#LiftTheCeiling for Racial Equity
- Minister Chrystia Freeland
Scenario:
Bombardier Canada has been hit with a high-profile lawsuit for racial discrimination in the hiring process. This results in racialized employees sharing their own testimonies through social media with the hashtag #LiftTheCeiling to expose the extent and nature of workplace discrimination and underrepresentation. This nation-wide social media campaign in Canada mirrors the #MeToo movement following the Harvey Weinstein scandal.
“Racial categories are not based on science or biology but on differences that society has chosen to emphasize, with significant consequences for people’s lives. People can be racialized not only based on skin colour but also other perceived characteristics such as their culture, language, customs, ancestry, country or place of origin, or religion.” (A Better Way Forward: Ontario’s 3-Year Anti-Racism Strategic Plan, 2017)
Systemic Racism: Systemic racism occurs when institutions within a society create or maintain racial inequity, both intentionally or unintentionally.
Racialization: “The process by which societies construct races as real, different and unequal in ways that matter to economic, political and social life”. (Commission on Systemic Racism in the Ontario Criminal Justice System, 1995)
Visible Minority: “Persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour and include Chinese, South Asian, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Southeast Asian, Arab, West Asian, Japanese, Korean, other visible minorities and multiple visible minorities.” (Employment Equity Act, 1995)
DEFINITIONS
BACKGROUND
&
CONTEXT
CURRENT RESOURCES
Despite continuously ranking high on the Social Progress Index in areas of tolerance and inclusion (Canada ranked 2nd in 2016), there remains considerable evidence of discrimination based on race in the Canadian workplace. This manifests itself in wage inequity, discriminatory hiring and promotion practises, a serious lack of representation in senior management positions.
Wage inequity
Labour inequalities have significant impact on the socio-economic well-being on visible minorities. For instance, racialized Canadians are three times more likely to live in poverty than white Canadians, accounting for 19.8% and 6.4% respectively. [9]
Discrimination and hiring process
A research report published in 2017 by the Munk School of Global Affairs analyzed the extent to which job applicants with racialized names are being discriminated against in the hiring process. It used statistics provided by a discrimination audit study conducted in 2008 and 2009 by Philip Oreopoulos. This study distributed 13,000 resumes with standardized qualifications but different names (ethnic and non-ethnic) to a set of employers, looking for disparities in callback rates. Ethnic names in this study referred to Asian names, particularly those of Chinese, Indian or Pakistani origin. Research findings are as follows: [10]
In the first case, even when qualifications (experience and education) of the ‘Asian’ applicant were all obtained in Canada and equivalent to those with Anglicized names, discrimination in the recruiting process is still evident. Following the conclusion of the study, employers were contacted with the research results and asked to provide their thoughts on the discrepancy in recruitment based on racialized terms. In reply, many employers stated that:
an Asian name suggested the possibility of language problems and heavy accents
However, employers had no evidence to support their concerns, as the applicants’ all-Canadian education and experience should contradict these accusations.
What Does This Mean for Canada?
This reveals the nature of internalized (and covert) discrimination present in the Canadian workplace. While employers may not consider themselves to be ‘racist’ or even aware that they are subconsciously discriminating against a large sector of the Canadian workforce, understandings of racialized identities are embedded within societal structures and ways of thinking. Furthermore, it reveals that discrimination based on race is not restricted to refugees or new immigrants, but extends to the growing population of minorities who are both raised and educated in Canada, and fluent in English and/or French.
By 2031, one-third of the Canadian population will be members of a visible minority. If Canada wants to, as Minister Freeland suggests, “set a standard” for how minorities should be treated worldwide, we must first seek to address issues of discrimination at home. We must recognize that inequalities which stem from systemic and covert discrimination affects racialized individuals, who face unique socio-economic barriers that do not affect white, Caucasian Canadians.
Lack of representation: senior Leadership
Visible minorities are also underrepresented in senior leadership positions. While attitudes of racism or discrimination may play a role, this also alludes to the structural barriers within the Canadian workforce that disadvantages minorities of all kinds.
The Diversity Institute at Ryerson University’s recent study titled DiversityLeads 2011 - 2017 examined the representation of women and visible minorities in senior leadership positions among private-sector companies in Greater Toronto and Greater Montreal. This study concluded that female representation on Boards of Directors in Toronto has grown from 14.8% in 2012 to 23.6% in 2017. [12] In comparison, the representation of visible minorities has stalled, from 2.8% in 2012 to 3.3% in 2017. [13] These findings directly point to the role that structural discrimination and barriers play on workplace representation, considering 51.5% of Toronto inhabitants identify as a member of a visible minority group. (2016 Census)
Source: Diversity Institute (Ryerson University), 2017
Similar trends are revealed in Montreal, where 22.5% of the population are visible minorities, but only represent 1% of directors in boards and 2.2% in senior management positions.
Going Beyond Gender
However, a greater divide is revealed when both race and gender are combined. Wendy Cukier, founder of Diversity Institute, stated that: [14]
Although the representation of women has improved, the gains are primarily made by white women
And even though white women and racialized women are equally represented in Toronto’s workforce, Cukier notes that “white women outnumber racialized women 16 to 1 on corporate senior management teams”. [15] This focus on gender equity has been fuelled by the growing traction of feminism and the surrounding discussions emerging from movements such as #MeToo.
Lack of representation: board of directors
To compliment the Diversity Institute’s findings, the Canadian Board Diversity Council’s Annual Report Card of 2016 examined representation in Canada’s 500 largest companies’ Board of Directors, nationwide. [16] It found that there has been a decline of visible minority representation, from 7.3% in 2015 to 4.5% in 2016, a drop of over one-third. Furthermore, this study sought to survey attitudes towards diversity among senior executives.
