Chapter 2: Review of Literature on Visible Minorities and the Public Service

2.1 Introduction

Canada is respected in the community of nations as a racially-tolerant country. The question arises: "How does Canada measure up in its treatment of visible minorities in its own public service?" The following literature survey looks at some of the studies and reports related to employment equity for visible minority employees in the federal public service.

Canada's population and labour force have changed significantly as a result of immigration. By 1991, 9.1% of Canada's labour force belonged to a visible minority. The visible minority segment of the population and labour force are bound to grow further in the years to come in view of continuing immigration and an increase in Canadian-born visible minorities.

2.2 Origins of employment equity

Relatively high levels of immigration from developing countries and the affirmative action program in the US have given a boost to "employment equity" programs in Canada. Several studies revealed in the l980s that persons with origins in developing countries experienced higher rates of unemployment and earned less than other Canadians, and had difficulty finding work in their chosen fields (Samuel, 1996). Two significant reports in 1984 shaped the future of employment equity initiatives in Canada. In that year, the Parliamentary Committee on Participation of Visible Minorities in Canadian Society produced a report, Equality Now! The report pointed out that Canadian society constitutes a "vertical mosaic" in which some ethnic groups were, economically and socially, more privileged than others. Eighty recommendations were put forward, of which several were aimed at employment.

The second was a Royal Commission report by Judge Rosalie Abella, Equality in Employment, which pointed out that the American term, "affirmative action", often sparks a negative emotional reaction as it is equated with reverse discrimination, or hiring and promotion based on target group membership, rather than merit. The term "employment equity" was coined to refer to measures to eliminate discriminatory employment barriers and procedures. The report proposed employment equity as a "strategy to obliterate the present and the residual effects of discrimination and to open equitably the competition for employment opportunities to those arbitrarily excluded. It requires a special blend of what is necessary, what is fair, and what is workable"

(Abella, 1984:254).

These two reports prepared the ground for the Employment Equity Act of 1986 that applied to federally-regulated employers with 100 or more employees (representing about one-tenth of the Canadian labour force) but excluded the federal public service, the RCMP and the military. A new Employment Equity Act came into force on October 24, 1996, bringing almost all of the public service under its purview.

2.3 Treasury Board initiatives

In April 1985, a Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) survey revealed that 3,791 persons (1.7%) identified themselves as visible minorities in the public service compared to 4.3 percent in the Canadian labour force in 1981. TBS asked the Public Service Commission (PSC) to implement a number of special measures aimed at facilitating the self-identification of visible minorities, and the monitoring of the recruitment, referral, appointment and training processes. A special employment program of up to 300 person-years for 1986-89 was announced. This program assisted in recruiting visible minority persons by paying for the first year of an appointment to an indeterminate position or for six months of a developmental term position with the understanding that the latter action would lead to an appointment to an indeterminate position.

In order to understand the visible minority issue better and with a view to finding consultative solutions, the Treasury Board Secretariat appointed in early 1990s a Visible Minority Consultation Group (VMCG) on Employment Equity. The VMCG produced reports in 1992 and 1993 addressing a number of important questions. Among them was the question of self-identification and the reluctance of visible minorities to self-identify. Self-identification does not provide any direct benefits, some visible minorities said. Some feared that the reverse may be true. Other reasons cited for not self-identifying were: it has nothing to do with merit; it is distasteful and is an invasion of privacy.

The VMCG pointed to the need to develop a "supportive culture that facilitates new visions and ways of working" as "a fundamental pre-requisite to any success that may be achieved in employment equity" (Visible Minority Consultation Group on Employment Equity, 1992:4) for visible minorities. The Group held the view that the Scientific and Professional category seems to have become a trap for visible minorities. The extent to which their concentration in that category affects their ability and propensity to gain access to management is not clear but is certainly worthy of further investigation because it is one of the principal feeder groups to the management category. The VMCG also noted that about a fifth of the management rank is appointed from outside the public service, but few visible minority employees are recruited this way. Moreover, the VMCG noted the "double jeopardy" faced by visible minority women.

The VMCG said that time alone will not correct the situation of under-representation of visible minority employees at the management level and recommended "efforts similar in scope to those designed to increase the representation of francophones and women in the public service". As the VMCG report put it: "It is bad judgment to try to draw 100% of the talent from 75% of the available population".

