team?

[rjag]

It's a good start.  Scanning down seeing where Geoff Young or Ben Issit were opposed is a good barometer for where things start to come off the rails.  You can pickup the motions based on activism.  Here is one that Geoff Young voted down.

 

 

What exactly does that mean?  That the CoV will hire soley based on skin colour, gender and age?

 

Its Affirmative Action, where qualifications and merit dont count as much as your skin colour, infirmity etc. I think if Council has a concern instead of paying for artists and poet laureates they could divert the money to cover costs to identify and encourage minority and under represented groups to shadow/apprentice etc but dont ever deny someone a job who has the experience and skills due to their whiteness/genitalia. All applicants should have that info scrubbed in the initial application process

[Mike K.]

Councillor Dubow recently remarked via Twitter, along with posting a photo of Canada's premiers:

 

"Diversity, Eh? Say no more." Here's a link to the tweet: https://twitter.com/...564505627619329

 

The premiers were fairly elected in their respective provinces, and chosen to lead their respective parties.

[rmpeers]

Actually it means the opposite, but then you should know that.

It means hiring more diverse staff. It means breaking down barriers for disabled applicants and employees. It means making sure that senior management never again becomes an "old boys club". It means actually living up to the ideals of Canada as a place where everyone is entitled to a fair opportunity to succeed.

If that's truly what it means, that's great
But when the language seems deliberately dense and bureaucratic, it seems to embody the sort of insider beaureaucratese that probably doesn't do much to lure new blood.

[rmpeers]

Councillor Dubow recently remarked via Twitter, along with posting a photo of Canada's premiers:

"Diversity, Eh? Say no more." Here's a link to the tweet: https://twitter.com/...564505627619329

The premiers were fairly elected in their respective provinces, and chosen to lead their respective parties.

So he's a Christy Clark fan, presumably?

[Nparker]

So he's a Christy Clark fan, presumably? 

And Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May and Angela Merkel. Diversity!

[Victoria Watcher]

and winnie mandela

[Awaiting Juno]

Does Mr. Dubow have a problem with democracy?  You know the system that put him in his council seat?  The current set of premiers were elected, and as a result of recent elections - all 3 female premiers were ousted, Clark, Notley and Wynne - arguably because their policies and leadership failed to resonate.  When people are placed in positions because of their identity (ie. female, trans/LGBTQ, non-white, etc.), however, lack the expertise needed to succeed in those positions, you are setting them up for failure.  You have not advanced their cause, and you have not served the greater good.  Now, if it's truly a tie-breaker situation, where you have two equally qualified candidates and a single position, and one happens to be a minority/under represented group, there's an argument that the opportunity to improve upon diversity in the workplace should be taken.

 

There are also good arguments to be had to improve the chances of those who are "under-represented" to be the best qualified for the job in the first place.  Improve upon their chances to make it through the system - identify the barriers and work to provide them with the tools they need to clear those hurdles.  That doesn't mean the hurdles should be cleared, they should be there if the reasons for them being there in the first place are bonefide, however the deck should not be stacked against under-represented people before the race even begins. 

 

Dubow is arguing that people should be placed in positions because of who they are, rather than because of what they know or their abilities to do the job that is before them.  That is "workfare", and will result in people continuing to view those in under-represented groups in a negative light.  You'll get people into positions, but when they fail to meet the job requirements, you'll then be in a position where that person needs to be replaced by someone who can do the job that needs to be done.

 

We need more diversity in leadership, but to get there, we need to enable the pool of diverse leaders to be improved upon and we need to re-assure those who are being asked to elect diversity that they are still getting representation that is capable of doing the job (ie. equally capable to the non-diverse candidate who has been passed over).  Electing diversity for diversity's sake will only result in a backlash against doing so in the future - and will eventually result in an "image" problem for parties that put identity before ability - in short, will result in those parties getting a reputation for being unable to do the job, and to do it well.  

[Rob Randall]

There are also good arguments to be had to improve the chances of those who are "under-represented" to be the best qualified for the job in the first place.  Improve upon their chances to make it through the system - identify the barriers and work to provide them with the tools they need to clear those hurdles.  That doesn't mean the hurdles should be cleared, they should be there if the reasons for them being there in the first place are bonefide, however the deck should not be stacked against under-represented people before the race even begins.

 

This portion deserves highlighting as it gets buried under the harrumphs of the Old White Guys Brigade. Some of the most capable and trustworthy leaders I know are women; why aren't they represented adequately at the highest levels of leadership?  Trump's cabinet is equally ridiculous. 

