The recent xenophobic and personal attacks in the comments of the last post (A call for new posts) illustrate the need for Nunavut Uncensored. A commenter posted a pretty moderate and balanced comment only to be personally attacked. This is why bloggers around Nunavut were looking for an outlet out fear of reprisal and/or job dismissal for freedom of speech. Thank you Arctic Agent for giving us the outlet.Xenophobia has ultimately not been productive in history, and it is likely similarly not going to be productive here in Nunavut.
But this brings up an important issue that many people that come to Nunavut have to deal with - the ethical right to be working here.
In my work (at the GN), I am often attacked in a similar way in the comments to the last post. I am asked, why am I telling Inuit about what they already know better? Who am I, an outsider, to tell them what to do?
The simple answer is, because it is my job. I've been hired by the Government of Nunavut as a qualified professional. The Government of Nunavut is an Inuit Government born from the NLCA. This land-claim government had decided their policy and sought to hire someone with qualifications to enact that policy. This Inuit land-claim Government wrote the qualifications for the job, and decided, through a job competition process that is skewed towards hiring Inuit, not to hire an Inuk. Likely because no Inuk applied who met the qualifications of this Inuit Government. So they hired me, someone from the south (but I don't have a big belly or bushy eyebrows). And then I get attacked for "telling Inuit - who know better - what to do."
So... this Inuit land-claim government hires southerners to work for them, but there is open hostility from within the communities. It appears that the community either doesn't understand democracy, or their MLA's aren't simply working for them. Or rather, because this Inuit land-claim government has obligations beyond the communities (in addition to the communities), i.e., to other territorial/provincial governments, the federal government, and in some cases to international governments, they need to hire 'professionals' with 'credentials'. I've heard this be called 'credentialism'.
If Inuit don't want southerners telling them what to do ... then simply don't hire us. Go to your newspapers, blogs, MLA (not to HR at GN, who will just give you government lip service) and say : Don't hire southerners to do these jobs. Please hire Inuit, we can do better. And show them that you can do better.
Ask your Inuit landclaim government why it is not hiring Inuit. Don't attack the people who have been hired. These people who are doing their best to serve this government, while it gets on its feet.
I for one will love to see the day when there is an Inuk in my job. Despite the fact that I feel that I do a great job, because of my white face, the people will always interpret my decisions with suspicion and even perhaps hostility.
Any thoughts? What does 'qualified' mean? Can a southerner ever have legitimacy in a race-based government? Can this government be accountable to the Inuit, at the same time by meeting international standards of policy?
- Anonymous
46 comments:
Some inuit are so hell bent on keeping whitey out of their lives, yet they don't realize that in order to succeed in today's world you need an education. Look at the attendance records of the schools and the lack of discipline and responsibility of parents in regards to making sure their children get an education. I absolutely hate the hypocrisy when it comes to this stuff. If you don't like it, do it yourself! Oh but wait... the white man has ruined our culture and he's the reason I do drugs and get drunk, and don't have an education. Back to the beginning... rinse and repeat.
Excellent posting! A great recovery!
Wonderful posting .. and my thoughts exactly. Often as GN (teachers) we hear "oh an Inuk should have been hired for this position, not a southerner". Well, then why are these GN jobs being posted with specific qualifications (ie: University degree in Education)? I personally would love it if there were more Inuit teachers in the school system, but then I look at the NTEP program and many registered in the program don't finish it because it is just too hard, and then they bitch that they can't get a full-time position, but only supply or SSA.
Just to clarify a fundamental error -
GN is not an "Inuit" government. It's a public government.
Yes, on paper and in theory, the GN is a public government.
In this over-subsidized society, it seems the value of just about everything is grossly underestimated. This includes the value of housing, the value of a decent (and/or higher) education, and the value of having truly ‘qualified’, and thus, effective employees.
For example, an Inuk who graduates from high school in Nunavut feels that they are equal to a grade-12 graduate from the south although that usually isn’t the case. Not only do they feel equal to all other Canadian grade-12 graduates, sometimes they feel they could perform the job of a university graduate, including those in specialized positions. And yet, few Inuit seem to value, let alone comprehend, the investment and effort it requires to truly merit these positions.
Likewise, many Inuit who are eligible for low-income housing are actually being rewarded for doing nothing, while those who do strive to achieve are penalized by having to pay higher rent for equal amenities. In effect, those who are receiving housing for close to nothing do not value the actual cost of housing. I always get a kick out of those who say that private homeowners are “lucky” to have their own home. To me, “lucky” is paying $60/mo in rent and not having to work… instead of paying on a $300K+ mortgage!
Finally, with a GN hiring policy that automatically gives Inuit a 40% advantage over southerners, Inuit will always feel more ‘qualified’ than southerners just for being who they are, and therein lies another subsidy. A government employee has a duty to service Nunavummiut to the best of their abilities. By giving a position to an Inuk who is 40% less effective than another more qualified individual from the south, the government is actually subsidizing that Inuk and their family at the expense of the community they serve.
As long as the value and satisfaction of a good day’s work and a dollar EARNED is not realized, and 'qualified' means different things depending on one's race, how can southerners ever feel legitimized?
According to the Gov't of Canada,
"Inuit control through public government is premised upon the existence of an Inuit majority in Nunavut. Currently, 85% of the population of the region is Inuit."
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/962-e.htm#4.%20Nunavut-t
It's public alright... Inuit public!
It's a public government, that's correct. And 85% of the population is Inuit. Democracy is a bitch, ain't it?
But turning to the matter at hand: as our initial poster said, "Xenophobia has ultimately not been productive in history, and it is likely similarly not going to be productive here in Nunavut." Exactly. Xenophobes who sit around and bitch about "the Inuks" probably aren't going to be part of the solution, I agree completely.
Non-facetious summary of the above paragraph - there are racists and xenophobes on both sides of the fence, and neither group are particularly useful.
As to why non-Inuit professionals and experts so often encounter hostility - read Hugh Brody's "The Peoples Land", if you haven't already. He's a bit polemical, but he gets it right. Briefly, we're in a transitional post-colonial period that will take at least a generation, and possibly up to a century, to get through. The institutions mediating the relationship between Inuit and the "outside world" are not of their creation, including virtually everything that the GN does. A territory is trying to deliver a province's worth of programs and services, to and through a population for whom ALL these systems are no more than a generation old, to an indigenous groups with a smaller population than most southern cities
It's inevitable that massive amounts of outside expertise are going to be required. It's inevitable (and unfair) that the requirement will generate huge resentment. Does it hurt? Of course. But responding to it with neo-conservative platitudes and thinly veiled racism only does two things; it deepens and enshrines the resentment on both sides, and hastens the day when you leave the territory, another burned-out, bitter ex-Northerner.
Some anger and exasperation is inevitable. But wallowing in your rage because your expertise is not appreciated is self defeating. In reading these threads, I find two kinds of complaints: people who are angry because they're trying to achieve something for Nunavut and are being blocked, and people who are angry because their ego is being assailed, or they're feeling inconvenienced. If you're a category one, reread your Brody and soldier on; if you're category two, reconsider your life decisions.
I posted this on a past comment section but here it is again. I have been in the north for 11 years now and no matter how hard you try or how much work you do, you will never be accepted up here as a southerner.
On April 1 1999, I was asked about 8 times, "Why are you still here? All white people are supposed to leave as this is our land now!"
I have been told by the GN what I can post on my personal; website. I thought this was a free country but I guess I am wrong. Agent was right in saying that there are many good storied up here as well but unfortunately they are far less than the negative ones.
Take for example the latest HR tour. There are two Inuit representatives traveling the territory giving a lecture on the GN. Part of that lecture goes like this, quote" We are tired of white people taking our jobs and retiring on our money". This is what the GN is pushing out to the population. I have had some of my Inuit friends say they had to leave this presentation as they started to feel uncomfortable.
In my 11 years up here I have seen this territory go backwards. I have seen the racism get more prevalent. And it is only going to get allot worst before it starts to get better.
It actually saddens me to see the state of affairs in Nunavut. I thought as Canadians we go over the whole racist discrimination but it looks as if Nunavut is keeping it alive.
"I have been in the north for 11 years now and no matter how hard you try or how much work you do, you will never be accepted up here as a southerner."
