"B.C. Mountie's anti-Trudeau website raises concerns about discriminatory views within the RCMP" (split from White nationalism/CF thread)

[mariomike]

Oh, Browning for sure. After a criminal conviction there’s still an internal conduct investigation and whatever professional sanctions come from that.

The civil lawsuit was settled out of court in June 2021.

No mention of how much $.

 

[lenaitch]

Different when your "boss" is a political figure. But then again sorry I forgot again this is not an equal standard. Does that "rule" apply to the leader and/or members of CUPE or PSAC? And more so if the current Head of the Government is a Conservative? I always like to know where the lefts double standards are so I don't make the mistake of thinking they can apply to the other side.



This is the reason we have the Monarchy and a Head of State apart from the H of G. well one of them.

PS Sorry I do also agree with you Seaking but this just one more case of the double standard too me

Employees wearing a union/association hat do so under the mandate of representing the interests of their membership. Although it has probably happened sometime in the history of public labour relations, I honestly can't think of an instance where they mocked their employer and company policy. Disagreeing in labour relations is different than mocking for fun.

Freedom of expression will no doubt raise its head.

 

[brihard]

Employees wearing a union/association hat do so under the mandate of representing the interests of their membership. Although it has probably happened sometime in the history of public labour relations, I honestly can't think of an instance where they mocked their employer and company policy. Disagreeing in labour relations is different than mocking for fun.

Freedom of expression will no doubt raise its head.

Blasting policy and leadership, yes. Mocking, generally not.

 

[mariomike]

That’s part of the point of having a union- they enjoy privilege to say things about the employer that working employees can’t.

^ This.

 

[RangerRay]

I remember back when Harper was PM, an Environment Canada employee got in hot water for singing anti-Harper songs on YouTube. The union went to bat for him and the usual suspects decried it as violating his freedom of expression, but I believe he was still disciplined.

Government employees (civil servants and military) do not enjoy the same freedom to publicly criticize the government (i.e. their employer) as their fellow citizens.

 

[Booter]

I remember back when Harper was PM, an Environment Canada employee got in hot water for singing anti-Harper songs on YouTube. The union went to bat for him and the usual suspects decried it as violating his freedom of expression, but I believe he was still disciplined.

Government employees (civil servants and military) do not enjoy the same freedom to publicly criticize the government (i.e. their employer) as their fellow citizens.

Actually he retired after being suspended with pay so it was never settled- but it is still a held position that he would have been exonerated. Because he retired it was never aired out. The song is “Harperman”

 

[RangerRay]

Actually he retired after being suspended with pay so it was never settled- but it is still a held position that he would have been exonerated. Because he retired it was never aired out. The song is “Harperman”

Wait…but if he was suspended with pay, then wasn’t it “settled”.

 

[Booter]

Wait…but if he was suspended with pay, then wasn’t it “settled”.

Pending the outcome of the allegation that he contravened something- he was sent home until they determined “guilt or innocence”- but he retired. So they never settled the question.

 

[blacktriangle]

As much as I think Trudeau is taking the ship in the wrong direction, he's still the democratically elected skipper. It is what it is.

I'd like to see the RCMP (and RCMP members) stay as apolitical as possible. If you need help, get it. If you're over it, move on - lots of other services or employers will value your experience.

I've had the privilege of meeting some fantastic RCMP members. Is it an extremely hard job? From what I've heard, and what I see in the media, the answer should be obvious. But we need to find a way to hold this country together, and that means we need to preserve the national institutions. If you can no longer do your job in good faith, it's time to step aside and let someone else in. Applies equally to RCMP or CAF. It doesn't mean it's easy, but it's the right thing to do.

 

[Jarnhamar]

raising concerns about political bias among the ranks of the RCMP.

featured theatrical performances by a man dressed up as multiple characters

teaches the importance of socialism, of cancelling everyone that offends anyone, of being woke and highly emotional.

conservatives who belong to a fringe minority with unacceptable views

the goal of the policy is to bring in 1.5 million Liberal voters to Canada.

They say art imitates life.

 

[RangerRay]

Pending the outcome of the allegation that he contravened something- he was sent home until they determined “guilt or innocence”- but he retired. So they never settled the question.

Needless to say, if I was publicly criticizing or mocking the premier of my province, I think a one way conversation with management would be in my future.

 

[Booter]

I’m not in disagreement. I don’t think Mounties should be political. Especially like this

 

[daftandbarmy]

Needless to say, if I was publicly criticizing or mocking the premier of my province, I think a one way conversation with management would be in my future.

Believe me, if an employee in my (private sector) firm pulled something like that, they wouldn't be around for long either.

 

[Booter]

Believe me, if an employee in my (private sector) firm pulled something like that, they wouldn't be around for long either.

In your experience- private sector- are employees signing an understanding of these things- like how often can someone say “I didn’t know?”

 

[Kirkhill]

Different when your "boss" is a political figure. But then again sorry I forgot again this is not an equal standard. Does that "rule" apply to the leader and/or members of CUPE or PSAC? And more so if the current Head of the Government is a Conservative? I always like to know where the lefts double standards are so I don't make the mistake of thinking they can apply to the other side.



This is the reason we have the Monarchy and a Head of State apart from the H of G. well one of them.

