Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa
At some point there is someone in the hierarchy that needs to be able to read documents in both languages. But the low-level manager positions could easily be unilingual or have a lower level required (i.e. a French-speaking manager would supervise the French-speaking employees to review French submissions), which would actually be better than the current system of having "pass the test" anglos trying to muddle through.
|
I am not an insider but I am pretty sure that is what the system does already. It's just that that upper person in the hierarchy has to come from somewhere. Generally the further you climb up the ladder the more likely you will bump into bilingualism requirements. Hence why bilinguals are more likely to get promoted - though I know from entourage experience if you're unilingual and they really really like you they'll bend the rules and send you on language training at their expense so you can be promoted.
It's imperfect for sure (what bureaucratic process or policy isn't?) but it's far from being as grossly unfair as some are letting on.
Not saying this is your case but I do think that many of the critics are just people who think there shouldn't be any French language requirements at all, except maybe in cases of life or death.
There is another solution to this - as was proposed by the Laurendeau-Dunton bilingualism and biculturalism commission. But Canada under PET chose this model instead.
We could also pursue further decentralization and devolution to the provinces - or at least to Quebec which wouldn't have any problem providing services in French. Or even bilingually if we're being brutally honest.
Prev
Linear Mode
