[CommanderSock]

kenmore kenmore:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100722/national/tories_minority_hiring


Tories to review affirmative action hiring ..... they keep it up and I might have to vote for them.

They would need to make constitutional amendments.

Not with a minority government.

[Proculation]

CommanderSock CommanderSock:

kenmore kenmore:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100722/national/tories_minority_hiring


Tories to review affirmative action hiring ..... they keep it up and I might have to vote for them.

They would need to make constitutional amendments.

Not with a minority government.

Why ?

Section 15 of the charter says:

"(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 affirmative action is excluded from being "discrimination" but it is not a requirement. It's only allowed.

[BartSimpson]

Proculation Proculation:

Section 15 of the charter says:

"(1) Every individual who isn't Caucasian is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination (unless they're Caucasian) and, in particular, without discrimination based on race (that isn't Caucasian), 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. Unless, of course, they're disadvantaged because we actively discriminate against Caucasians"

Just thought I'd fix that for you.

Here's the new Charter based on Section 15:

[ShepherdsDog]

It's more specific than just Caucasian......it's being a male Caucasian of European genotype.

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

It's more specific than just Caucasian......it's being a male Caucasian of European genotype.

In this case it was a woman.

[ShepherdsDog]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

It's more specific than just Caucasian......it's being a male Caucasian of European genotype.

In this case it was a woman.

They can still play the sex card in a lot of cases...white men have nothing to fall back on, except our education and abilities, which don't seem to count for much nowadays.

[OnTheIce]

raydan raydan:

Went to the unemployment bureau today.

Exactly WHY do they ask you if you're a "native" or a visible minority?

Thank Mulroney and the Employment Equity Act.

[Proculation]

My reply was more for the need of a constitutional amendment. If, and really it won't happen, we repeal section 15(2), it would make everyone totally equal and affirmative action would be unconstitutional.

[GreenTiger]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

I would fight this tooth and nail. The lawyer's ending remark should be does the Charter of Rights mean what it suggests it means or is a cheap knockoff of the the US Bill of Rights without it protections. There are or should be equal in the law.

'Not withstanding' clause. This kind of thing is perfectly acceptable under the Charter.

Then it is a cheap knockoff of the US Bill of Rights, It can mean whatever parliament says it means through the "Not Withstanding Clause".

The US bill of Rights defines 10 rights that are so basic so fundamental that even the Government can't take that away from you. Canadians deserve better.