When asked the question “Do you feel that your board is diverse?” over three-quarters of respondents replied “Yes”. However, ‘diversity’ for many directors is largely attributed to diversity in expertise, education and geographical location rather than that of race and ethnicity:
Source: Canadian Board Diversity Council, 2016
Responses to the question “Has this board adopted a written diversity policy?” are as follows:
Source: Canadian Board Diversity Council, 2016
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
AND CALL TO ACTION
Legislation Diversity Reports
In order to tackle the issue of systemic racial discrimination in the workplace, the Canadian government should move to pass legislation that would require all publicly-traded corporations to produce yearly reports on employee diversity. This should be comprised of two sections
One, annual Diversity Reports must include in-depth company statistics on the percentage (%) and numbers of visible minority representation among/in regards to:
-
Newly hired employees
-
Total company employees
-
Retention rates
-
Promotion rates and corresponding compensation processes
-
Employee wages, broken down by position level (ie. internship, entry-level, manager, executive, Board of Directors, etc.)
-
Senior management positions (ie. CEO, CFO, Vice Presidents, Directors, etc.)
-
Board of Directors
Most importantly, this practise will encourage transparency and scrutiny among corporations who have not yet adopted this framework. It will both act as a reflective exercise within corporations to make them actively aware of their diversity figures (or lack thereof) and create a platform for critique and scrutiny among the general public and companies alike. Furthermore, this proposed legislation has the potential to extend beyond the recognition of racial and ethnic diversity in the workplace to include employee statistics related to gender, Aboriginal status and individuals with disabilities.
Bill C-25 was an act introduced by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Development to amend the Canada Business Corporations Act, the Canada Cooperatives Act, the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act and the Competition Act. [17] It requires publicly-traded corporations to disclose information regarding diversity and representation in their senior management. [18] However, this fixation on senior management transparency fails to examine the extent of systemic discrimination in the workplace that goes beyond just the executive levels of power.
Going Beyond Bill C-25
Diversity Reports must provide a progress report that outlines the public corporation’s commitment to foster diversity and inclusion in their workplace. This may include:
-
Identifying current barriers in recruitment and staffing, and how they are to be addressed and eliminated
-
An outline of current/developing non-discrimination policies and practises that encourage and ensure workplace diversity and equity
Similar diversity policies and annual progress reports have been adopted by numerous public and private corporations alike. For instance, the Employment Equity Act (1996) requires all federally-regulated workplaces to report annually on the representation of women, Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities. [19]
From this gathered information, the Canadian government can produce “report cards” for overarching industries, similar in concept to that created by the Feminist Foreign Policy group within this project. This report card will seek to synthesize all company-acquired data into industry-specific reports, looking for and examining trends that may reveal unique barriers to racial representation and equity among certain industries. Moreover, it creates a database of information in which future government, corporate and non-profit work surrounding the promotion of diversity and equity can reference and identify key trouble areas to focus on. A directory of best-case practises among companies who achieved high scores should also be promoted to the public and other corporations. It would provide a guide with policies and suggestions that have been implemented by corporations to improve their minority representation and inclusion in their work environment, with success.
Legislation Diversity quotas
However, diversity reports are unlikely to be effective by themselves. With this proposal, diversity reports would be mandated through government legislation. This creates a phenomenon in which companies are forced to release such reports under legal obligation, rather than fuelled by a commitment to fostering a more diverse and inclusive work culture. In other words, it can very well be a dead-letter for action. As a result, this proposal must work in concert with diversity quotas.
Therefore, the Canadian government should pass legislation that will require a visible minority-quota to be implemented on the Boards of Directors in publicly-traded companies. Recognizing the uneven population distribution of visible minorities across Canada, quotas should be established according to city demographics, specifically at 50% of the city’s visible minority population. For instance, Toronto which has a visible minority population of 51.5% would have a quota of 25.5%. Furthermore, legislation must insist that these quotas be enforced by the year 2025.
This will force employers to consciously consider diversity when it comes to their hiring, promotion and training practises at all levels within the company. More specifically, this proposal seeks to combat systemic discrimination in the workplace by working to break down the internalized conception among many racialized minorities are less qualified or worth less than their white counterparts. In addition, it will force executives to actively search for qualified, diverse personnel outside their personal networks. Furthermore, this can extend to include female quotas.
While completely private companies cannot be forced to do the same through law, the gradual diversification among public companies will create and enforce a norm that cannot be ignored. It will instill diversity and representation as qualities inherent in the Canadian workplace culture, thus compelling private corporations to follow in their footsteps to avoid harsh criticism and backlash.
Norway
Norway was the first country to introduce boardroom quotas in 2003, requiring all Boards to be at least 40% female. [20] Since then, other countries have pushed for similar practices to be implemented. Iceland, Spain and France has also adopted 40% targets, with Germany following in 2016 with a 30% mandate. [21] In 2017, European Union has been pushing their member states to enforce a similar 40% boardroom quota for women. [22]
Government-Funded Diversity Campaign
In addition to legislation, a campaign that promotes diversity in the workplace will begin to tackle the issue of covert discrimination that still remains for the most part invisible. It is not acceptable to build structures that assume everyone is a member of the dominant group and tries to accommodate the minorities. Rather, racial diversity and other marginalized groups should be considered and reflected in the design stage of programs so that barriers are not created. Organizations have the responsibility to see that the workplace environment and its practices create inclusiveness instead of divisiveness.
Creating an inclusive environment is difficult to police through legislation, but this campaign pushes companies, both public and private, to audit themselves internally. By adopting the title ‘#LiftTheCeiling for Racial Equity’, this campaign serves as a responsible, bold statement from the Canadian government in the wake of the social media movement resulting from the Bombardier case. This campaign is Canada’s response to its citizens and to the world that it is taking care of things at home.