Visible minority employees, it was found, were well represented in Ontario, (outside the National Capital Region), Alberta and British Columbia, especially on the front lines. The need for management training was at the core of the visible minority issue. The VMCG also drew attention to the corporate culture built on misconceptions, such as employment equity is a "leg-up" for the disadvantaged, and perhaps the unqualified, or is designed to compensate for past wrongs and runs counter to the merit principle. While many visible minority public servants are cynical about employment equity, some public service managers are guilty of stereotyping minorities. The VMCG strongly argued for a "higher profile and priority" for employment equity and urged stronger "political will to pursue it vigorously".

The VMCG found that "employment practices are believed by most visible minority employees interviewed to be unfair, to lack integrity, and to be racially biased". These views were corroborated by a majority of those at the management and even senior management levels. They wondered whether the interest in employment equity was real or whether it was just more window dressing. The report referred to the "abuse of acting appointments", the perception that selection boards for promotion are "mock boards", "a farce", and accord too much weight to the "personal suitability" factor, and complaints about "old boy" and "new girl" networks that work against visible minorities. A two-pronged strategy was proposed: l) improving the culture of the public service for visible minority employees through persistent, visible leadership by Deputy Ministers; and 2) preparing visible minorities for full participation at all levels, especially with respect to access to and promotion within management. Accountability was stressed as a means of improving the climate for employment equity for visible minorities.

2.4 The views of non-governmental organizations

Despite the Treasury Board initiatives in the late 1980s, the representation of visible minorities in the public service was only half that of their representation level among federally-regulated employers in the early 1990s. Such low levels made interest groups critical of the Canadian Government and its efforts to bring about employment equity for visible minorities in the public service. In a 1992 report entitled Employment Inequity, the Canadian Ethnocultural Council said that the public service has no leadership when it comes to the issue and the Government in general and several key departments in particular are setting a poor example to the private sector.

A 1995 report by the Canadian Alliance for Visible Minorities characterized the shrinking public service as a "bureaucratic institution in a state of demoralization". The present situation was "summarized by three words -- flux, uncertainty and fear". The report itemized a number of perceived problems and issues with the public service. It drew attention to excessively long management procedures, concentration of power in the hands of senior managers, ineffectiveness of personnel departments and employment equity offices, absence of skill inventories, shrinking opportunities and managers paying only lip service to visible minority issues. Other major issues were: exclusion of visible minorities on the basis of personal suitability; poorly-defined performance measurement criteria; lack of concern for and interest in visible minority issues; the narrow scope of the appeal process; non-acceptance of visible minority employees in the bureaucratic corporate culture; lack of mentors for visible minority employees; and a tendency to stonewall any wrong doing on the part of managers.

The report also referred to some factors such as fear of reprisals by visible minority employees, their unfamiliarity with the intricacies of the system, and the difficulty visible minority employees encounter in dealing with corporate culture. It observed that "because the concepts of performance and efficiency have very elastic meanings in the bureaucratic system, the merit principle becomes a noble fiction without any credibility" (Canadian Alliance of Visible Minorities, 1995:21). The report concluded that the "documentation and advice available attempt to show that the system can accommodate them (visible minorities) provided they follow the marvellous path to nowhere. And in case they cannot reach their target it is simply their fault. This is an ideal case of blaming the victim" (ibid:25).

2.5 Some departmental initiatives

There are a few reports on visible minorities and the public service that have been produced by different government departments. Reports were available from the Department of Canadian Heritage, Citizenship and Immigration and Health Canada. They are summarized below.

Department of Canadian Heritage

The report from the Department of Canadian Heritage completed in 1996 was the result of a survey and consultations with all the visible minority employees of the department. The survey discovered that 85.5% of the visible minorities had self-identified.

Respondents were asked a variety of questions concerning their employment experience in the department. The study found that the majority of managers and supervisors were perceived as needing more cross-cultural training and sensitization skills. It suggested that "there seems to be an institutional bias against the promotion of visible minority employees, especially into management and supervisory positions" (Multicom, 1996:9), and that managers themselves would benefit from cross-cultural training. For a majority of the respondents, solutions involve management becoming more sensitive to visible minority employees' viewpoints and more skillful in intercultural communication.

It was suggested that in order to attract more visible minorities to the public service, they should be present within the organization and in planning branches, selection boards, senior management, and Minister's office. More assignment programs were proposed and managers could submit the names of those available for assignment indicating their willingness to accept others. Monitoring of the competition process and dealing fairly with grievances were suggested. "There is no need to do anything special, just do everything fairly", the report emphasized.

More than four out of 10 visible minority employees in the Department felt that their career development has been hindered because of their visible minority status. The factors responsible were said to be: institutional bias against the promotion of visible minority employees, little backing for grievances from the union, lack of vision on the part of management, negative reactions from clients, and lack of training.

