Read Me

ANTI-RACISM TRAINING SESSIONS:
JUNE 20 AND JULY 12, 2017
Provided by:
Charles C. Smith Consulting
July 26, 2017
HouseLink – Transcript of Notes
SUMMARY
HouseLink ‘s most recent annual report places significant emphasis on this year being a time of
renewal, reflected in a review/revision of the support services model and renewed focus on key
outcomes areas.
When addressing the organization’s new vision statement, the report notes the importance that
members placed on “being in charge”, and to “a strong sense of defiance “ expressed in related
discussions; and the new vision statement reflects the intent to offer a safe space for the
organization’s members and maintain an environment where violations of the Human Rights Code
are not tolerated.
It is in this context that the results of the sessions held on <dates and times> need to be viewed:
 HouseLink’s approach is based on an empowerment process that that allows for the
individuality of the member/service user – it acknowledges power differentials; with the
assumption that the service provider is holding the power
 Despite Houselink having developed a Workplace Harassment Policy and Protocol that
speaks to responding to discriminatory behaviours and other forms of harassment, session
participants appeared unaware of guidelines that would protect staff if members
demonstrate behaviours that in the eyes of staff participating in the sessions clearly
constitute
o Human rights violations
o Workplace health and safety violations
Key Issues:
The following key issues were raised in a consistent manner across all groups (notably in a
significantly more forceful manner in groups without management present)
 Human rights violations:
o According to session participants, members are frequently demonstrating abusive
behaviours (racism, sexism, homophobia)
 Enabling culture:
o Inconsistent and/or inadequate consequences for member
o Lack of support for staff in the following areas:
 training for staff how to manage the situation with the member
 debriefing to help staff process situation in supportive environment
 peer support (“hierarchy of oppressions”)
 reporting procedure
 accountability demonstrated by management
Key Requests/Recommendations by Session Participants
 Training on a regular basis and as integral part of onboarding process

o Regular training
www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 2

o Peer support and team work

o Appropriate responses based on member’s ability to comprehend/change
 Policy Review
o Impose clear consequences in terms of service restrictions for members
 “What does zero tolerance mean? Where are its teeth?”
o Clear reporting procedure to be established
Increase opportunities to dialogue on challenging issues

o Host forums to educate and challenge systemic and covert racism as it relates to
staff and members at Houselink
o Separate committees/caucuses to be established to deal with member issues vs staff
issues vs management-to-staff issues
While the issues of power imbalance and covert racism in the delivery of mental health services to
people from racialized groups are well researched, documented and tool kits put in place.
However, if the human rights violations are committed by the recipients of the mental health
services, the balance of contesting human rights represents a significant challenge.
Given the level of frustration expressed by the participants of the sessions, their requests for
training and support would seem to be a reasonable measure to help the organization
achieve/restore that balance and avoid escalation.

APPENDIX 1
Transcribed Flip Chart Sheets / Notes

Note: This section reflects notes verbatim as provided by the participants; no revisions made
with the exception of minor spelling corrections as required.
Line breaks and flow reflect original.

Issues – Session/Day 1 [white sheets]

Group 1: (Flip chart; no Group # on sheet)
1. What are the issues at work:

 Homophobia: Difficulties shutting it down
 Sexism: Lack of empathy
 Racism: Lack of empathy
 Infantilism of members: DENIAL, MINIMIZING
 Lack of understanding
of who is impacted: DISMISSIVE!
 2 different experiences
 Imposing cultural norms
 Relative privilege
 Power differences
 BOB RESIGNED
o Lack of support from peers – re-traumatized
o Enabling culture
o Sheila condoning behaviour - Why?
 It’s not me – feeling of no hope of change
 “What I am supposed to do” - everyone is accountable
 Intersectionality
2. What action/s should be taken:

 Guidelines – members are involved in the discussion
 RE: Bob resigning:
 Sheila should have shut down incident immediately- the individual should have been pulled
aside and spoken to immediately
 Sheila should have been open to debriefing with Bob and offer support
 Use it as an opportunity to open discussion for members
3. Management should be transparent:
 Policies
 How support is provided
 DO NOT DISMISS Bob’s experience
 Consistency in applying policy and [in]consequences

