Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Whitehorse Star

Russ Knutson

Proposed bylaw sets ‘alarm bells’ ringing

The Yukon Human Rights Commission is expressing major concerns over a proposed city bylaw aimed at addressing bullying in city facilities.

By Stephanie Waddell on June 1, 2018

The Yukon Human Rights Commission is expressing major concerns over a proposed city bylaw aimed at addressing bullying in city facilities.

The Community Standards Bylaw would establish processes in dealing with bullying.

However, much of the effort by bylaw officers would focus on, as stated in a report to council, “providing education on bullying and co-ordinating with other levels of government to ensure those that were victims and/or bullies were referred to the appropriate support services in the community.

“City employees that are victims of bullying would also be encouraged to receive counselling through the city’s employee assistance program.”

There are provisions for fines should the bylaw need greater enforcement, bylaw manager Dave Pruden told council.

However, Russ Knutson, who chairs the Yukon Human Rights Commission, said Thursday the bylaw could threaten the rights of individuals – and may even result in issues around racial profiling.

“There were red flags coming up all over,” Knutson said of reading the proposal.

In a seven-page letter sent to the city about three days before the bylaw came forward, the commission outlined its concerns and argued against its adoption.

“While the commission supports the goal of this bylaw, the commission does not recommend the adoption of this bylaw due to the existence of other effective alternatives for seeking redress (human rights process, criminal law and civil claims) and the legal issues identified above,” says the letter, signed by Jessica Lott Thompson, the commission’s executive director.

“Nonetheless, if the Community Standards Bylaw is to be adopted, it is our hope that the commission’s comments would be incorporated in the review and discussion of the proposed bylaw.”

Knutson said he wasn’t surprised that the commission’s views were not reflected in the bylaw proposed, as it was only three days earlier it had been sent (reflecting the time the commission had to respond).

However, Knutson said, it should have set off “alarm bells” for officials.

He understands the intention of the bylaw, but points out that issues with similar regulations have come up in jurisdictions around the country.

The very definition of bully under the proposed bylaw could restrict freedom of expression that’s guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The bylaw defines a bully as “repeated behaviour, that:

(1) is intended to cause, or should have been known to cause, fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress or other forms of harm to another person’s, feelings, self-esteem, or reputation; and

(2) is intended to create, or should have been known to create, a negative environment for another person; and

(3) is any objectionable or inappropriate comment, conduct or display by a person directed at an individual, intended to intimidate, humiliate, ridicule, or isolate; and

(4) excludes at all times nuisance behaviours; and

(5) which causes or is likely to cause emotional distress including:

(a) verbal ridicule;

(b) taunts;

(c) teasing;

(d) name calling;

(e) put downs; and

(f) repeated abusive communication, directly or indirectly, through any medium whatsoever.”

As it was highlighted in the commission’s letter to the city: “Additionally, the definition of ‘bully’ under the proposed bylaw has the potential to infringe on bona fide religious beliefs, views and practices of some religious individuals or groups in the City of Whitehorse.

“Whitehorse is a diverse city with a population of people from diverse religious and non-religious backgrounds.

“Bearing in mind, the much-touted Canadian virtue of being an inclusive society, the proposed bylaw could potentially ostracize certain religious persons or groups and unlawfully limit their freedom to freely hold beliefs, views or express bona fide religious doctrines.”

Potential racial profiling is also a major concern. That’s because a section of the bylaw would allow bylaw officers to require identification and ask questions of anyone believed on reasonable grounds to have committed an offence.

The commission argued that discretion provided to officers “could potentially open up the floodgates to racial profiling and/or carding for racialized individuals in Whitehorse.”

It’s been shown in other regions that the ability of officers to stop and ask for identification has disproportionally been applied to visible minorities.

The Yukon Human Rights Act “prohibits the unfavourable treatment of individuals based on origin when receiving services, goods or using facilities available to the public.

“Racial profiling or carding could therefore be a violation of the Act,” it’s stated.

As Knutson describes it, the discretion officers have is a grey area.

The commission also took issue with sections of the bylaw that would give officers broad search and seizure powers and the lack of acknowledgment around accommodating people with disabilities.

Specifically, it was noted in the letter that some with “mental disabilities may present in a way where their actions or conduct may fall under the behaviour being regulated under the bylaw.

“The commission suggests that accommodations for persons with disabilities are taken into consideration during the review and implementation of this bylaw.”

Knutson said the commission is not planning to pursue the matter further. He did note, however, that the commission has made it clear to the city that officials are available anytime to have an open discussion on various matters – including the proposed bylaw.

Concerns have also been expressed by other organizations.

As Pruden stated in his report: “Groups such as the (Yukon) Anti-Poverty Coalition and B.Y.T.E. expressed concerns with anti-bullying legislation and felt it criminalized the bully.

“In general, many of those consulted agreed on the approach of protecting the victims of bullying.

“Those consulted also supported an approach of treating the bully as a victim, as it was likely there were underlying issues causing the bullying behaviour,” Pruden said.

“As such, in any legislation proposed, both bully and victim should be treated as victims.

“They should both be offered help from existing third party programs as well as services offered by Yukon Government Social Services.”

The bylaw is scheduled to come back to council later this month.

Mayor Dan Curtis was absent from Monday’s council meeting.

Comments (8)

Up 2 Down 6

Bandit on Jun 5, 2018 at 1:36 pm

Al Fedoriak for Mayor

Up 10 Down 1

Al Fedoriak on Jun 5, 2018 at 11:26 am

This is social engineering at its worst. The criminal code covers all assaults physical or verbal. City council has a responsibility to provide services to the citizen not to make laws that they do not enforce which is common practice with city council who pit neighbour against neighbour rather than taking the responsibility an enforcing the laws that they create.

Up 12 Down 1

Stu Panton on Jun 3, 2018 at 11:02 pm

What about bullying by city staff? Or should we call it something else.

Up 6 Down 1

Doug Ryder on Jun 3, 2018 at 8:05 pm

@Jean - There is no such thing as race in any objective sense. It is a social construct whose sole purpose is to create the necessary conditions for bullying, for prejudice... Just be human!

Up 11 Down 0

jean on Jun 2, 2018 at 8:16 pm

There's absolutely nothing "racial" about getting tough on bullying. Bullies are found in all races.
These social-justice-activists find "racist" problems in everything. When their only tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail.

Up 19 Down 1

My Opinion on Jun 2, 2018 at 12:10 am

What is the City doing involved with this? Do they have nothing to do and too much money? We have Territorial and Federal laws for this, why would we reinvent the wheel. Are they NUTS?

Up 9 Down 4

Sabrina on Jun 1, 2018 at 5:18 pm

As Drum said in the comments, employers need to take responsibility for the abuse of their employees and the definition of a bully sure describes the atmosphere well.

Up 19 Down 1

drum on Jun 1, 2018 at 4:46 pm

Sounds as if victims are told to seek counselling through EAP (5 free sessions).
When are employers going to take responsibility for the abuse that some of their GOOD employees have to live with to keep their job because they have bills to pay and children to feed.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.