Probably not. I have friends born in Beirut, Hong Kong and Manila who moved to Canada as infants, and who still get asked daily "so, where are you from?" Had the same experience myself moving to a small Ontario town many years ago - despite my participation in a Chamber of Commerce and much volunteer work, I knew I would never be viewed as "from here".
You feel upset because people ask you when you're leaving. But your comments on their home include your observation that the news is overwhelmingly negative, the suggestion that GN is promoting racism, that the territory is going backwards, that everything is getting worse. To be honest, if you came to my home and described it like that, I'd wonder why you were sticking around myself.
Balulican, don't you find yourself to be pompous to the point of caricature? Cripes. You talk as if you have some special knowledge that the rest of us don't have, and beliefs that the rest of us unwashed don't share.
The fact that other commenters and article-writers have thoughts that aren't completely all-accepting of the status quo in Nunavut doesn't make them "thinly veiled racists" or "wallowing in rage".
I think you're reading this into them as you don't happen to agree with them, but you're using a pathetic tactic that lefties use (and I know it well from being on the inside) of putting opposing viewpoints on the defensive, and demonizing them in a knee-jerk "I know better" condescending fashion.
Anon 8:13, I agree, I have been in the north a long time too and I have seen things get worse, and it saddens me too.
I know for myself, I'm so completely non-racist that I don't put anyone on a pedistal, but some people will see that as a racist act, when in fact putting one race on a pedistal is the actual racist act. People are people. You get jerks on either side, but that doesn't mean it's wrong for either side to point one out when they see one.
And the Canadian non-urban trait of considering new folks to be outsiders forever is obnoxious and counter-productive, wherever you run into it. But the fact they do it elsewhere doesn't make it right to do it in Nunavut.
"Balulican, don't you find yourself to be pompous... don't share."
I'm not much interested in your insults or literary critique, Lucy. Let's stick to the actual matter at hand, shall we?
"The fact that other commenters and article-writers have thoughts that aren't completely all-accepting of the status quo in Nunavut doesn't make them "thinly veiled racists" or "wallowing in rage"."
No all of them, nope. Some are, some aren't. Apply the observations to those whom the shoe fits.
"I think ...lefty... condescending fashion..." etc., ect.
As before, I'm not much interested in your opinion of my style. Back to substance...
"You get jerks on either side, but that doesn't mean it's wrong for either side to point one out when they see one."
Absolulutely. As I said, "there are racists and xenophobes on both sides of the fence, and neither group are particularly useful."
"And the Canadian non-urban trait of considering new folks to be outsiders forever is obnoxious and counter-productive, wherever you run into it. But the fact they do it elsewhere doesn't make it right to do it in Nunavut."
I would suggest you edit that thought to: "The human trait of considering new folks to be outsiders..., etc." You'll encounter it in every country and culture on the planet. As I said, it's not "right" - in Nunavut, or anywhere. But it's real, it's inevitable, it's universal, and anyone chosing to live in any post-colonial society is going to experience it.
I wrote the "in the north for 11 years" bit. This is for balbulican.
Your read things how you want to interpret them. There are alot of negative things up here as there are anywhere else in Canada. My point is that it is getting worst here in Nunavut and those are the facts. It is also more prevalent here because of the size of the communities. You see more than you would in a southern city of 500k.
I have many Inuit friends and love living here but that still does not negate that fact that racism is getting worst in Nunavut and especially within the GN. I know of a person I worked with who was 1000000% Inuk but believe it or not was turned down for jobs because she was not a NLCB. So, not only is the GN discriminating toward none-Inuk but also toward Inuk who do not meet certain criteria.
I myself have been brought up to a review board for not hiring an Inuk (although I did interview this person along with two Inuk panel members). The appeal letter from the applicant said, and I quote, “It does not matter if I am qualified, I am Inuk so you have to hire me”. Are you freaking kidding me? The person was dead serious and stated that this was GN policy. Combine that with the recent HR tour and this will tell you what the GN is telling the youth in Nunavut.
I am no where near perfect and never claimed to be but I figured that as Canadian we got over the whole race thing and moved on to a point where everyone is equal no matter what race, religion and so on. I love the North and what I am saying is that is just saddens me to see the way things are heading. And yes I consider it a step backwards. When you yourself have been told that you are not welcome in a building or at a feast because you are not Inuk then come to me and tell me what you think. Is that not discouraging?