 Accountability – Really implementing policies
 Finding a way to communicate policies and consequences to members and staff
- Health and safety issue
 Follow up and action is key
 Clear guidelines
 Consistent tool box

 Expectation needs to be transparent and visible

 Impose service restrictions for racism
 Define service restrictions in all programs
 Have integrity and support staff at the risk of losing funding for a program (steps to support)
4. Issues must be addressed simultaneously:
5. Performance related issues? Unaware of guidelines [Left as in original without line break here]
 Lack of training Therefore
 Both [?] are operating in a vacuum NO
6. Training – Revisiting on an ongoing basis
 Part of the Onboarding process
 Involve staff & members in making policies
 Screening in the hiring process [? For staff or members?]
 Training in terms of supporting each other
 CLEAR signage throughout organization
Group 4: [Flip Chart; group # on sheet]
1. Racism, ageism, Profiling, Insensitivity, Shaming, Intolerance of other ideas
2. Take back group to find solutions acceptable for all

 Inform committee of what took place, discussion and resolution
 If no agreement, take to committee to demand poster not released [? Context to be added]
4. [ as per numbering in original]
 Further education, creating workspace where these concerns can be addressed
5. If staff or tenants refuse to hear or engage in discussion on matter, possible sensitivity training
6. Education, training.
Make policy clear and consistent, consequences to human rights violation.
----------------------------------
Group 1: [Note paper; group # on sheet.]
1. If service users don’t have a guideline what behaviour is acceptable.

 Racist behaviour, the lack of support and appropriate response enhances the feeling of
discrimination.
 Why clients are allowed to make rude comments and it is tolerated.
2. At HouseLink, people should go to health and safety committee.

 Will we educate or punish the person/s
 Staff can […??]

 Lack of clarity about reporting procedure.

Staff should write it down immediately and report to management.
 Training should be offered and build team work
 It resulted in discrimination but also health and safety issues
3. There should be a mechanism in place to address such systemic issues.

 Management should review policy about anti-oppression.
 There should be consequences for clients
 We have a duty to hold the power and allow clients to change their behaviours
 Educate members about their behaviour and issue a warning letter to address the
unacceptable behaviours.
4. As a landlord staff members have power and duty to report discriminatory behaviour.
 They should document every case and [put into?] practice anti-oppressive policies and
regulations
 We can discuss how to better express frustration
5. They are not documenting; Bob needs to feel safe at work and needs to speak up about his concerns.
6. There should be protocol and guidelines in force that management should encourage to be
applied and reinforced in order [for] staff to feel safe at work.
 There should be debriefing practices checking with [the] person who went through [a] difficult
experience
 HouseLink staff felt that they did not get any positive feedback from management about the
hard work and discriminatory issues they are dealing with, [with their] clients
 They feel that that they need more support and acknowledgement about the risky work that
they experience every day
Group 2: [Note paper; no group # on sheet.]
1. If it’s created as an anti-racism committee why name it something else – easy to satisfy all staff
 Other talks of oppressions can minimize experience impact of racism [?]
 Broad focus of committee impedes the advancement of fighting a specific form of oppression
 Power- tenant issue, staff issues and management-to-staff issues are all being addressed by
the small space of one committee
 PPI won’t “harp” if they feel they concern is heard – why was Bill so angry?
 Is there a history of this dynamic? Is James not being hard but also here for a different reason.
Sounds like Bill may be there for the ani-racism approach
2. Similar issues on same platform – maybe subcommittees

 Need a clear policy/guideline w/response how to follow up, what are consequences
3. Tenant should be included in conversation

 Is there education and support in place for tenants to bring their experiences
- MAF issues identified by HouseLink rather than by members – do members understand
when to bring their issues? Where? Not always best for a group? Should be an individual way
to do this – anonymous survey option – Tenant Advocacy Forum organizing
4. Sub committees could address individual oppressions but important all the sub-committees
also meet
 One anti-oppression committee is a way to marginalize each issue – the whole agency also
needs to work on these
 Just as there is a privacy officer there could be an anti-oppression or equity officer
 More managers on the committee or even all of them
5. Decision making issues – clear advocacy for Anti Racism Committee and then grown
into something else
6. Subcommittees so the focus can be specific
 Staff could meet themselves to talk issues
 Tenants meet themselves to talk about issues
 Then come together and discuss them
Group 3: [Note paper; no group # on sheet]
[1.] Issues
 Race, marginalization, oppression.
 Email should not be at all staff,
 Should not be e-mail.
 One group felt they are getting more attention than other.
 St Event given internal h [??]
 Contentious issue.
 Language issue in the second e-mail, and downplay the issue at hand.
2. Action
 Not to use e-mail
 Forum for opportunity staff to talk about the issue in safe space
 Review the policy and see where the e-mail [fit?]
 Training /workshop
3. Action
 Speak to both staff that send out the e-mails
 Management should send out e-mail to all staff addressing this e-mail/s
4. Education/Training
 Transparency, open dialogue
 Respectful dialogue