PS Sorry I do also agree with you Seaking but this just one more case of the double standard too me

To a non-police type - could somebody explain the difference between a CUPE or PSAC union member criticizing the Prime Minister of the Day and an NPF union member criticizing the Prime Minister of the Day? Or the local mayor? Or police chief?

I mean, its not as if they are subject to the National Defence Act.

And this guy hasn't apparently identified himself as a Mountie. Or conducted this activity within office hours.

 

[daftandbarmy]

In your experience- private sector- are employees signing an understanding of these things- like how often can someone say “I didn’t know?”

I think it's the old 'FAFO Policy'. No one signs anything...

Private sector organizations are usually pretty ruthless at screening out anyone who is a gross under-performer, or a nutjob with a political axe to grind.

Either type can crater a business as their clients can easily go elsewhere for products and services provided by reliable and responsible providers.

 

[RangerRay]

Most public service collective agreements and PS codes of conduct are quite clear: one can stuff envelopes, knock on doors on your own time, even put a sign on your lawn; one cannot publicly criticize the government aka your employer. The union representatives can generally say what they want publicly.

Outright firing is rare, but it can result in a one way discussion and some form of disciplinary action.

 

[mariomike]

Didn't watch his vids.

But, according to the article in the original post, the professional standards complaint seems to have originated from the municipal government. Not the federal.

Specifically, the mayor of Trail, B.C.

'We are taking it seriously': mayor​

The website's contents and the views expressed by the officer are concerning, according to Trail Mayor Colleen Jones, who said she has had "multiple conversations with the Trail RCMP detachment commander about it.

"It's definitely not anything a community wants," Jones said.

"I want everybody to know that we are taking it seriously and that the officer in question is currently working from home and will continue to do so until the investigation is complete."

Jones said she has faith in the police force's review of the situation and that she will be closely following the process.

City speaks to Trail RCMP member being investigated after 'controversial' online commentary​

City of Trail Mayor and Council have been receiving inquiries after the release of a news story highlighting an RCMP investigation into one of its Trail-stationed members who had shared his controversial political views through a satirical YouTube channel.

“We would like to reassure our community that our Council values our residents and we will continue to strive to provide an inclusive, welcoming, and vibrant community,” said Mayor Colleen Jones. “We do understand that freedom of speech is a human right; but, as community leaders we believe in upholding values of safety, diversity, and inclusivity.

“Our local police force is essential to the Greater Trail area,” said Jones. “We have faith and trust in their commitment to serving our citizens with respect and integrity.”

City speaks to Trail RCMP member being investigated after 'controversial' online commentary - Trail Champion

City of Trail Mayor and Council have been receiving inquiries after the release of a news story highlighting an RCMP investigation into one of its Trail-stationed members who had shared his controversial political views through a satirical YouTube channel. “We would like to reassure our...

trailchampion.com

From what I remember of municipal mayors, they didn't GAF about your opinions about Ottawa, but they did take an interest in your attitudes towards "marginalized" members of their community.

 

[lenaitch]

This extract from a government webpage mentions a Supreme Court decision but doesn't cite it:

The principles, qualifications and factors emerging from these court judgments on the duty of loyalty, including a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, can be summarized as follows:

• The duty of loyalty owed by public servants to the Government of Canada encompasses a duty to refrain from public criticism of the Government of Canada.
• Failure to observe the duty of loyalty may justify disciplinary action, including dismissal.
• However, the duty of loyalty is not absolute, and public criticism may be justified in certain circumstances.
• In determining whether any particular public criticism is justified and therefore not subject to disciplinary action, the duty of loyalty must be balanced with other interests such as the public servant's freedom of expression.

As always, the particular facts of any case would be assessed against the principles of any SCOC ruling. I think a key point of discussion would be that he doesn't identify as a federal employee.

 

[brihard]

To a non-police type - could somebody explain the difference between a CUPE or PSAC union member criticizing the Prime Minister of the Day and an NPF union member criticizing the Prime Minister of the Day? Or the local mayor? Or police chief?

I mean, its not as if they are subject to the National Defence Act.

And this guy hasn't apparently identified himself as a Mountie. Or conducted this activity within office hours.

Taking the case of the RCMP specifically, though not subject to the NDA, they do come under the not dissimilar RCMP Act. That act empowers a number of regulations, among which you’ll find the Mounties’ Code of Conduct. So, like CAF, RCMP members are subject to conduct rules that are federal law.

Police in general, not just RCMP, are subject to codes of conduct that reach beyond duty hours and into their personal life. Off duty we still have to behave in ways that won’t compromise our ability to carry out our duties faithfully, or bring our employers into disrepute- though this is still assessed through a test of our conduct being able to have some rational connection to our duties, and the expectations reasonably placed on police officers.

Like many things in law, this doesn’t always have a clear line in the sand with regards to off duty conduct. This gentleman’s case will likely be argued within that grey area, but my gut feel is that after a lengthy conduct investigation, he’ll probably eat a bit of shit. The fact that he never identifies himself as a police office will mitigate somewhat… But he was identifiable and was identified. In small town policing, people know who you are and word gets out.

What he did was dumb and he should have known better. It’s also not the end of the world.