Hi, anonymous. That was a thoughtful response.
"Your read things how you want to interpret them."
I guess we all do. I'm responding to the overwhelmingly negative tone of the discussion.
"There are alot of negative things up here as there are anywhere else in Canada. My point is that it is getting worst here in Nunavut and those are the facts."
It all depends on what you choose to measure, Anon. Here's a little quiz. For the following indicators, are things getting "better" or "worse" in Nunavut, looking at the period 1993-2008?
- Infant mortality
- Residents per housing unit
- Life expectancy
- Rates of suicide
- Number of HS graduates
- General literacy and numeracy
- Percentage of Inuit labour force employed full-time
- Per capita income
You may know the answers already. If so, you're aware that some things are getting better, and some things are getting worse...just like everywhere. The failings of GN are there for everyone to see, no question: but a simple statement that "Nunavut is getting worse" is both inaccurate, and paralyzing, in my opinion.
"It is also more prevalent here because of the size of the communities. You see more than you would in a southern city of 500k."
Not sure what you mean about "it's more prevalent here".
"I have many Inuit friends and love living here but that still does not negate that fact that racism is getting worst in Nunavut and especially within the GN."
I can't really say, since I've been abused (and in a couple of cases physically assaulted) for my race since 1980. Your observation about it getting "worse" may be accurate, I don't know. But it's not new. Neither is the racism of some kabloonaks toward Inuit, of course.
"I know of a person I worked with who was 1000000% Inuk but believe it or not was turned down for jobs because she was not a NLCB. So, not only is the GN discriminating toward none-Inuk but also toward Inuk who do not meet certain criteria."
That would seem to disprove your suggestion that this is about "race", wouldn't it? As discussed in a prior thread, beneficiary status is not a matter of being Inuk: it's a matter of having surrendered your Aboriginal title, granting Canada access to your land, and receiving benefits in compensation.
"I myself have been brought up to a review board for not hiring an Inuk (although I did interview this person along with two Inuk panel members). The appeal letter from the applicant said, and I quote, “It does not matter if I am qualified, I am Inuk so you have to hire me”. Are you freaking kidding me? The person was dead serious and stated that this was GN policy. Combine that with the recent HR tour and this will tell you what the GN is telling the youth in Nunavut."
"The person" was mistaken, correct? Did the appeal Board direct you to hire them?
"I am no where near perfect and never claimed to be but I figured that as Canadian we got over the whole race thing and moved on to a point where everyone is equal no matter what race, religion and so on."
Absolutely. But I repeat: Inuit of Nunavut signed away their Aboriginal title in return for negotiated benefits. Those were ratified by the GNWT and the Government of Canada. Are you suggesting that Canada/GN now simply say "Hey, we've decided not to honour Articles 23 and 24. But we're keeping the land. Thanks."
" When you yourself have been told that you are not welcome in a building or at a feast because you are not Inuk then come to me and tell me what you think. Is that not discouraging?"
It's happened to me several times. And as I said, I was once beat up because I was the wrong race at a party. Quite some time ago, so this is NOT new.
I had to come to terms with it, and to understand where that resentment was coming from. As I said, reading Brody helped. So did working and socializing with the vast majority of Inuit for whom my race wasn't a problem. It still pisses me off when I get it, just as it pisses me off to sit and listen to racism whining about "the Inuks". I don't like racists of any colour.
Balbulican, there are many things I would like to take you to task on, but here's one little one:
Re: The People's Land: Eskimos and Whites in the Eastern Arctic
Published in 1978.
I think you should update your library. I'd say more than a few changes have taken place since then, not the least of which the word Eskimo has fallen a bit out of favour, don't you think?
Ummm...it was actually first published in 1975.
have you actually read it, Anon?
If so, don't you think Brody's quotes from the non-Inuit of Baker Lake sound astonishingly like the points of view espoused by many in in this forum?
If not, please have the courtesy to do so before you comment on its relevance. Thanks.
Brody has written many excellent books since "The Peoples Land" (most recently "The Other Side of Eden", 2000); but People's Land remains a book I still lend to people who want to understand something of the post colonial north in transition.