5. Warrant a talk to both.
 Not a performance issue because it is not about their work in the organization.
May be becoming a performance issue
6. Tightening policies & guidelines, review policies.

 No survey – have a safe space to talk about issue.
Group ?: [Note paper; no group # on sheet]
Case Study – What has been seen and heard
1. – Stereotyping hoodie image – other co-workers unaware and silencing concerns of others
 Marginalizing, minimizing concern
= deflection of responsibility to management
 Lack of education in workplace
 Unaware of social circumstances – Trayvon
 No one spoke up until the last minute
 Lack of support from co-workers + management to raise concerns
 Hoodie is historical arrangement of perception [?]
2. - Promote dialogue
 Awareness of how to follow up with concerns talk about racism regularly,
how it is infused [?] in us and our work
 Need anti-racist lens in agency until it is no longer needed
 Need follow-up, management, board, union
 Accountability
 Not being a bystander
3. – Education, conversation, empowerment

 Gaps in execution, follow thru, documentation
 Competing tensions, triage of human rights
 Empowerment of staff, remedy for peoples’ racist behaviours, even with participants with
mental illness
 Create a list of remedies and concrete actions to take, monitor that action has been taken
4. [no notes handed in]
5. - Staff education, reporting
6. [no notes handed in]

Issues – Session/Day 2 [brown sheets]
Group 2 [Group # on sheet]
1. Competing “oppressions” coming forward

 Competing hierarchy of oppression
 Bigger structural issues with Pride
 Who is sending e-mail and what is the goal?
 What precipitated the e-mail?
 Is e-mail the best forum for discussion?
(Lacking appropriate forum)
 Anti-black racism
2. Education about anti-black racism

 Have a forum with facilitator
 * Management response to the issue/s from the beginning (organizational stance)
 Unpack and discuss/educate
 Bring back to teams for further discussion
3. See *, create forms for discussion
4. HL organize, support community education

 Support sector-wide initiatives
 Take a stand
5. See 2*, 3*[?], 4 – Communication, process, response
6. Bring to HL Management, committee

Bring to Network, sector
Use conversations as catalyst for [addressing] intra-organizational concerns
Group 3: [Group # on sheet]
1. Trying to address too many issues at one time

 Communication
o Prioritizing concerns
o E-mail [? Context to be added]
o How people relate/bring forth issues to one another/ lack of empathy
o How power/privilege affects committee[Which? Context to be added]
Recommendations:
 Make space for group to work race issues before tackling other issues
- have space for commonalities of race/other issues (e.g., ableism)
 Create more than one committee or sub-committees

- tenant committee,

to ensure enough attention given to each issue/level
Management:
 Talk to supervisors on how to appropriately respond to issues
 Committee frame of ref[erence?] created or revisited [?]
 Employer responsibility
o Human rights- employees should feel safe
o Committee responsibility to promote inclusivity

Recommendations – Session/Day 1 [white sheets]
Note: Not all sheets numbered with Group #
Group 1:
 In order to demonstrate commitment to antioppressive/antiracist practice and policy we

recommend an inclusive hiring policy, procedures and process
 Enact the recommendation of AIR and ALOP committee work and hold accountable
 Clear process to report on discrimination
 Report on issue of discrimination in the workplace and how they were dealt with
 Regular training on staff and participants on Antioppression
Group 2:
 Management, board and union to dialogue to ensure they are oprating within the Human
Rights Code/Charter R+F
 Protocol process for racism and discriminatory behaviours within organization
 Ongoing mandatory training and implementation + education in human rights and cultural
competency
 Communication, transparency at all levels
Group 3:
 Need to further develop Zero tolerance policy

– how we respond to and what are the consequences?
– What does Zero tolerance mean? Where are its teeth?
– Want a guideline/clear procedure on how to respond
 We need to always apply this
 Should have training and conversations about anti-racism more regularly
o Should have a yard stick, i.e. X# of new staff then [as?] we do [on] other training
 Forum for dialogue for contentious issues for staff and tenants
o Option to anonymously submit things to discuss @ forum
 Anti-oppression training for tenants
[struck out by group and replaced with phrase below:]
Restorative justice approach built into strategic planning
Group 4:
 Address: HouseLink need to review systemic & covert racism on all levels

 Hold staff and members accountable for their behaviour.

Regardless of their mental and physical abilities.
 Provide staff member[s] with adequate income to live & survive
 Ongoing training, i.e., quarterly/annually,
and forums for staff to discuss issues that affect staff on a daily basis

Recommendations – Session/Day 2 [brown sheets]
Group 1:
 Skills education
o More forums (staff and participants)
o More training
o Skills to apply anti-racism: ally, how to call out, practice stock phrases
 Actually following policies:
o Staff member involvement in policies  consequences
o Management needs to enforce
o Management should show/model leadership
 Capture peoples’ experiences of racism
 Mandated discussion/training on current social issues
Commit to actually having an active & productive anti-racism committee and report
Group 2:
 Clear signage about anti-racism, anti-discrimination and consequences and how to report
incidents
 Address: Profiling - from an anti-racism framework (community and individual)
 Training at all levels, appropriate to group; on a regular basis i.e., annual
o Addressing systemic issues of racism and discrimination
 Revisit policies – see what needs to be revised (from a human rights point of view), include
appropriate staff in on policy review discussions
o Accounysbility of policy implementation
 Organising caucus
Group 3:
 Education & promotion for both staff/members in community around anti-racism with clear
language of consequences - someone in charge enforcing it
o For staff, then for members
 Board and management:
o Support and develop leadership for racialized groups,
o ing [sic] diversity on board, recruitment and staff committees
 Continue to unpack issues of systemic racism within organization
 Creating capacity to address issues

o To be able to speak up, being proactive about confronting issues in community space
o Creating caucus comprised of racialized staff to discuss important issues, debrief
Group 4:
 Clarity of policy
 Consistence and consequences
 Follow up
o Report written/Record
o Meet managers
 Caucus

July.4.2017
June 12th, 2017 Anti-Racism Training Feedback
1. How would you rate the overall quality of the workshop?
A) Excellent B) Good C) Fair D) Poor E) Very poor
Answer Choice Responses

A)Excellent 22.22% 4
B)Good 61.11% 11
C)Fair 16.67% 3
D)Poor 0% 0
E)Very poor 0% 0
Total 18
Comments:
-I appreciate the fact that all could speak from their lived experience in a safe and supportive
environment. I also felt that there was much that was left unsaid and unsorted, and see this as an
opportunity to work towards equitable, healthy community work environment.
-It was an open workshop, where staff could share their feelings, thoughts and experiences
-I thought the training was pretty weak on the "training" component. I was hoping the training
would be more effective in addressing ignorance around issues of racism, systemic racism, and
privilege.
-I was engaged by the content and HL staff participation, comments
-Knowledgeable facilitator, good group work
-I really liked it and the instructor
2. What suggestions would you provide for future workshops on anti-racism?
-It would be helpful if we could have a anti-racism workshop that does some unpacking of the
subtle ways that our perceptions are arranged and made invisible through internalization and
acceptance. Using resources like Sherene Rizac's Looking White People In The Eye , and Gordon
Matthew's Power: A Radical View
-All staff and management should experience the workshop together
-It was clear from the workshop that staff feel like they are being subjected to systemic
discrimination from within the organization. The training was a good starting point for addressing
that, but a lot more follow-up is required. Another issue that was highlighted was the racism that
staff face from participants. Future workshops on how to deal with and respond to that might be
helpful. And there is still a need for training on issues of race, privilege, and white supremacy.
Many staff still don't get it.
-I feel that as a mental health agency there was very little focus on mental health issues in this
workshop. I would like to see this explored further.
-All staff at one workshop and make it two days workshop.
-Emphasis should be placed on not just white racism on blacks, but also on Asian racism on blacks.
While blacks ans Asians are targets of racism, blacks are more so.
-staff only - managers only workshops tips on how to affect changes throughout the organization
-Provide more condensed reading material well ahead of the training and perhaps a reading list of
quality, denser reading materials for staff who would like to read more in the future.

-There should be follow up by managaement with anti racism policy of ZERO tolerance. I think the
Human Rights code trumps anty Tenant rights.
-Try to have everyone in 1 group, split into 2 half day sessions
-That we discuss more specifically how racism translates into our work. Also, I would like to have
more commitment to activism from Houselink as an org. I think its our responsibility to participate
in activism + advocacy in the community
-I’d suggest having the entire staff together if possible
-That we discuss more specifically how racism translates into our work. Also, I would like to have
more commitment to activism from Houselink as an org. I think its our responsibility to participate
in activism + advocacy in the community.
-commitment to activism as an organization - not just convenient political-speak
3. Would you be interested to attend another training with this facilitator?

A)Yes 76.47% 13
B)No 25.53% 4
Comments:
-I appreciate the fact that the facilitator could speak of his personal experiences of racist behaviors,
yet still be open to learn and grow
- He was open, and willing to listen
- If the training was focused on a very specific topic
- I found the facilatator shut down a couple of staff members opinions. As well, he argued with one
staff member who he disagreed with.
-Dont feel the need to
4. Do you have any other comments or concerns?
- There has to be real Commitment to ant- oppression work, as part and parcel of the work that
Houselink does. We have to reconise and identify that systems interlock in invisible ways that hurt
people psychically, and that these wounds/ trauma are not only excruciating but are very
challenging and necessary for real healing to take place; and because psychic trauma affects mental
health and wellbeing, Houselink has to be at the forefront of this essential and cutting edge journey
into wellness.
- I hope the suggestions that were given to management will be taken seriously, and changes will be
seen throughout the agency.
- The facilitator acknowledged his bias but I felt this bias did somewhat distort the overall umbrella
of anti-racism and anti-oppression issues
- Lack of management staff at the workshop
- To what extent is Houselink aware of incidents of racism directed against HL staff and/or
Participants? Who is involved ? - staff and/or participants - and what outcomes / consequences
follow? Given that 1 incident is 1 too many, how many incidents occur? Received impression that a
large number of systemic, overt and covert racist vocalizations and behaviours are being directed at
staff. One staff in particular strongly voiced HL experience. What is going on at HL?
- The disconnect with having this ‘training’ (which I don’t think it is) is a bit awkward. How can we
bridge the comments/discussions/frustrations/ hopes from both groups? I asked Helen and Jonathan

to consider attending the july meeting as a way to carry over participation. Neither was committed
to doing so. I think Helen is away in fact. So you may be the anchor to do that bridging.
-Facilitator was good but I don't want to do it every 6 months
-This is sensitive and highly charged subject matter. Lots of room to be offended, and I think
Charles did a good job making this training inclusive.
June 12th and July 20th 2017

Anti-Racism Workshop Attendance:
June 12th 2017:
Jane Swaine
Monica Vaus
Ranga Morlin
Omar Badarah
Julie Lam
Rose Lee
Emily Imrie
Keratiloe Carpenter
Paul ODonnell
Melissa Goldstein
Florence Akol
David Fiege
Thuan Ngo
Desmond Rowley
Judy Ngo
Joy Whitely
Jason Graine
Helen Cheung
Sandra Russell
Tina Hjorngaard
Tanya Jones
Calleta Johnson
Beena Babu
Ruth Bockner
Lily Liu
Lily Hou
Rumjana Dimitrova
Jonathan Aghoghovwia
Janice Kluwak
Joan Johnson
Jason Graine
Jason Renford
Elisabeth Vanloo
Sheila Learning

July 20th, 2017:

Judy James
Catlin De Villa
Manzur Ahsan
Ben Younesi
Tim Paige
Jorge Saban
Rolena Sharmin
Cornelia Dinu
Luis Maida
Lucy Gudgeon
Joseph Deogracias
Jose Mejia
Victor Henry
Florence Heung
Angela Zaglul
Patricia Malcolm
Connor Learey
Michael Williams
Ashleigh Rose
Ashley Labow
Joanna Pawelkiewicz
Carmen Charles
Teresa Rodriguez
Sue Canellis
Martha Judge
Michael Palens
Richard Gallant
Donna Dalrymple
Sandra Lang
Karen Hazelton
Carlos Aedo
Jaipreet Kohli
Brian Davis
Carl Melvin
Carol Thames
Colleen Vandeyck
Charles Lior
Anita Mohan
Peter Makanza
Dharm Solanki
Staff that did not attend:

Fred Mwesigye
Peter Marra

Hani Siyad
Courtney Roberts Lawes
Sana Momin
Jody Risdon
Luke Dufoe?
Rena Post

July.21.2017
July 12th, 2017 Anti-Racism Workshop Feedback
5. How would you rate the overall quality of the workshop?
B) Excellent B) Good C) Fair D) Poor E) Very poor

A)Excellent 0%
B)Good 5 35.71%
C)Fair 5 35.71%
D)Poor 3 21.43%
E)Very poor 1 7.17%
Total 14 100%
Comments:
-Materials were a bit dry and unengaging, but facilitator was good at dealing with the people in the
group
-Too much time on legislation without confirming Houselink has these policies in place. No
discussion of the policies in place and how to use them. Not a chance to talk about issues in
Houselink or get help on dealing with them.
-Agenda was too general to cover specifics. Did not like the idea of calling a break a "health break"
let's be real and call it what is was - it was simply a break, to smoke, catch up on email go to the
bathroom, but not for health reasons.
-he did not establish a safe space we needed agreed upon ground rules / group norms
-It's a difficult subject to deal with. Emotionally draining.
-could have been less emphasis on the legislative framework.from the morning session
-The morning session was not particularly productive. I was unsure what the purpose of the long
PowerPoint presentation was.
6. What suggestions would you provide for future workshops on anti-racism?
-small group workshop
-unpacking privilege, working with members who are expressing racism or other isms, health
equity, being an ally,
-Discuss the material distributed to read prior to workshop
-Less lecturing. More activity/participation
-More practical skills on how to call things out when racism occurs, how to be an ally

-Safe space created. Chance to talk about issues and find solutions. Have tools to help on the job.
-We have a mic system that may have come in handy
-Focus and use relevant issue material. For example using time to go over Human Rights cases was
a waste of time, that could have been emailed to us if we wanted to explore issues at large. Perhaps
the notion of self care could have been explored more. Perhaps also take the focus from anti-racism
to cover all oppresions.
-cultural competencies we also need workshops about the other forms of oppression (sexism, able-
ism, homophobia, classism...)
-Smaller groups.
-increasing understanding of white privilege, the importance of allies and how to be a good ally,
-better balance, less skewed toward one group
-Having a caucus/committee break out groups, maybe an exercise where we give examples of "I see
priviledge within HL when..." & "I see oppression within HL when..."
7. Would you be interested to attend another training with this facilitator?

A)Yes 3 23.08%
B)No 10 76.92%
Comments:
-Poor Flipchart, Presentation & No analysis, just hear say
-If there is more partipation
-Was not able to stray from the agenda to explore what was really pressing to our staff. The
presenter was not flexible enough and I felt sensitive enough to navigate the day to our needs.
-What was particularly problematic was his consistent use of the word "queer" when referring to
gay male culture.
-there was too much reading material - better to limit it to the objectives of the day
-Obviously a very accomplished individual, very knowledgeable, but not a great facilitator.
8. Do you have any other comments or concerns?
-individual discussion with outside facilitator

-No

-some staff felt that some of the examples were directly pulled from Houselink and not well
disguised causing embarrassment or shame.
-This is a learning process. First, get peoples perspectives, analysis of the history and roots of
inequity, injustice and unfairness and Plan how to overcome obstacles to fairness and equity
-Workshops on practice
-I'm not feeling that this addressed the issue of competing oppressions has not been fully addressed.
-Concerned there was no safe space or a person to talk to if triggered by talk at the workshop or
events.
-There were scented markers at the tables
-The ice breaker was far too long for everyone to stand, we could have done this by sitting where
we were, enjoying our tea and coffee while it was still hot - and raising our hands in answer to
questions. It seems the facilitator did not take this into account - ironic for him supposedly being
sensitive to needs. The case studies could have been presented by more than one group member i.e.
one person recap the case and the other to go over answers. It was far too long for one person to
speak, again some - not all - staff may have experienced nervousness and there was opportunity to
get more staff participating in the exercise. Again I felt this could have been better thought out by
the facilitator.
-I am concerned that by focusing exclusively on race we will not spend time dealing with each of
the many types of oppression that are systemic in our society and specifically in this agency
-The pitfall of this work is accusations and judgments can hamper progress. As noted in the Human
Rights Commission reading (page 47), I believe it would have been helpful to state that an anti-
racist organization is not one where racism is absent, but is proactive in taking a stand against it,
and an organization must be holistic in its approach. It goes on to list these approaches which helps
guide our next steps.
-I think this workshop should be de-briefed at every team meeting. Despite it not being the best
workshop of its kind that I have attended, I still took away a couple of key things from it.
Anti-Racism Workshop Attendance:

July 12th, 2017:
Judy James
Catlin De Villa
Manzur Ahsan
Ben Younesi
Tim Paige

Jorge Saban
Rolena Sharmin
Cornelia Dinu
Luis Maida
Lucy Gudgeon
Joseph Deogracias
Jose Mejia
Victor Henry
Florence Heung
Angela Zaglul
Patricia Malcolm
Connor Learey
Michael Williams
Ashleigh Rose
Ashley Labow
Joanna Pawelkiewicz
Carmen Charles
Teresa Rodriguez
Sue Canellis
Martha Judge
Michael Palens
Richard Gallant
Donna Dalrymple
Sandra Lang
Karen Hazelton
Carlos Aedo
Jaipreet Kohli
Brian Davis
Carl Melvin
Carol Thames
Colleen Vandeyck
Charles Lior
Anita Mohan
Peter Makanza
Dharm Solanki

Read Me

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Read Me

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANTI-RACISM TRAINING SESSIONS:

JUNE 20 AND JULY 12, 2017

Key Requests/Recommendations by Session Participants

 Training on a regular basis and as integral part of onboarding process

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 2

o Peer support and team work

Increase opportunities to dialogue on challenging issues

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 3

Transcribed Flip Chart Sheets / Notes

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 4

Issues – Session/Day 1 [white sheets]

1. What are the issues at work:

2. What action/s should be taken:

 Consistency in applying policy and [in]consequences

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 5

 Expectation needs to be transparent and visible

Group 4: [Flip Chart; group # on sheet]

1. Racism, ageism, Profiling, Insensitivity, Shaming, Intolerance of other ideas

2. Take back group to find solutions acceptable for all

Group 1: [Note paper; group # on sheet.]

1. If service users don’t have a guideline what behaviour is acceptable.

2. At HouseLink, people should go to health and safety committee.

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 6

 Lack of clarity about reporting procedure.

3. There should be a mechanism in place to address such systemic issues.

Group 2: [Note paper; no group # on sheet.]

2. Similar issues on same platform – maybe subcommittees

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 7

Group 3: [Note paper; no group # on sheet]

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 8

5. Warrant a talk to both.

6. Tightening policies & guidelines, review policies.

Group ?: [Note paper; no group # on sheet]

Case Study – What has been seen and heard

3. – Education, conversation, empowerment

4. [no notes handed in]

5. - Staff education, reporting

6. [no notes handed in]

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 9

Issues – Session/Day 2 [brown sheets]

Group 2 [Group # on sheet]

1. Competing “oppressions” coming forward

2. Education about anti-black racism

3. See *, create forms for discussion

4. HL organize, support community education

5. See 2*, 3*[?], 4 – Communication, process, response

6. Bring to HL Management, committee

Group 3: [Group # on sheet]

1. Trying to address too many issues at one time

 Create more than one committee or sub-committees

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 10

to ensure enough attention given to each issue/level

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 11

Recommendations – Session/Day 1 [white sheets]

Note: Not all sheets numbered with Group #

 In order to demonstrate commitment to antioppressive/antiracist practice and policy we

 Need to further develop Zero tolerance policy

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 12

 Hold staff and members accountable for their behaviour.

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 13

Recommendations – Session/Day 2 [brown sheets]

www.charlescsmithconsulting.com e- charlescsmith@rogers.com t- 416-686-3039 14

5. See 2, 3[?], 4 – Communication, process, response