(Another Case Of Diversity Trumping Merit)
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are facing a personnel shortage, and have come up with an interesting solution: drop all standards, and focus on diversity. No, this is not an exaggeration.
1. Proposed Changes
1/ Criminal record may not be a barrier to entry
2/ Credit problems not to be a barrier to entry
3/ Aptitude testing to be eliminated
4/ Hearing tests to be reduced or eliminated
5/ Vision tests to be reduced or eliminated
6/ Long stints at the acadmeny (training) to be reduced
7/ Focus to be on recruiting women and visible minorities
This CBC article, article is very difficult to parody, as it reads as one. Also, the comments are well worth checking out.
2. Article Quotations
‘Race to the bottom’
3. Thoughts On The Proposal
(1) Dropping the prohibition against people with a criminal record is non-sensical. Having a “pardoned” criminal record is one thing, but letting actual criminals in to do the policing?
Additionally, there are way too many questions here:
(a) Which offences will be grounds for exclusion?
(b) Will there be any specific cut-off, or is it case by case?
(c) Will there be a waiting period before a person can enter?
(d) Will people on parole or probation be allowed to enter?
(e) If an ex-con has a firearms ban, will that be waived?
(f) If an ex-con has a driving prohibition, will that be waived?
(2) Credit checks are used in places like banks. When putting someone is a position of trust, it is important to have some knowledge that they can manage finances, and will be less likely to abuse that trust.
Furthermore, ”employment credit checks” do not show anywhere near as much information as say, getting a check for a loan or credit card. These ones are severely restricted in the information disclosed, as it is to measure trustworthiness, not the balance on your cards or mortgage.
(3) Dropping the aptitude test? Do we not want some intellectual standards for RCMP recruits? If a person cannot meet a basic entry level exam, then excluding that person, or people, is in the best interest of the organization. It does raise the question though: is this an attempt to gain more ESL recruits?
(4) Hearing and vision tests are useful, since your physical health and sense are essential to one’s ability to do the job. Further, given how dangerous and gruelling policing can be, physical strength and stamina are needed.
(5)Yes, being away from the family for 6 months can be a burden, but training to be a police officer is a serious commitment. It cannot simply be gutted.
(6) Who cares how many people are women (or trannies identifying as women), or how many people are of a particular background? The focus should be on creating a strong force of intelligent, fit people with good moral character. The rest is just pandering to identity politics.
(7) “”….If we’re going to have mandatory requirements, we want to make sure we’re not creating unintended barriers for reasons that really have nothing to do with whether you’d be a great police officer.””
If we’re going to have mandatory requirements? These people seem uncertain about that. Also, the above criteria are VERY important in selecting police recruits.
(8) Assuming the claims of a culture of harassment are true — fire any and all people engaging in behaviour and focus on building a force with better decency. Don’t eliminate standards. This is sort of like having Problem “A”, and coming up with Solution “B”.
(9) Why change the way you do business? Again, terminate the bad apples, but don’t make it open-recruitment under the guide of ”inclusiveness”.
(10) An interesting point is made: in an era where technology and crime is becoming more sophisticated, do we want to be LOWERING our IQ entry requirements?
(11) Regarding the obsession with Gender-Based Analysis: no one is saying that women should not be police officers. Rather, their abilities should be valued more, and the focus on being women should be stopped. This is a frequent straw-man lefties use: assume any difference in stats is due to discrimination, and not due to personal choices.
4. Moronic To The Extreme
This quote says it all:
“We need to stop assuming there’s only one kind of person who belongs in policing,” she said in an interview with CBC News.
The challenge for us going forward is looking at diversity and inclusion as seriously as we look at security.
– Vaughn Charlton
Yes, we need to focusing on diversity and inclusion as much as security. So, people with criminal records, poor credit, low IQ, lack of commitment, poor hearing/vision, etc…. are just “another form of diversity”?
Enough of the endless pandering. Simply hire good quality recruits. If needed, make the compensation and benefits package more attractive. Offer flexibility in work locations. Don’t water down the standards.
Again, pretty difficult to parody this article.