"Balbulican, there are many things I would like to take you to task on, but here's one little one..."
"Little one", indeed. Anything substantive to say, now that that's out of your system?
Does Balbulican actually "work"? I'm assuming that Balbulican "works" for the GN, given how much time he/she has to spend writing comments on the internet.
Nothing of value to say, Anon? Pity, it's an interesting topic with some good comments.
Nope. Nothing to say Balbulican, other than to thank you for proving my point.
No problem. I look forward to the next adult contribution. Standing by.
Thanks.
It would seem to me that no matter what anyone’s opinion is, we are all wrong and balbulican is correct. I love the way he/she picked apart my last comment. Great work bal...
I guess my downfall was that I did not mention any of the good thigs up here in Nunavut. The many friends I have that are both Inuk and non-Inuk. Considering I was talking about how I feel on the racism here in Nunavut. I could go on and argue some points on your little quiz but that would be useless.
My final word is that I love it up here in Nunavut. There are many very good people here that I am a better person for knowing. I have learned alot from again both Inuk and non-Inuk’s alike.
This still does not hide the fact that racial tensions are growing and it will only get worst before it gets better. And my main point was that in this day and age we still have to put up with racists no matter where we are. One would think we, the human race, would learn from our mistakes.
Life is not fair bal... Get used to it...
"It would seem to me that no matter what anyone’s opinion is, we are all wrong and balbulican is correct."
I agree with quite a bit of what you said, and I said so.
"I love the way he/she picked apart my last comment. Great work bal..."
Thanks. I try. Glad you loved it.
"I could go on and argue some points on your little quiz but that would be useless."
Not sure why you feel that. My point is that folks determined to convince themselves that "everything is getting worse in Nunavut" can do so, but only by ignoring the stuff that's getting better.
"Life is not fair bal... Get used to it..."
Heh. I think you have us mixed up. I'm not the one who's astonished by the existence of racism in post colonial Nunavut, Anon. Like I said, I've experienced it too. Unlike you, I haven't let that experience convince me that everything's getting worse.
I haven't let the racism get to me actually. I refuse to let it get to me. At the end of the day I make super bucks to be here and I can go home and drink all the wine I want. Summer trips to Europe, a few wine tours and spiffy hotels in the South, yeah I can take the racism in return for life I can now afford.
I've been following this thread with interest, and mounting horror. Balbulican, I really appreciate your comments. I've worked across the north for many years, including a prior stint in Nunavut. Returning here, I'm stunned at the levels of growing, overt racism on all sides. To the qallunaat who feel like they are being discriminated against, are not getting 'their due', that the 'others' are getting away with something --- well, welcome to the other side of the fence, and welcome to the experience of indigenous communities on this continent for the past 500 years.
I know two wrongs don't make a right, but we need to recognize how much damage has been done over generations, and stay positive while we work for generations to come to heal those wounds.
- Supporter of the Nunavut "project"
I usually post frequent comments on this site, but have been away for a while. Glad to see the discussion is moving along at a fever-pitch without my pathetic input!
I think it's fair to say that many of us are in for the long-haul. We have too much of our lives invested here to just thoughtlessly pull up stakes and leave anytime soon, if ever. Like many others, I am seeing "things" getting worse.
Not for me, though. My life has become much better over the last few decades. And I think that would also apply to many, if not most, of the long-term whites.
So, the question is, why do we give a shit if things are bad, and getting worse, for a significant portion of the Inuit population?
Many of us have stuck our necks way out in order to draw attention to some of the major problems facing Nunavut and, in good faith, have provided (un-asked, because we never will be asked) our opinions and suggestions for solving some of those problems.
Could it be possible that we actually DO care where this territory and it's people are heading, want to help, but are ignored and belittled by the majority and by the leftist "saviours" in our midst, whose knowledge of the north comes from a 30-year old book?
I understand and appreciate the frustration, and the tone and content of the posts I've read have to be taken with consideration of that frustration.
We DO care, we want to help and make things better, but we're told to go away or shut the f**k up!
And that attitude will be the down-fall of this territory.
El Dubya
"by the leftist "saviours" in our midst, whose knowledge of the north comes from a 30-year old book.."
LOL. You lookin' at ME, El?
