Chapter 1: Diversity and Inclusion in the Security and Intelligence Community — Organizational efforts to promote diversity and foster inclusion
National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Annual Report 2019

Previous
Table of Contents
Next

Organizational efforts to promote diversity and foster inclusion

64. The first half of this chapter provided an overview of employment equity requirements and the state of diversity in the security and intelligence community as of 2017-2018. The rest of this chapter goes beyond employment equity obligations and assesses efforts by those organizations under review to promote diversity and to foster inclusion across their workforces.

Promoting diversity

65. This section describes the efforts of security and intelligence organizations to promote diversity. It evaluates the important role that leadership plays in these efforts, and corporate efforts to achieve organizational buy-in; analyze and understand the workforce; and recruit and hire members of diverse groups.

Leadership and accountability

66. Organizational leadership and corporate policies play a critical role in promoting and enabling diversity. Footnote 94 CSIS's 2010 Diversity Roadmap states, "Sustainable diversity and inclusion requires visible commitment from the leaders of the organization." Footnote 95 Leaders of all organizations under review recognize diversity and inclusion as vital to the success of their organizations. One of the most visible expressions of organizational leadership is the appointment of 'champions.' Footnote 96 All of the organizations under review have appointed senior-level champions to act as spokespersons and advocates for different groups or initiatives. Champions have been appointed for all four designated groups and the LGBTQ2+ community, and for broader initiatives, including Champions for Diversity and Inclusion, GBA+, and Women, Peace and Security. Footnote 97

67. Another expression of organizational leadership is the extent to which responsibility for diversity is spread across an organization. Footnote 98 As the 2018 employment systems review of Public Safety Canada noted, efforts to promote diversity and inclusion were "undermined by the treatment of employment equity as a separate program rather than a lens through which barriers to [designated] groups have been systematically identified and measures put in place to create a representative workforce and an inclusive workplace." Footnote 99 In many of the organizations under review, diversity and inclusion are the sole responsibility of the human resources department, and not integrated across levels of the organization. For example, PCO's 2015 employment systems review found that employment equity goals were established by the human resources division as a “stand alone program.” Footnote 100 Managers were not involved in the development of plans or strategies to achieve these goals; this practice, according to the PCO review, “undermines managerial accountability for creating a representative workforce and an inclusive workplace.” Footnote 101 By contrast, the RCMP created a Workforce Culture and Employee Engagement Unit in 2016 responsible for promoting gender equality and culture change within the organization. Footnote 102 The head of this unit actively participates in regular discussions with senior leaders of the organization to promote diversity and inclusion throughout the organization. Footnote 103

68. Ministers are responsible to the Prime Minister and ultimately to Canadians on their commitment to diversity and inclusion. In December 2016, the Prime Minister met with leaders of the security and intelligence community and officials from PCO and requested they establish a group of experts to address the specific challenges of diversity and inclusion in their organizations. In January 2017, the leaders of the CAF, the Canadian Coast Guard, CBSA, CSIS, CSE, DND and the RCMP established the "Security and Intelligence Diversity and Inclusion Tiger Team" with the stated aim of “exploring, advancing and implementing joint efforts to learn from one another and share best practices to enhance diversity and inclusion within and across [their] organizations through a variety of activities and initiatives.” Footnote 104 The team met approximately every seven weeks and reported to the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Results and Delivery) every six months. At the time of writing, the Tiger Team had not met since July 2018. Footnote 105 Tiger Team initiatives included joint recruitment initiatives, such as CSE's Young Professionals Network's Career Tradeshow, and joint engagement in the GBA+ Security and Defence Network. Footnote 106 Another Tiger Team initiative was the creation by the CAF, CBSA, the Coast Guard and the RCMP of the Uniform Modernization Working Group to develop a more inclusive uniform design and procurement practice across the four organizations. Footnote 107

69. The Committee noted several shortcomings with this initiative. First, the Tiger Team did not establish specific objectives for diversity and inclusion nor develop a performance measurement framework to assess the success of its initiatives. Footnote 108 Second, the representatives from each organization were all from human resources departments and organizations did not seek out members of employment equity groups for membership or participation on the Tiger Team. Organizations also did not always send the same representative to each meeting. Footnote 109 Third, the Tiger Team did not engage with designated groups within the security and intelligence community to inform their activities or initiatives. Finally, throughout its discussions, the Tiger Team focused on short-term initiatives without considering systemic challenges raised in various organization-specific studies or class-action lawsuits (the CAF and the RCMP), such as workplace culture and discrimination Footnote 110 .