[Coreyburger]

Been waiting for this.  Perhaps someone else can chime in here but I can only find one motion of the current council that was defeated at a council meeting.  Could that possibly be right? December 13th, the very contentious checkout bag regulation implementation -an exemption for food service businesses.

 

Very little gets defeated at council. Also most votes are unanimous (the consent agenda).

[Mike K.]

This portion deserves highlighting as it gets buried under the harrumphs of the Old White Guys Brigade. Some of the most capable and trustworthy leaders I know are women; why aren't they represented adequately at the highest levels of leadership?

They aren’t?

Mayor of the Capital of BC: woman
Head of the Victoria Chamber of Commerce: woman
Co-chairs of the Victoria Police Board: women
Capital Regional Housing Committee chair: woman
CRD vice-chair: woman
BC Transit Board chair: woman
Victoria Regional Transit Commission chair: woman
Victoria Airport Authorty vice chair: woman

And that’s just off the top of my head. Women are extremely talented leaders in our community.

[Victoria Watcher]

perhaps he means business leadership. where profits count.

[Coreyburger]

They aren’t?

Mayor of the Capital of BC: woman
Head of the Victoria Chamber of Commerce: woman
Co-chairs of the Victoria Police Board: women
Capital Regional Housing Committee chair: woman
CRD vice-chair: woman
BC Transit Board chair: woman
Victoria Regional Transit Commission chair: woman
Victoria Airport Authorty vice chair: woman

And that’s just off the top of my head. Women are extremely talented leaders in our community.

 

And we are an outlier on this. I rather liked RBJ's comment about the US supreme court on the number of women: https://www.huffingt..._n_6636328.html

[Mike K.]

I dunno. Instead of worrying about another country's supreme court maybe greater efforts should be taken to involve women in your organization's leadership. Six of the seven board positions, including that of the president, are filled by men.

[Coreyburger]

I dunno. Instead of worrying about another country's supreme court maybe greater efforts should be taken to involve women in your organization's leadership. Six of the seven board positions, including that of the president, are filled by men.

 

Interesting line of questioning...

 

GVCC does (as does GVBTWS, which I also sit on) - shows the challenge of counting in the now. In both the regional case and the case of the bike orgs, better to look at a historical perspective. While nobody does well, right now is actually the lowest number of women on the GVCC board in the past 5+ years, while this is a relative historic high for women in the region. I would argue that in both cases, more work is needed.

[Victoria Watcher]

man = woman. no difference. social construct.

so why the concern?

[Mike K.]

Interesting line of questioning...

 

GVCC does (as does GVBTWS, which I also sit on) - shows the challenge of counting in the now. In both the regional case and the case of the bike orgs, better to look at a historical perspective. While nobody does well, right now is actually the lowest number of women on the GVCC board in the past 5+ years, while this is a relative historic high for women in the region. I would argue that in both cases, more work is needed.

 

Don't get too worked up, I'm just razzing you.

 

Your organization needs leadership and the six men and one woman were the best individuals suited for the roles/the best among those who could take on the roles. That's how its supposed to work and it works well for the GVCC, clearly. Next year (or whenever) the make-up could change because availability can change, desires can change, and better candidates materialize. All good.

[Coreyburger]

Don't get too worked up, I'm just razzing you.

 

Your organization needs leadership and the six men and one woman were the best individuals suited for the roles/the best among those who could take on the roles. That's how its supposed to work and it works well for the GVCC, clearly. Next year (or whenever) the make-up could change because availability can change, desires can change, and better candidates materialize. All good.

 

It is something all orgs need to be aware of - is your leadership inclusive? It is way too easy not to be

[spanky123]

Don't get too worked up, I'm just razzing you.

 

Your organization needs leadership and the six men and one woman were the best individuals suited for the roles/the best among those who could take on the roles. That's how its supposed to work and it works well for the GVCC, clearly. Next year (or whenever) the make-up could change because availability can change, desires can change, and better candidates materialize. All good.

 

 

In general, most elections for the boards of NPOs and community organizations are not hotly contested events. In fact in the vast majority of cases, people have to have their arms twisted just to put their name forward to be on the board at all. Trying to then compare men vs women, white vs black, or gay vs straight representation is laughable. I would bet a lot of money that if you could come up with 4 people (let alone women) who wanted to join an 8 member board then the chair would be jumping for joy and as long as they could walk upright she would be happy to have them join!

[RFS]

More men cycle than women and especially more men get into it fanatically as a lifestyle so it stands to reason that a cycling board would skew male.