The requirement for proficiency in the French language was seen as an obstacle to the furthering of their careers. It was suggested that cultural orientation workshops on matters such as Canadian corporate culture would be helpful for new Canadians joining the public service, while cross-cultural communication training programs would benefit all employees.

A mentor program was proposed as a way of piloting employees through the professional waters of career development. It was important to talk to a mentor who is knowledgeable and trustworthy in the context of career development.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada

An Administrative Review by TLC Enterprises prepared for Citizenship and Immigration in 1996 sought to "examine corporate culture, values, and systems in the CPC (Central Processing Centre) Vegreville with a view to enhancing respect in the workplace for all individuals", and understanding the context of alleged racial harassment of visible minorities on the job and in the community. The focus of the review was the CPC's ability to provide a respectful work environment for all its employees.

The Administrative Review team interviewed a number of visible minority employees who had raised the issue and a number of managers to see whether CPC Vegreville was a respectful workplace. The consultants defined "'a respectful workplace as one where there is an active and open line of communication between all levels of staff; where there is a degree of security that allows for a person to receive and offer positive/constructive criticism; where a mutual respect for others, regardless of differences, underlies all workplace activity; and where professionalism and a set standard of conduct are upheld by all staff and supported by management". The consultants concluded that CPC Vegreville "is not a harassment-free environment. Because of changes over time, the workplace has developed sufficient elements to determine that it is a hostile environment for visible minority groups.

The report presented recommendations to the staff and management. The staff was asked to seek clarification if a staffing action appears to be invalid, to resist making racist comments, to use the complaint process to resolve situations that cannot be resolved otherwise, and to avoid attributing motives to other people's actions.

It was proposed that management should develop a system so that the staff could get information on any competition process in order to reassure them of the fairness of the process on a one to one basis; have a person outside of CPC on the staffing boards; have a Diversity Management Committee with equal numbers of visible minority employees and non-visible minority staff; arrange for speakers on various cultures for all staff; inform managers that it is their responsibility to maintain a harassment-free workplace environment; develop an equity plan; to the extent possible have someone from an equity group sit on selection boards as a member; and monitor results of appointments and acting assignments to ensure equitable distribution among all staff, including visible minority employees.

Health Canada

The Visible Minority Advisory Committee (VMAC) was established in Health Canada in 1991 to advise the Department on all issues concerning recruitment, retention, and promotion practices as they apply to members of visible minority communities. In the following year VMAC in a report recommended that the Department: (a) establish a culturally diverse Cross-cultural Unit to analyze and make recommendations on diversity; (b) establish mechanisms to actively recruit visible minorities; (c) increase the representation of visible minority employees on departmental selection boards; (d) establish mechanisms to ensure that visible minority employees are represented fairly at all levels, and in all categories; (e) recognize, use, and develop the skills of visible minority employees within the department; (f) give training to managers and supervisors to value a culturally diverse workforce; (g) evaluate managers on their performance in managing and valuing a culturally-diverse workforce; and (h) implement a department-wide educational initiative to increase employees' sensitivity to cross-cultural issues. Appropriate action steps were proposed to implement the recommendations.

2.6 The Unions
Among the unions, the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) prepared and submitted a brief in 1996 to the Anti-racism Task Force of the Canadian Labour Congress. The brief considered racism as a "state of mind that is passed on from generation to generation, and fosters hatred and ignorance" (PSAC, 1996:5). The authors of the brief wanted the unions to be pro-active and indicated the importance of a critical mass of visible minority members in visual positions of the union when addressing race-related issues. The issue of networking was underlined and they endorsed the requirement that a racial minority person should have a seat on each of the national bargaining teams. Their recommendations included: representation of visible minorities at executive levels within the labour movement; a self-identification program for its membership vis-a-vis race; recognition of foreign credentials as part of contract negotiations, and that being from a different culture or religion should not make one better or worse; design and delivery of anti-racism courses by racially visible members; and funding more minority delegates to attend conferences and conventions. 

Summary: Chapter 2

Literature Review

This chapter reviews previous efforts by federal departments and non-governmental organizations to study the situation of visible minorities in the federal public service. It describes the conclusions and recommendations of those studies. 

Several studies have pointed to difficulties faced by visible minority public servants, including:

• Misconceptions about employment equity;
• Stereotypes about and biases against visible minorities;
• A lack of management commitment;
• Demoralization;
• The rigidity of employment systems; and
• Official-language requirements.

Key recommendations of these studies were:

• Senior-level leadership;
• Cross-cultural training;
• Representation of members of visible minorities in key organizational activities; and 
•  Mentoring programs.

Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page