70. Within departments and agencies, accountability for results is a cornerstone of public service leadership. Footnote 111 TBS policy requires performance management agreements for executive-level positions in every department and agency across the federal public service to include an indicator on diversity and inclusion. Footnote 112 Departments and agencies develop their own performance indicators based on the corporate priorities set by the Clerk of the Privy Council. Footnote 113 However, the majority of hiring and day-today employee management tasks are the responsibility of middle management. Footnote 114 Of the nine organizations under review, only two, CSIS and CSE, have incorporated a diversity and inclusion indicator for middle managers. Footnote 115 While laudable, their performance indicators lack specificity and measurable goals. At CSIS, for example, managers are assessed on their ability to promote "a healthy workplace." Footnote 116 At CSE, managers are assessed on their efforts to "create a workplace that is representative and inclusive by encouraging employee self-identification and participating in Diversity and Inclusion initiatives." Footnote 117

71. The challenges of ensuring leadership accountability in the areas of diversity and inclusion are compounded by the absence of established ways of measuring organizational success or progress on diversity and inclusion in the public service. As the Joint Union/Management Task Force on Diversity and Inclusion noted, there is no government-wide framework and approach to diversity and inclusion, and that "without established goals, data and performance measures, it is difficult to determine progress and to know whether current initiatives, by themselves, will succeed in reducing or eliminating systemic barriers." Footnote 118 This is equally true for the security and intelligence community. Few of the organizations under review have established a performance assessment framework for their diversity and inclusion goals and initiatives, with three partial exceptions. In 2013-2014, CSIS created a "Diversity Scorecard" to measure its progress on employment equity, but stopped tracking progress in 2016 due to resourcing issues. Footnote 119 In its 2015-2020 employment equity plan, the CAF noted that it planned to develop a Performance Measurement and Evaluation Plan, but has not made progress in developing that plan. Footnote 120 As a final example, the Security and Intelligence Diversity and Inclusion Tiger Team stated in a letter to the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet ( Results and Delivery) in September 2017 a n intention to "develop a [security and intelligence] community Performance Measurement Framework to track diversity issues;" this framework was not developed. Footnote 121

Organizational buy-in

72. Research shows that while leadership commitment to diversity is important, ensuring that employees at all levels of the organization understand and accept the value of diversity is critical to the success of any initiatives, particularly at middle management levels. Footnote 122 However, misunderstandings about diversity and inclusion goals and even resistance to their implementation persist. As examples, the RCMP noted that resistance to diversity and inclusion initiatives was strongest at the Senior Non-Commissioned Officer level of the organization. Footnote 123 Similarly, the CAF's 2013 employment systems review identified continued resistance to the importance of diversity, including among senior leaders in the organization. Footnote 124 DND's most recent employment systems review found that "only the most senior executives are able to describe the organizational benefits of a more diverse workforce." Footnote 125 For its part, CSE's 2017 employment systems review revealed a "lack of visibility of employment equity/diversity and its recognition as a contributor to business results." Footnote 126

73. Various organizations have implemented measures to better inform their members of the value and importance of diversity and inclusion. For example, in 2010 CSIS commissioned a report on the case for diversity and best practices to enhance diversity and inclusion in the organization. Footnote 127 This report stands out as a useful tool to both justify initiatives and implement strategies to improve diversity across CSIS. In a similar vein, the CAF developed a diversity strategy document to provide the "framework within which [it] will direct, promote and safeguard the respect and dignity of all persons as a core value within [its] institution." Footnote 128 DND and the CAF are also currently developing a joint civilian and military diversity action plan. Footnote 129

74. Most organizations also offer employment equity and diversity training online. For their part, CSIS and CSE provide training on employment equity and diversity to employees during onboarding sessions. Footnote 130 CBSA employs a mandatory online course on diversity and race relations for all employees. Footnote 131 For the other organizations, these courses are voluntary and no organization makes career promotions conditional on the completion of courses on diversity or inclusion. Footnote 132

Efforts to understand the workforce

75. The Employment Equity Act requires organizations to identify barriers to employment for designated groups and to institute policies and practices to address those barriers. This requires organizations to assess and understand their workforces. As noted earlier, the government renewed its commitment in 2015 to support the full implementation of GBA+, an analytical tool used across organizations in the federal public service to assess how different groups experience policies and programs. Footnote 133 Like other departments, some security and intelligence organizations are using GBA+ to identify potential barriers in their recruitment, hiring and promotions.

76. The GBA+ assessment of staffing policies and practices at GAC and the RCMP stood out as best practices among the organizations under review. GAC's analysis sought to bring a GBA+ lens to all of its human resources and management policies and processes. Footnote 134 The RCMP's assessment recommended updating recruiting materials and reviewing mandatory requirements to ensure fair recruitment and hiring processes. Footnote 135 For its part, DND stated in a 2018 briefing to the Department for Women and Gender Equality that it had conducted a "complete institutional assessment: organization, doctrine, culture, to understand where to start, how to prioritize, and how to 'crack' both the organization at large . . . as well as the multiple areas and 'cultures' of work." Footnote 136 Despite repeated requests from the NSICOP Secretariat, DND failed to provide the Committee with documentation of its assessment.

77. There are other means used by organizations to understand the composition of their workforce and the potential barriers they face. Notable as a best practice, GAC and the RCMP conducted a 'clustering analysis' that, according to ESDC, is used "to determine whether a higher proportion of any designated group is found in the lower levels of occupational groups compared to non-designated counterparts." Footnote 137 The RCMP's analysis revealed important clusters of Aboriginal peoples and persons with disabilities in administrative and clerical positions, which informed their employment equity planning. Footnote 138 GAC's analysis found that women are clustered in lower levels in foreign service positions. Footnote 139 Internal research conducted by CSIS and GAC on barriers women face in executive and foreign service positions also stood out as a best practice. Footnote 140 The studies provided senior management with information about the systemic and attitudinal barriers to women's advancement in each organization and informed policies and initiatives to resolve the identified challenges.

78. In terms of members of visible minorities, DND and the CAF reported to the Minister of Canadian Heritage in its 2017-2018 annual multiculturalism report that the department was conducting an internal study on racism and discrimination. DND and the CAF stated in that report that data collection for this study was complete and that its "results provided important insights into these issues that inform/support organizational efforts to address them." Footnote 141 Despite repeated requests, DND failed to provide the Committee with the results or any other documentation related to this study, including relevant studies that came to the attention of the Committee through media reports. Footnote 142

Recruitment and hiring

79. Organizations need to recruit and hire diverse candidates to achieve a diverse workforce. Research demonstrates that this may require organizations to adjust their recruitment strategies to reach candidates of different genders, abilities, and racial or ethnocultural backgrounds, and to ensure that their hiring practices are free of bias. Footnote 143 As a practical example, CSIS's 2010 Diversity Roadmap identified establishing relationships in diverse communities, advertising and recruiting at colleges and universities, using specialized recruitment services, training people in cross-cultural interviewing skills, and reviewing recruitment processes for bias, as best practices for recruiting a diverse workforce. Footnote 144

80. A majority of organizations reviewed have adopted proactive and targeted recruitment strategies to reduce representation gaps for all designated groups. CSIS and CSE were particularly notable for their collaboration with a number of agencies that specialize in the recruitment of persons with disabilities and women, and appointment of specialized diversity recruiters whose role is to reach out to ethnocultural community groups and student associations. Footnote 145 Another positive initiative is the Young Women in Public Safety Internship Program, launched by Public Safety Canada and its portfolio agencies, to increase recruitment of women. Footnote 146 CBSA is developing a three-year recruitment and retention strategy for Aboriginal peoples in border service officer positions. Footnote 147 Moreover, several organizations have made efforts to target members of designated groups in their staffing advertisements. CBSA, for example, advertised several positions for persons who self-identify as Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities or as a member of a visible minority. Footnote 148 Similarly, CSIS and PCO have both encouraged hiring managers to obtain information on targeting designated groups in staffing advertisements.1 Footnote 149

81. GAC and the RCMP both conducted GBA+ reviews of their recruitment or hiring processes to ensure they are bias-free. Footnote 150 GAC's "Guide to applying GBA+ using a Diversity and Inclusion Lens to Staffing" aimed to "replenish or refresh the staffing being carried out in a manner that adheres to the GBA+ philosophy thus leading to a diverse and inclusive workplace and workforce." Footnote 151 The RCMP's review of recruitment processes sought to identify the barriers facing diverse applicants throughout different phases of the recruitment and hiring process. Footnote 152 In terms of bias- free hiring practices, CBSA and GAC stood out in terms of ensuring adequate representation of designated group members on selection boards and bias-free training requirements for interviewers. Footnote 153

