By: Lauren Marshall, volunteer
A black correctional officer alleged some of his supervisors and colleagues made racist comments about him and other co-workers. These comments included stereotyping him as being “slow” at his job, despite receiving positive performance reviews for over a decade.
The Tribunal’s Decision
The tribunal found multiple incidents of racist slurs and remarks were made. While the officer had reported these incidents to management for investigation, the investigations took a long time. The length of time, as well as the officer’s belief that the investigations were ineffective, led him to file his human rights complaint.
The Tribunal also found a supervisor had escalated a workplace incident as a way of getting back at the officer after he’d made his human rights complaint. The Tribunal also found the officer was once ordered by a supervisor to breach protocol. The officer was then reprimanded for this breach, even though the supervisor themselves did not follow protocols.
To prove his claim for employment discrimination based on race, the officer had to prove the following points:
That he was protected under the ground of race. A “ground” under the BC Human Rights Code is a personal attribute or trait like race, religion, or gender identity. The Code lists 14 grounds, including race.
That he experienced a negative impact on his employment.
That his race was part of the negative employment impact that occurred. A protected ground does not have to be the only factor that led to negative treatment.
The Tribunal decided that point 1 was met because the officer was born in Barbados and identified as “black”. This constitutes the protected ground of race under the BC Code.
The Tribunal then found point 2 was met because the officer left his employment at the facility. Leaving his job was a negative impact.
Finally, the Tribunal found point 3 was met because the officer was racially stereotyped, treated and monitored differently, experienced everyday racialized comments and slurs, and experienced racist incidents including gossip about racist comments being made about others.
The Tribunal further found that the officer’s allegations of discrimination were impacted by racist misconceptions by staff. The officer was viewed by staff as being “sensitive” and as “playing the race card” to get what he wanted. The Tribunal discussed how these misconceptions or “myths” about racial discrimination complaints disempower the very people making them. As referenced in an Ontario decision, the people making racial discrimination complaints will be members of racialized groups. The Tribunal acknowledged that the corrections facility had a workplace culture where racist slurs and jokes were common, which contributed to the downplaying of the officer’s complaint. The staff also painted the officer as a “troublemaker” and “rat” for his human rights advocacy in the workplace.
Ultimately, the Tribunal found that all the racist incidents and comments combined negatively impacted the officer’s workplace. The officer testified that he felt unsafe at work and that his colleagues did not have his back. The fact that he had to continuously address racist issues and take sick leave due to the stress constituted negative effects, along with his resignation. The Tribunal further said that whether racial slurs and comments were directed at the officer or others, they negatively effected his work environment. Two of the incidents were also found to be retaliation: the escalation of a workplace incident (with a letter of reprimand) and the order to breach protocol (and the reprimand that followed).
Disclaimer
The VIHRC blog is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice.