CIDA apologizes, commits to improve hiring of minorities
Lunch with the boss finally brought to a close an historic 15-year-old discrimination claim at the Canadian International Development Agency.
Ranjit Perera first filed a complaint of racial discrimination against his employer (CIDA) with the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 1986.
Although that complaint was dismissed by the commission, a pitched battle ensued for the next decade and a half, eventually making it to the Federal Court.
Perera sought a promotion that he said had been unfairly denied because of his race but he also wanted CIDA to take steps to end systemic racism at the agency.
Perera agreed to meet for lunch with CIDA president Len Good, last month, and the two were able to agree to a settlement.
Aside from a significant promotion, Perera also received a letter of regret signed by the CIDA president, as well as a cash settlement and court costs. Notably, CIDA also committed to renewing efforts to meet an earlier recommendation that 20 per cent of new hires be visible minorities.
Because the settlement was signed by Justice James Huggessen of the Federal Court of Canada, it would technically be enforceable in court, however it is unlikely that would happen.
“The court order says they’ll make all reasonable efforts to achieve that (20 per cent of new hires being visible minority),” said Peter Engelmann, Perera’s lawyer. “It would be difficult to enforce though because of use of the word reasonable.”
However, the case had already established an important precedent that federal public-sector employees could sue their employer for violating rights established in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The government twice tried to have Perera’s case struck down arguing human rights complaints had to be heard at the Canadian Human Rights Commission and not in the courts.
Perera stressed that while the settlement represents a win for himself, he feels CIDA, and indeed all Canadians, emerged victorious because tangible improvements should ensure CIDA becomes a more inclusive workplace.
And while the 20 per cent target is an important one, Perera said it is unlikely a failure to meet it would end up in court.
“If it is blatantly obvious that they are not following the order, then I can go back to court,” he said. “But I am not interested in if they marginally fail.”
Both Engelmann and Perera said Good was instrumental in finally reaching a settlement and that there have been positive signs CIDA is willing to improve the situation for visible minorities since Good took over in late 1999.
Besides confirming public servants can sue their employers, the settlement is also important in that it sheds light on the continuing systemic discrimination that pervades the federal public service, said Engelmann.
While the federal government sets standards for other federally regulated employers, public-sector employers are not doing a very good job on their own to provide workplaces free of systemic racism, said Engelmann.
Nearly two years ago, a task force recommended 20 per cent of all new hires by federal public-service employers should be visible minority.
Since then there has been a systematic approach to employment equity said Kathy Trim, director of public affairs with the public service commission. However, of the 40 departments or government agencies that were supposed to file reports only 11 have so far.
As of March 2000, 5.5 per cent of the public service was a member of visible minority, said Trim. However in terms of new appointments and hires, last year 8.3 per cent were visible minority.
Departments are starting to get the message that they have to do more active HR planning, she said. “They are doing more HR planning up front and looking at representation rates and asking where do we need to balance out.”
There are a number of things that the federal government has been doing to demonstrate a fair commitment to employment equality, said Perera. However it is important that 20 per cent of all new hires be people of visible minorities because they have been so underrepresented in the public sector there has to be some catch up.
Systemic discrimination lingers as a problem in the public sector because employers and hiring managers don’t have the same motivation as those in the private sector, said Perera.
People are always suspicious of people they are unfamiliar with or that are different from themselves, he said. It is not that they are intentionally racist. “In the public sector where you don’t have to go on the basis of looking for the person who will help you with the bottom line, you hire a person who you are comfortable with and the person you are comfortable with is a person like you.”
Ranjit Perera first filed a complaint of racial discrimination against his employer (CIDA) with the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 1986.
Although that complaint was dismissed by the commission, a pitched battle ensued for the next decade and a half, eventually making it to the Federal Court.
Perera sought a promotion that he said had been unfairly denied because of his race but he also wanted CIDA to take steps to end systemic racism at the agency.
Perera agreed to meet for lunch with CIDA president Len Good, last month, and the two were able to agree to a settlement.
Aside from a significant promotion, Perera also received a letter of regret signed by the CIDA president, as well as a cash settlement and court costs. Notably, CIDA also committed to renewing efforts to meet an earlier recommendation that 20 per cent of new hires be visible minorities.
Because the settlement was signed by Justice James Huggessen of the Federal Court of Canada, it would technically be enforceable in court, however it is unlikely that would happen.
“The court order says they’ll make all reasonable efforts to achieve that (20 per cent of new hires being visible minority),” said Peter Engelmann, Perera’s lawyer. “It would be difficult to enforce though because of use of the word reasonable.”
However, the case had already established an important precedent that federal public-sector employees could sue their employer for violating rights established in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The government twice tried to have Perera’s case struck down arguing human rights complaints had to be heard at the Canadian Human Rights Commission and not in the courts.
Perera stressed that while the settlement represents a win for himself, he feels CIDA, and indeed all Canadians, emerged victorious because tangible improvements should ensure CIDA becomes a more inclusive workplace.
And while the 20 per cent target is an important one, Perera said it is unlikely a failure to meet it would end up in court.
“If it is blatantly obvious that they are not following the order, then I can go back to court,” he said. “But I am not interested in if they marginally fail.”
Both Engelmann and Perera said Good was instrumental in finally reaching a settlement and that there have been positive signs CIDA is willing to improve the situation for visible minorities since Good took over in late 1999.
Besides confirming public servants can sue their employers, the settlement is also important in that it sheds light on the continuing systemic discrimination that pervades the federal public service, said Engelmann.
While the federal government sets standards for other federally regulated employers, public-sector employers are not doing a very good job on their own to provide workplaces free of systemic racism, said Engelmann.
Nearly two years ago, a task force recommended 20 per cent of all new hires by federal public-service employers should be visible minority.
Since then there has been a systematic approach to employment equity said Kathy Trim, director of public affairs with the public service commission. However, of the 40 departments or government agencies that were supposed to file reports only 11 have so far.
As of March 2000, 5.5 per cent of the public service was a member of visible minority, said Trim. However in terms of new appointments and hires, last year 8.3 per cent were visible minority.
Departments are starting to get the message that they have to do more active HR planning, she said. “They are doing more HR planning up front and looking at representation rates and asking where do we need to balance out.”
There are a number of things that the federal government has been doing to demonstrate a fair commitment to employment equality, said Perera. However it is important that 20 per cent of all new hires be people of visible minorities because they have been so underrepresented in the public sector there has to be some catch up.
Systemic discrimination lingers as a problem in the public sector because employers and hiring managers don’t have the same motivation as those in the private sector, said Perera.
People are always suspicious of people they are unfamiliar with or that are different from themselves, he said. It is not that they are intentionally racist. “In the public sector where you don’t have to go on the basis of looking for the person who will help you with the bottom line, you hire a person who you are comfortable with and the person you are comfortable with is a person like you.”