The Committee's assessment of organizational efforts to promote diversity

82. The leadership of the security and intelligence community recognizes the importance of a diverse workforce and some organizations have made efforts to promote and increase diversity in their workforce. However, accountability for diversity and inclusion at executive and managerial levels is limited and organizations have not developed a performance measurement framework to measure their progress. Responsibility for diversity and inclusion tends to be concentrated in human resources areas, rather than spread across the organization, including among middle-managers who make the majority of hiring decisions. Outside of specific organizational contexts, leadership at the level of the security and intelligence community (the Tiger Team) suffers from notable weaknesses, including a lack of diversity among its own membership and a focus on short-term measures. Finally, while organizations have implemented measures to increase representation of designated groups through recruitment, few have made efforts to better understand barriers facing designated groups in their workforce or review internal policies for bias.

Fostering inclusion

83. According to TBS's Joint Union/Management Task Force on Diversity and Inclusion, "an inclusive workforce is fair, equitable, supportive, welcoming and respectful. It recognizes, values and leverages differences in identities, abilities, cultures, skills, experiences and perspectives that support and reinforce Canada's evolving human rights framework." Footnote 154 Unlike measures for diversity, most notably employment rates for designated groups, inclusion is harder to quantify and address. Indeed, there are no government-wide means of measuring organizational progress on inclusion, as discussed in paragraph 70.

84. Based on the definition of an inclusive workforce, the Committee identified three important areas to review. The first is the prevalence of harassment, violence and discrimination in the security and intelligence community and organizational efforts to address those issues. Footnote 155 The second is efforts to promote members of designated groups. As this review shows, members of designated groups are consistently underrepresented in leadership positions. The third is organizational efforts to engage designated groups in policies and processes related to diversity and inclusion. Such engagement is not only important to recognize, value and leverage differences, but is also a requirement imposed on organizations by the Employment Equity Act. Each area is addressed in turn below.

Harassment, violence and discrimination

85. In Budget 2018, the government identified com batting violence in the workplace and ensuring that workplaces are harassment-free as goals. Footnote 156 According to the report from the Clerk's Deputy Minister Task Team on Harassment, organizations across the public service have a responsibility to provide their employees with "a safe and healthy work environment that is free from all forms of harassment and inappropriate behaviours." Footnote 157 However, perceptions of harassment, violence and discrimination are still present in most organizations of the government, including the security and intelligence community.

86. TBS defines harassment as:

improper conduct by an individual, that is directed at and offensive to another individual in the workplace, including at any event or location related to work, and that the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm. It comprises objectionable act(s), comment(s) or display(s) that demean, belittle, or cause personal humiliation or embarrassment, and any act of intimidation or threat. It also includes harassment within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act (i.e. based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability and pardoned conviction). Footnote 158

87. TBS defines discrimination as:

Treating someone differently or unfairly because of a personal characteristic or distinction, which, whether intentional or not, has an effect that imposes disadvantages not imposed on others, or that withholds or limits access that is given to others. There are (13) grounds of discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act: race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability, and pardoned conviction or suspended record. Footnote 159

88. Three core organizations in the security and intelligence community have faced lawsuits alleging harassment, discrimination or violence. Most prominently, the CAF and the RCMP have faced or are currently facing class-action lawsuits alleging longstanding systemic issues of harassment, violence and discrimination in the workplace, with some lawsuits leading to official apologies and settlements totalling over $1 billion. Footnote 160 CSIS also settled a multi-million dollar lawsuit in 2017 with five employees in the Toronto Region office specifically alleging lslamophobia, racism and homophobia. Footnote 161 During the same period, reviews of organizational culture for all three organizations revealed important problems. A 2015 review by former Supreme Court Justice Marie Deschamps, entitled External Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces, found "an underlying sexualized culture… that is hostile to women and LGBTQ members." Footnote 162 A 2017 Workplace Climate Assessment of CSIS's Toronto Region office noted problems of abuse of authority and fear of reprisal, and a lack of trust in management. Footnote 163 Finally, a 2017 review of organizational culture at the RCMP by the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission noted the long-standing issues of harassment and confirmed "problems of workplace bullying and harassment persist." Footnote 164

89. These organizations have responded to the workplace harassment, discrimination and violence issues through a variety of programs and initiatives. CSIS implemented a Workplace Action Plan in 2017 to address organizational culture issues. The RCMP and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness announced the creation of an Interim Management Advisory Board in January 2019 to advise the agency on how to improve its policies and procedures on harassment in the workplace, among other things.

90. The CAF has conducted surveys to examine harassment within the armed forces. However, according to the 2012 Canadian Forces Workplace Harassment Survey, "much of the research examining harassment in the CAF was conducted in the 1990s, with minimal comprehensive research conducted since then." The 2012 survey was the last comprehensive survey on workplace harassment conducted on harassment in the regular forces and the low response rate represented "a key source of bias" in the results. Footnote 165 Similar surveys conducted on reservists, cadets and those completing Basic Military Qualifications were completed in 2015. Footnote 166 The CAF launched Operation HONOUR in June 2015 to resolve and prevent issues of sexual harassment in the armed forces. Footnote 167 The CAF has monitored force-wide perceptions on harassment regularly in the last five years as part of a much larger survey that examines a wide range of personnel issues, policies and experiences for CAF members. Footnote 168

91. Progress on these issues has been slow. The CAF has acknowledged that eradicating harassment and violence requires a transformation of its organizational culture over the long term and has not yet established a deadline for this initiative. Footnote 169 Several reviews of the CAF's efforts in this regard have found that the organization has made limited progress over the past four years. In 2019, Statistics Canada found that the prevalence of sexual assault in the CAF in 2018 was similar to that of 2016. The CAF's own 2019 Operation HONOUR progress report noted that the department has implemented only three of the ten recommendations from the 2015 report by Justice Deschamps. Footnote 170 A May 2019 report from the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence stated that measures put in place by the CAF in the last four years to address these issues "fall short of what is required, and that further work remains to be done." Footnote 171 Similar to the CAF, the RCMP has struggled to address the pervasive issues of harassment and violence in the workplace. The Civilian Review and Complaints Commission noted in its 2017 report on harassment at the RCMP that "after each new harassment scandal has arisen, highlighting anew the RCMP's dysfunctional organizational culture, the RCMP's reaction has been merely to circle the wagons." Footnote 172 The report goes on to state "If the last ten years, over 15 reports and hundreds of recommendations for reform have produced any lessons, it is that the RCMP is not capable of making the necessary systemic changes of its own accord." Footnote 173

92. Harassment and discrimination are also present in the other organizations under review. The following text box highlights results from the 2017 Public Service Employee Survey (PSES), an annual anonymous survey used to measure public service employees' opinions on their workplace. Footnote 174 The text box includes comparisons of the average rates of harassment and discrimination across the public service with the rates of harassment and discrimination at CBSA, CSE, DND, GAC, PCO, Public Safety Canada and the RCMP as reported in the 2017 PSES. CSIS and the CAF are not included because they do not participate in the PSES. CSIS separately administered a survey to its employees in 2015. The CAF captures its members' opinions through Canadian Forces Workplace Harassment surveys and an annual Your Say Survey.

2017 Public Service Employee Survey results for harassment and discrimination

The 2017 PSES results revealed the following:

  • Of the employees in the public service who responded to the survey, 18% indicated they had been victims of harassment and 8% indicated they had been victims of discrimination in the workplace in the past two years.

Harassment

  • In the public service, 19% of women employees, 28% of Aboriginal employees, 18% of employees who are members of visible minorities and 37% of employees with disabilities indicated they had been victims of harassment at work in the past two years.
  • In half of the organizations under review, women experienced harassment at a higher rate than the public service average.
  • In half of the organizations under review, persons with disabilities experienced harassment at a higher rate than the public service average.

Discrimination

  • In the public service, 8% of women employees, 15% of Aboriginal employees, 13% of employees who are members of visible minorities and 25% of employees with disabilities indicated they had been victims of discrimination at work in the past two years.
  • In a majority of the organizations under review, women experienced discrimination at a higher rate than the public service average.
  • In half of the organizations under review, members of visible minorities experienced discrimination at a higher rate than the public service average.
  • In a majority of the organizations under review, persons with disabilities experienced discrimination at a higher rate as compared with the public service average.

