Scenario: Unspoken Barriers
This scenario contains explicit language and references to hateful conduct and race-based harassment which may be emotionally activating for some people. If you need support, services are available through the CAF Member Assistance Program (CFMAP) and the Employee Assistance Program (EAP).
Group Size: 4-15
Scenario
Petty Officer 1st class (PO1) Baptiste Etienne, who is a Black sailor with an exemplary record, has become the topic of discussion amongst his colleagues. He has been overlooked for a career-advancing course in favour of a much less qualified colleague, who neither has the right experience or skills to be successful on the course. The decision of who to send on the course was made by a superior officer, who is rumoured to be racist towards racialized folks. The officer was heard in the past making derogatory comments against Black people and about the country from where PO1 Etienne emigrated, and also making racial slurs about PO1 Etienne specifically. Baptiste, and his group of colleagues, believe that the decision to send the other PO1 on the course was influenced by racial biases. They believe that Baptiste is the victim of racial discrimination and that missing the opportunity to take the course could have a negative effect on his career advancement.
PO1 Rachael Hawkins, a very good friend to Baptiste and a white woman, sees the decision of the superior officer as unfair treatment and tells him that. “We can’t let this slide, Baptiste! You deserve better.” Baptise considers her point of view for a few minutes but then tells her that he does not want to cause a stir. He thinks that the tension a complaint could create would be worse for his career than missing this one particular course.
Rachael is now both faced with the moral dilemma of whether the racial discrimination should be reported. She understands the gravity of the accusation and the potential repercussions of bringing such a matter to light.
She understands that the “duty to report” has recently been repealed, but how can she turn her back on Baptise and allow such blatant racial discrimination to occur? “How will the CAF ever change its culture,” she steams, “if racial discrimination is just swept under the rug?” She knows she wants to be a better ally to racialized folks, but feels unsure of how to best support her friend.
Categories
- Principles: Respect the dignity of all persons
- Values: Integrity, Loyalty, Courage, Stewardship, Excellence
- Cultural themes: Service, Leadership, Teamwork
- Misconduct types: Discrimination, Racism
- GBA Plus themes: Race/Ethnicity
- Audience: Canadian Armed Forces
Facilitator’s Guide
Learning Objectives
- Discuss the ethical principle of Respect the dignity of all persons in relation to this scenario.
- Discuss the ethical values of integrity, loyalty, courage, stewardship and excellence in relation to this scenario.
- Discuss the repeal of the duty to report.
Facilitation Questions
- What is the ethical dilemma in this scenario?
- Open group discussion.
- The ethical dilemma in this scenario revolves around the conflict between the moral obligation to report racial discrimination and the potential negative consequences of such action. PO1 Rachael Hawkins is faced with the decision of whether to expose the unjust treatment of her colleague, PO1 Baptiste Etienne, potentially risking her own career, or to allow the discrimination to continue.
- This situation highlights the challenges individuals face when confronting systemic issues within an organization, especially when personal and professional risks are involved. It also highlights the ethical values that continue to be at play, regardless of an official repeal to the duty to report.
- What considerations are at play with respect to the DND and CAF code of Values and Ethics?
- Open group discussion.
- Respect the dignity of all persons: PO1 Baptiste Etienne has the right to be treated in a respectful and fair manner in the workplace. CAF members are expected to value diversity and the benefit of combining the unique qualities and strengths.
- Loyalty: CAF members are expected to ensure that all personnel are treated fairly and given opportunities for professional and skills development.
- Courage: PO1 Rachael Hawkins will have to demonstrate courage to make the right choice amongst difficult alternatives.
- Stewardship: The stewardship of the officer who made the decision to not send PO1 Etienne, who is more skilled and experienced, on the career advancing course is called into question in this scenario. Stewardship, a value in the Code and a professional expectation in the CAF Ethos, encompasses the impact of decisions on resources (including personnel), ensuring the wellbeing of personnel and keeping subordinates motivated.
- What possible courses of action could PO1 Rachael Hawkins take in this scenario? Which is the best option? Why?
- Option 1: Report the racial discrimination. Although the duty to report has been repealed and PO1 Etienne does not want to report the discrimination, PO1 Hawkins could still act on her values and report it. This option may potentially lead to PO1 Etienne going on the course. PO1 Hawkins could however make the situation worse for herself and for PO1 Etienne, especially as she does not have his consent to report it.
- Option 2: Ignore the racial discrimination. This could avoid any backlash from the superior officer. She could, however, offer continued support to PO1 Etienne, and be vocal and speak up in the face of systemic discrimination in the future.
- In this scenario related to racial discrimination, do you think that CAF members who are bystanders to this type of misconduct have a duty to report?
- Open group discussion.
- Consider the ethical responsibilities as a bystander to racial discrimination.
- There may be more than one right answer to what CAF members should do when faced with this type of scenario. The aim of this discussion is to help participants consider what they would do in response to a situation of racial discrimination, in order to better help prepare themselves to act in a way that is in line with their beliefs and the CAF ethical principles and values when/if the time comes.
- Note: In 2024, there was a repeal to the duty to report obligations that were previously in place for CAF members. While CAF members may still feel, and act upon, an ethical duty to report, this is no longer a legal or administrative obligation.
Page details
- Date modified: