Parks Canada staff banned from criticizing Feds
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
I refuse to believe that federal employees need to erase themselves of opinions on government. They have every right to discuss and criticize government policy. It does not amount to the same thing as criticizing an employer, since the issues they are criticizing do not necessarily even pertain to their jobs. That is a level of stifling speech that this government has engaged in that is frankly spooky.
Has anyone EVER worked ANYWHERE that allowed you to publically trash the company and the boss without getting fired???
Government isn't a company. The government doesn't require thought police to protect it from it's citizens. I'm sure you'll agree.
The Corporation known as Canada....
0000230098 CANADA DC
SIC: 8880
American Depositary Receipt.
Business Address:
Canadian Embassy
1746 Massachusetts Ave., NW,
Washington, DC
20036
Unless the company was absolutely morally and ethically bankrupt, a lot more harm would likely come to the whiner than the company. First thing I would question is the idiots intelligence to work there in the first place. :lol:
I guess it comes under the heading of "sympathy and compassion and some degree of tolerance for stupid people". :smile:
Federal government employees should be held responsible for keeping their workplace as healthy and happy as any other workplace would expect. but...the temporary managers of their budget, should understand that they are only that. They are temporary fiscal managers, and in matters unrelating to their employment at Parks Canada, people should be allowed to criticize any facet of the government that they voted on. unfortunately, this government oversteps and attempts to tongue tie them on ALL facets of government, not just those relating to their job. and frankly, even in matters relating to their job, they are allowed to strike, they are allowed to demand raises, complain about policy, etc. To attempt to stifle a citizen's views on government policy based on your temporary power over them is disgusting.
So it's logically absurd to say Lake Ontario is composed of fresh water and the Atalntic Ocean is composed of salt water, because you can't pinpoint exactly where the salt water starts and fresh water ends? Is it logically absurd to say a person sometimes feels hot and at other times feels cold, because he can't identify the precise degree at which he begins to feel one or the other?
Just because it can be a challenge to define exactly where public speech ends and private speech begins in some situations, doesn't mean it's absurd to state that there's a clear distinction between private and public speech. Based on your logic, it would be absurd for you to have a problem with me wiring up your house to record everything you say.
Hmm... so... the shareholders who bankrolled Harper into power, him hypnotized by Lucifer into the lie of not getting eaten by the non-photosynthetic fungus which Satan is, are working on ways to destroy the global economy ASAP, because the longer it takes for Armageddon to happen, the more souls get to heaven.
Where in the Bible does it say Armageddon is something God *wants* to happen? Through John on Patmos the Big Kahuna warned how things would end up if humans kept going the way things were going... i.e. He said "I might have to step in as the incarnation of what I would have been if I was Human", with a sword, in order to restore order.
Harper and his demon puppet-master are working towards destruction of all parts of the planet still standing as God created, in total opposition to the spirit of the Canadian ancestors able to see that as a people they could-and-would eventually run it all over, therefore better set something aside, so...
... Harper and/or his puppet masters are thinking like Saducees (an old-time Jewish sect which didn't believe in an afterlife... they thought everything about passing DNA was based on what could be done in the here-and-now... i.e. early Darwinism).
What a glorious Prime-Minister... to get power on promise of transparency, and then clamp down on details of reorganization with a secrecy making German Nazi's envious.
In the mean time, really, the better the environment you can set up for your kids to grow up and learn in, the better soul they have to add to heaven, which is supposed to be what Canada was about, and now it's getting butt-****ed by Harper with a hand-puppet finger from Satan sticking through his dick.
Or maybe he's seriously just a dumb-puppet... What's worse? That Harper knows what he's doing, or that he doesn't?
If your frackin arch-angel nags you as much as mine, he'll tell you to kick the guy into teaching middle-school english in Red Deer.
Last edited:
No, it's logically absurd to use salinity concentration as the contour or boundary of something geographic like a lake, or ocean. Unlike something like private and public, salinity is a continuous variable that can be measured.... Lake Ontario is not devoid of cations and anions. It's salinity can be measured, and it's not zero. Most lakes are not.
Are there degrees of private or public speaking? You can measure them and assign quantitative ratios or intervals that would not be absurd?
No, absoultely it does. If you can't define clearly where the two end, then you by extension cannot say that the two are clearly distinguished. There will of course be obvious cases where it's one or the other, but that does not mean there is a clear distinction between the two. That is illogical...
Think about that. There can't be a clear distinction between the two, if there are cases where it's not clear if it's one or the other. How this is even a point you want to argue is frankly baffling.
I couldn't tell ya, and neither can you tell me.
There is always the option to ask those people that were herded-off to the gulags and compare that to the 'official' reason
Kinda like someone on death row... They too don't reach realize their natural life-expectancy
It is, but it is also a common practice in society today. I still see this as the actions by a person which is contrary to the best interests of their employer and themselves. Just because it's the gvt that is their employer, doesn't mean that all bets are off.
I most definitely agree, but the other side of the coin is that I also believe that the same rules that apply to the private sector should apply just as much to the public sector.
I have not had time to read trough the whole thread, but I get the impression that the discussion has been about Public vs Private speech and the government's Right to control that of its employees if it can be considered public.
My opinion would be that there is a larger question of Public and Private policy. That Public employees have an unimpeachable Right to speak to matters of Public policy unless it breaches, say, the Official Secrets Act or interfers with operations of their area of employment.
That distinction, too, may be somewhat blurred but that comes with the territory of public engagement.
Government cannot be looked at in the same way as a Private employer whose profitability or very survival may be threatened by employees who do not restrain their public statements about the company. The federal government is as much the servant of its employees as it is the employer.
My opinion would be that there is a larger question of Public and Private policy. That Public employees have an unimpeachable Right to speak to matters of Public policy unless it breaches, say, the Official Secrets Act or interfers with operations of their area of employment.
That distinction, too, may be somewhat blurred but that comes with the territory of public engagement.
Government cannot be looked at in the same way as a Private employer whose profitability or very survival may be threatened by employees who do not restrain their public statements about the company. The federal government is as much the servant of its employees as it is the employer.
I think that you're ducking the issue here.
The gvt, as an employer, either has the same rights as the private sector or they don't.
How so? Do you dispute that government employees are also taxpayers and consumers of government services?
I think this has a lot to do with the lay offs and cuts to the park staff.
Sour grapes and all.
More than 100 Parks Canada staff to lose jobs in Alberta - Calgary - CBC News
Personally I don't think it is an either/or situation. I don't think a direct comparison (public to private) can be made on this issue, it is a unique situation in the spectrum of employment situations. There are some similarities sure, but there are more differences in the comparison, as a whole.