CBSA

  • The rates of harassment and discrimination for all designated groups are higher at CBSA than the public service average.

Analyzing survey results and tracking complaints

93. The Deputy Minister Task Team on Harassment highlighted the importance of data analysis in identifying and addressing harassment in the workplace. Footnote 175 The report recommends that organizations "use quantitative and qualitative tools to gain a clearer line of sight to areas where harassment is more likely to occur." Footnote 176 Some of the organizations under review have sought to better understand the prevalence of harassment and discrimination and employee well-being in their organization by analyzing PSES results, conducting additional surveys and tracking harassment and violence complaints. CBSA, GAC, PCO and DND produced detailed analyses of PSES results for designated groups broken down by sources of harassment and discrimination. Footnote 177 CSE and the RCMP did not conduct an analysis of PSES results broken down by designated group. CSIS and CSE conducted internal surveys on employee wellbeing separate from the PSES, although CSE did not analyze the results of these surveys by designated group. Footnote 178 DND and the CAF are developing a "Defence Workplace Well-being Survey" to measure the psychological health and well-being of their workforce. Footnote 179

94. A majority of the organizations under review track and report on the number of official harassment complaints. That said, the RCMP, DND and the CAF noted deficiencies with their tracking systems. The RCMP reported that complaints about workplace issues that do not meet the definition of harassment are still directed to the harassment process in the absence of alternative forms of formal recourse, effectively skewing the statistics. Footnote 180 DND and the CAF characterized their joint Harassment Complaint Tracking System, in place since 2012, as "highly under-utilized" by individuals responsible for inputting information about harassment complaints. Footnote 181 DND continues to use this system to track complaints, but the CAF established a separate Integrated Complaint Registration and Tracking System in 2018. Footnote 182

95. Concerns over the accuracy of complaint tracking systems point to a larger issue of employee willingness to report harassment and discrimination. The Deputy Minister Task Team on Harassment noted "many cases of workplace harassment are never reported" due to a lack of trust or awareness of the process, or for fear of retaliation. Footnote 183 In fact, CSIS's 2015 Employee Survey found that the most frequently cited reason for not filing a formal harassment complaint was that individuals "did not believe it would make a difference." Footnote 184 That said, several of the organizations under review have made efforts to explain and build trust in the complaint process, through training and information guides. Footnote 185

Anti-harassment policies and corrective training

96. In accordance with TBS policy, all of the organizations under review have instituted a policy on workplace harassment and violence. Footnote 186 However, a 2017 ESDC report on harassment and sexual violence in the workplace identified several problems with the existing federal legal and regulatory framework for harassment and violence in the workplace. Footnote 187 Two central findings were that the current prevention regime "does not appropriately address the range of inappropriate workplace behaviours" and that regulations in place in federally regulated workplaces "fail to outline provisions for harassment." Footnote 188 The Act to Amend the Canada Labour Code (harassment and violence), the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, modified the existing framework for harassment and violence prevention in federally regulated workplaces. Footnote 189 The Act requires employers to take measures to prevent and protect against workplace harassment, respond to occurrences of harassment and violence, and support affected employees. Employers are also required to "investigate, record and report" all occurrences of harassment and violence. Footnote 190 As a result, the majority of organizations under review must update their harassment policies with the coming into force of this Act in the next two years. Footnote 191

97. Organizations have instituted mandatory anti-harassment training for all employees. In most organizations, employees take the course online and are required to complete it once during their career. The exceptions are DND and the CAF, which have instituted mandatory in-person harassment prevention and bystander intervention training for all employees, including supervisors and managers. Footnote 192 The issue of discrimination receives significantly less attention, despite its prevalence across the organizations under review. CBSA is the only organization of those reviewed to require employees or managers to complete training on anti-racism and discrimination. Footnote 193

Promotions, professional development and mentorship opportunities

98. Fair and equal access to promotional and training opportunities are key components of an inclusive workplace. Footnote 194 The Committee's review of promotion rates and professional development and mentorship opportunities revealed the following:

  • Promotion rates: For a majority of the organizations under review, including the CAF, CSE, CBSA ITAC and the RCMP, the rates of promotion for each designated group overall were proportionate to their overall representation within the organization. Promotion rates for persons with disabilities is below the average promotion rate at DND. However, few of the organizations under review provided promotion rates broken down by occupational category, making it difficult to know whether promotions for designated groups are distributed across all occupational groups or concentrated in specific areas of the workforce.
  • Professional development training: Few organizations provided information on targeted professional development training or on access to this type of training. Two exceptions were leadership training opportunities for women at CSIS, and GAC's participation in the Crown Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada Aboriginal Leadership Development Training initiative. Footnote 195
  • Mentorship: While some organizations in the security and intelligence community have established formal mentoring programs, few of them target specific designated groups. Footnote 196 Two exceptions are CBSA's Visible Minority Advisory Committee Mentoring Program and the informal mentorship program established by the CSIS Women's Network. Footnote 197

Employee engagement

99. The Employment Equity Act requires every employer to consult with its employees' representatives on two areas. The first is on the assistance that representatives could provide to the employer to facilitate the implementation of employment equity in its workplace and the communication to its employees of matters relating to employment equity. The second is on the preparation, implementation and revision of the employer's equity plan. Footnote 198 The main forum for designated group members to express concerns or provide input on diversity and inclusion issues are employee-led advisory committees. Membership on advisory committees is voluntary and should include representatives of all designated groups.

100. Every organization under review has established one or more advisory committees, but their degree of input on organizational policies differs across organizations. By way of example, the advisory committees for CBSA, CSIS, GAC and PCO provide regular input on employment policies and practices. Footnote 199 The RCMP recently consolidated all of its advisory committees and formally integrated the committee into the employment equity planning process. Footnote 200 In contrast, CSE's 2017 employment systems reviews noted that its advisory committee's engagement on these issues was limited. Footnote 201 For its part, the CAF's 2013 employment systems review found that few military members were aware of the existence or function of its advisory committees. Footnote 202

Members of Visible Minorities in the Security and Intelligence Community

According to the 2016 census, members of visible minorities represent 22.3% of the population with South Asian, Chinese and Black Canadians forming the three largest minority communities. Demographic projections suggest that by 2036 members of visible minorities could represent between 31.2% and 35.9% of the total population. Footnote 203

Members of visible minorities are underrepresented in a majority of the organizations under review, particularly at executive levels. This gap in representation will likely increase in the coming years as new WFA and LMA estimates reflect changes in the number of members of visible minorities in Canada. Data collection on this group is also incomplete given the absence of data disaggregated by sex, which obscures the representation of visible minority women in organizations. Footnote 204

At the same time, the representation and recruitment of members of visible minorities in several organizations has stagnated or decreased in recent years. At CSE, there is a trend toward increasing underrepresentation of members of visible minorities. Footnote 205 A staffing analysis conducted by PCO revealed a decrease of 15% in all staffing actions for this group since 2014-2015. Footnote 206 At Public Safety Canada, the representation of members of visible minorities has not increased since 2012. Footnote 207 In 2018, the Canadian Human Rights Commission stated that the CAF's progress in increasing visible minority representation "will not be sufficient to keep pace with the growing number of Canadian citizens who are ... visible minorities." Footnote 208

Recent news reports and documents provided to the Committee also suggest that members of visible minorities continue to face attitudinal barriers. The CAF, CSIS and the RCMP have faced allegations of racism in recent years. Footnote 209 More subtle attitudinal barriers were also identified at CBSA, DND and GAC, including that members of visible minorities feel unrepresented and unheard at senior levels of the organization, and, as noted in DND's employment systems review, feel unable to "express themselves ethnically and culturally at work." Footnote 210

The Committee's assessment of organizational efforts to foster inclusion

101. The Committee believes that an essential feature of an inclusive workplace is the absence of harassment, violence and discrimination. The importance of these issues cannot be overemphasized. The slow pace of progress in eradicating harassment, violence and discrimination at the CAF and the RCMP is of serious concern. In addition, while organizations across the community have implemented anti-harassment policies, training and awareness campaigns, many still have a limited understanding of the prevalence and sources of harassment in their workforce. The issue of discrimination, in turn, has received considerably less attention across all the organizations. In addition, employee engagement on diversity and inclusion is inconsistent across organizations under review, potentially undermining broader efforts to foster inclusion throughout the organizations. Finally, in the Committee's view, issues of underrepresentation and allegations of discrimination against members of visible minorities in the security and intelligence community require further study. The operational imperative for greater diversity combined with accelerating demographic change suggest that issues affecting members of this designated group require additional attention.

Previous
Table of Contents
Next