My "knowledge of the North" comes from working and living in various Nunavut, Nunavik and Nunatsiavut communities since 1980. Still not sure whether you've actually read Brody or not, but you should.
"...but are ignored and belittled by the majority..."
Gosh, I can't for the life of me imagine why THAT would be, given your positive outlook and constructive approach... ;)
Anon at 11:51 am, thanks. I was starting to think I was alone in here ;)
The first time I ever travelled north was to what was then Frobisher Bay in 1980 to do a couple of weeks of training. I ended up sitting that first night at the Kamotik with an "old northerner" who explained to me that it was pointless for me to try training "these people". He and other whites had tried really hard, but the Inuit were just unwilling to learn. Life was too easy for them. Everything was being handed to them on a plate. They never had to work like HE had had to work. They didn't appreciate HIS experience or listen to him the way they should. They thought HE was racist? HAH! THEY were the real racists...
And on, and on, and on, until I disengaged politely and went back to my billet.
I'm sure he really saw himself as someone trying to do good. I'm sure he was really confused about why it was Inuit didn't respond very well to him.
What's surprising is to hear exactly the same stuff nearly thirty years later.
Wow, Barbulican, thank you for pointing out what a miserable, hateful, racist person I am. You know, I never realized it. For now on I resolve to sit quietly in my empty classroom and collect the rest of my big fat pay cheques before I leave in June. Apparently, everything is just hunky-dory the way it is. I haven't been up here long enough to warrant having as valid an opinion as you seem to have. Apparently, the hundreds of hours of volunteer work I've put in over the past 3 years with coaching, army cadets and taking students to tournaments and competitions just pales compared to all your great works. That I consider myself in Nunavut for the long haul and looked into building a house of my own........man, that's all nothing because I am wrong and you are right. Sorry I ever came to your little territory and tried my best to make a difference. I guess I was just wrong. I'm just a hateful, racist.
Heh. Well, I don't know you, so I can't comment on any of your satirical self-pity. Sorry, you'll have to bounce it off a friend.
If you don't mind a friendly suggestion on your writing, though, leaden sarcasm and hyperbolic straw men don't make for very interesting blogs. There's probably a more valuable discussion we could be having.
Like for instance: how would YOU suggest that the GN/Federal Article 23 obligations be met with minimal disruption to the lives of long-term, non-beneficiary Nunavummiut?
Oh grief, now he's engaging racists in dialogue.
No, properly implementing Article 23 would be the GN's job.
"No, properly implementing Article 23 would be the GN's job."
Well, GN and the Feds, strictly speaking. But my question was: a good deal of this thread, and others, suggests that it is being implemented unfairly.
So I'm wondering what approaches you think would work to achieve the same objectives, but with minimal disruption to the lives of long-term, non-beneficiary Nunavummiut?
Yes the feds too have a responsibility, my bad. As for how I would implement it, again that's not my responsibility. I focus on my job and do it to the best of my abilities and I assume the gov't folks at both levels do the same. That's why I cast my ballot every few years.
"As for how I would implement it, again that's not my responsibility."
I understand that, and I wasn't directing the question to anyone specific. I'm just wondering whether anyone who's unhappy with the way it IS happening has any thoughts on how it SHOULD happen. A number of comments have expressed the writer's deep concern for the future of Nunavut; usually that prompts some reflection on solutions as well as complaints.
Ok I'll bite.......impress on students the need for, and value of a solid education. Infuse enough financial support into the system to ensure that standards are met. This would ensure that students graduate with the skills necessary to succeed in today's workforce. This would satisfy young Inuit (and their teachers too :)
Once, they can successfully compete for jobs, then revisit the land claim and get rid of these silly hiring practices. This will help ensure that people are hired according to how they should be.......knowledge and skill. This will (I hope) alleviate some of the ill feelings on the part of long-term Nunavummiut you speak about and ensure that future Inuit are true equals and not treated like children where they have to be given special treatment in the hiring process.
The way it works now, long-term Nunavummiut, Southerners etc. feel resentment (rightly or wrongly) for not being given fair process in hiring and Inuit are treated like children who are seen as always needing help. The policies in place at the moment are insulting and derogatory to both sides in my opinion
Way Way, I had originally sent the following to our host as a possible post. It hasn't appeared, so I'll pop it in here: it links with what you're suggesting.
The original post ended with a series of interesting questions, one of which was "What does 'qualified' mean?"
On the surface, the question is an easy one. "Qualified" means possessed of the skills, knowledge and attitudes required to do a specific job. Qualifications are usually one of two types: "Screen" (which means essential - the candidate MUST have it) or "Rated", which means it's desirable - the candidate's level will be assessed against that of the other applicants.
The notion of qualifications has worked against Inuit in Nunavut a few ways in the past.
Back in the GNWT days, screen criteria were sometimes set unnecessarily high. Note that I said SOMETIMES. No one can disagree that an accountant MUST have a CGA, or a Nurse MUST have recognized certification. But I remember job descriptions inthat required a university degree for a program officer. Useful and desirable? Yes, certainly. But essential? Maybe not, depending on the actual function. Certainly at the point in time, it was a clear signal that "No Inuit Need Apply".
Staffing actions also failed to recognize other skills or knowledge that might have given Inuit an employment advantage. For example, the ability to speak Inuktitut is ESSENTIAL if you're delivering front line service to older Inuit, especially in the communities. But that wasn't always acknowledged.
The NLCA sought to redress that through Article 23, probably the most widely misunderstood part of the Claim, both IN government and by the public. It's a bit more complicated than "THOU MUST HIRE INUIT".
Article 23 requires that all Fed. and territorial departments prepare Inuit Employment plans aimed at 85% Inuit employment. But these plans were to represent more than just hiring quotas: the Claim specifies that they also involve comprehensive and long term pre-employment plans and pre-employment training plans. Pre-employment plans were to involve a review of position descriptions and competency analyses, elimination of false screen requirements, and determination if there were any unfair barriers to Inuit employment. (For instance, there were originally no requirement in place that jobs should be advertised bilingually). The pre-employment training plans were to involve an in-depth assessment of needs, a labour market analysis to determine where the major gaps were, and the development of programs to address those gaps.
That labour market analysis was never carried out. And most "Inuit Employment Plans" ended up simply being numerical targets. Engineering a major shift in the demographic breakdown of a territorial government is a HUGE task, one that would realistically require a generation of retooling the education system, development of a wide range of training programs, and slow, carefully monitored transition. If the governments had actually committed themselves to that process in good faith, things might have happened. Instead, both the Feds and GN simply set quotas, fail to meet them, shrug, set new quotas, fail to meet them, shrug, set new quotas…repeat ad nauseam.
I have no problem with the goal of Inuit employment at "representative" levels; it’s the right goal to try for, and besides, it’s the law. But if it’s going to happen, both the governments and NTI have to realize that they’re not talking about a five or ten year process. Becoming a Deputy Minister or a Senior Policy Advisor takes a southern bureaucrat (who probably has a MPA) years of experience to achieve – it’s nonsense to think a “trainee” can acquire that knowledge in two years.
The first rule of staffing has to be: the job must get done.
So how to bridge that gap?
· Make "Beneficiary Status" a rated criterion, rather than a screen criterion, and award points for it during a hiring action: but ensure that all applicants meet the mandatories – otherwise they don’t get interviewed.
· STOP doing what too many departments are doing - hiring unqualified people to satisfy an IEP, or ignoring certain critical job requirements.
· Identify the long term problems that are limiting the number of qualified Inuit available on the labour market, bite the bullet, and start taking long term steps to address them. The Berger report had a lot to say about that; so do studies by Abele, Kulchiski, the RCAP, PricewaterhouseCoopers, and others.
· NTI needs to stop blindly applying political pressure to meet the 85% level in an unrealistic timeframe, and commit itself to a process of joint, long term planning and advocacy, in partnership with the GN, to get Canada back to the negotiating table.
Yes I am familiar with the NLCA, though admittedly not to the extent I wish I was. Your ideas appear reasonable enough from what I can tell. As I impress upon my students, its important to know the issues and get involved and demand that from our politicians which we expect. Well spoken.
I agree with your comments above Way Way Up and I like your comparison of treating Inuit like children.
As a parent, I have certain expectations of my child... and because I have expectations, my child (usually) strives to meet them and even tries exceed them. When no one has expectations of you (e.g. your parents, teachers, employers, etc.), and often expects failure, why would someone even try to do better? This lesson is found in just about every basic parenting book I’ve read.
I know of a small non-profit community-based Inuit organization whose mandate is to empower Inuit through education... and seems to specifically target mothers. I think they're on to something in that empowerment through education can go a long way for building someone's self-esteem and identity. I’ve seen its success first-hand. Too bad they have a hard time finding funding to support their endeavors and will likely cease operation at the end of the fiscal year.
I believe that many of these changes we speak of will have to come from Inuit themselves and not necessarily from the government. In the end, one learns what they live (i.e. in the home). Somehow, the entire population needs to come to the realization that, hey, it feels good to accomplish something and want a better life for myself and my family. I’m not sure how to make this one work though, since Inuit can’t even get the support to do it.
Since Balbalucan likes to tell cute little anecdotes... may I?
Back in 1976, I sat in the kitchen of my house, in the same community where I now live, having a cup of coffee with the Hon. Bud Drury and his assistant, George Braden. Mr. Drury was travelling what would later be called Nunavut, getting a feel for the concerns of people, both Inuit and white, over constitutional development in the NWT and the possibilty of division of the territory.
Braden and Drury listened politely to my concerns. I doubt I influenced them in the least, but I did have my say.
What was interesting was the local fall-out from that meeting.
You see, I had seen an ad in the newspaper saying that anyone could arrange to meet with Mr. Drury. I didn't realize that "anyone" didn't include me. I heard later that Mr. Drury got a scolding from the local Settlement Council for being so brash as to "consult" with an outsider/white-man/southerner.
In 1976, having been here only a few years, I don't think I'd had time to become the racist, negative person that all of us, save Balbalucan, have apparently become. My opinions (which, incidentally, were very moderate) caused antagonism for no other reason than that I was white. The Settlement Council never asked "what" I had said, their concern was that I'd had the nerve to say anything at all.
So exclusion of the non-Inuit point-of-view is not a new phenomenon. I'm used to it now, but I can't say that it doesn't bother me.
Perhaps, as one commentator suggested, we should just continue to work in a collapsing system, keep our mouths shut, collect our fat pay-cheques and hope it all doesn't fall completely apart before we retire or choke on the Bal-shit.
El
PS: I HAVE read Brody. Frankly, I think it's lost most of it's 1975 relevance.
Thanks, EL. We've moved on past the self-pity stage of this discussion. See above.
Did you have any additional thoughts on how the intent of Article 23 could be achieved to add to the thoughtful suggestions of Way Way Up?
"I believe that many of these changes we speak of will have to come from Inuit themselves and not necessarily from the government."
I think that's very true. Neither the negotiators of the Claim nor the designers of the GN did a great job of guessing what the reality of this transition was going to be like. You can't fault them too much for that - Lord Mountbatten thought he had the British withdrawal from India all figured out, too. Reality normally has a few more variables than the planners can anticipate.
But I think the GN still has a role to play. Article 23 creates an opportunity that the labour market has yet to fill. Measures like the Education Act and the Adult Learning Strategy are at least intended to create instruments that will start to address the gap between the current indigenous labour force and the need. Will they work? Certainly not perfectly, but probably better than the dismissive cynics say.
Like I said, it's a long, long haul.
All I can say is,
" If it was easy everyone would be doing it, and they'd be doing it for $8.00 an hour."
And thats not gonna happen here while you pay that for a loaf of bread and a quart of milk.
Education is the way to go... however when you are dealing with second and third generation fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, it is a pretty hard task.
I myself have lived in the north since the age of 1 and have witnessed first hand how cruel the inuit can be to "outsiders". I am not white and neither am i inuk so times became very tough. I was constantly beat for being different untill the age of about 16 when i started to gain respect and it seems the times have changed since then. my siblings going to school do not face the same problems and it seems the mentallity of the inuit people is slowly changing.
when i was about 13 years of age i remember going to a soccer tournament in a small community where 40 year old men spit at me, i had gotten used to abuse by kids and teenagers but It just suprised the hell out of me when grown men were doing the same things as the children.
It seems the mentallity towards outsiders is changing today as they are accepting that outsiders are needed to run everything for them and they accept the free ride.
Post a Comment