Scientist protest song....its a hit!

[Argus]

When you work for an organization, you can't bad mouth it, even on your own time. I thought that people would know that by now.

Don't assume the people you are talking with have ever worked for a living. Based on their posts I'm going to guess a lot of them have not.

I do agree with your above point about freedom of political expression, but I do know where the government is coming from, as it's a common practice.

You an bet that first, the politicians have nothing to do with this. Second, this guy's boss and his director have been called on the carpet by the deputy ministers office, and are having to file detailed reports on the matter. They won't forget that, and they won't forgive it. Whatever happens at the labour board his career is over.

[ReeferMadness]

You can't talk badly about the boss no matter where you are.

This, in a nutshell, is how right wingers see the Prime Minister. He's like a CEO. And a CEO is a dictator of the company. And if you say anything bad about the CEO, of course you will get fired. Because nobody offends the dictator.

It's why they get so outraged when the Supreme Court won't let him impose whatever legislation he wants, regardless of how badly it contravenes the constitution.

It's why they don't understand how incensed thinking people get at how Harper has undermined our democratic institutions. It's why they don't get how disgraceful it is when the PM has public fights with independent agencies who are supposedly accountable to parliament.

It's why they defend our first past the post electoral system. They don't want democracy. Not in any real form. They just want to vote for a dictator every 4 years. After that, they don't need to do anything. Just whine for 4 more years until they pick the next CEO.

[Evening Star]

I wrote a letter to then Superintendent about something that she had the power to address - or not. I personally do not know anybody in teaching on the Secondary school level, who went public with some kind of work related concern and was eventually promoted to either assistant department head, department head, vice principal or principal. There may be a variety of different reasons for this "anomaly" or it may be a policy.

You see the differences? i) You are talking about "not getting promoted eventually" vs "being put on leave". ii) The song does not really concern specific "work-related concerns", except in the general sense of criticizing government science policy alongside other policies and governing attitudes of the government.

Edit: Teachers have been badmouthing Premiers for as long as I can remember. When I was a student, they sure as hell did it to Bob Rae (even during class time) as much as they did it to Mike Harris.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Evening Star

[ReeferMadness]

He wasn't criticizing his employer; he was criticizing his government---that's the difference. He was speaking as a citizen, not as an employee.

You're wasting your time with this crowd. Harper isn't accountable to anyone. He's the "boss".

[Argus]

This, in a nutshell, is how right wingers see the Prime Minister. He's like a CEO. And a CEO is a dictator of the company. And if you say anything bad about the CEO, of course you will get fired. Because nobody offends the dictator.

Seriously, have you ever held a job? Every major organization has ethics codes now which prohibit people from publicly badmouthing them or their bosses, and that certainly includes the CEO. You want to work for the public service, you keep your fat yap shut about what you don't like, same as every other organization.

[Evening Star]

You an bet that first, the politicians have nothing to do with this. Second, this guy's boss and his director have been called on the carpet by the deputy ministers office, and are having to file detailed reports on the matter. They won't forget that, and they won't forgive it. Whatever happens at the labour board his career is over.

He was planning to retire in a month, according to the CBC article.

[Argus]

You're wasting your time with this crowd. Harper isn't accountable to anyone. He's the "boss".

You really think that a public servant who publicly mocks PM Trudeau or PM Mulcair won't face disciplinary action? What planet are you living on?

Chretien signed the Kyoto accord and then did absolutely nothing for nine years. Did you read or hear about any protests from federal scientists? Nope. Because they knew enough to keep their mouths shut. Chretien was a notoriously vindictive guy. The only major public servant I'm aware of who spoke out publicly about him -- after he was fired - then had his home and cottage raided repeatedly by the RCMP, who tried to persuade the SDQ to charge him with fictitious crimes.

[Evening Star]

Chretien signed the Kyoto accord and then did absolutely nothing for nine years. Did you read or hear about any protests from federal scientists? Nope. Because they knew enough to keep their mouths shut. Chretien was a notoriously vindictive guy. The only major public servant I'm aware of who spoke out publicly about him -- after he was fired - then had his home and cottage raided repeatedly by the RCMP, who tried to persuade the SDQ to charge him with fictitious crimes.

What do you think of this? Do you agree that this is how public servants should be treated if they speak out against the sitting government?

[Argus]

Yes, it is very different: he works for the public, not for the sitting government or governing party.

That's irrelevant. The CEO doesn't own the company, the shareholders do. You still get fired for badmouthing the CEO, or even your boss.

His salary is paid from tax dollars, not from private profits that Harper has earned. He was not badmouthing Environment Canada; he was badmouthing the sitting PM. This is not comparable to e.g. an Apple employee who tells people to buy PCs instead.

He was badmouthing government policy with regard to scientists while working as a scientist for the public service. We do not have nor do we want a situation where public servants get to publicly argue with the elected politicians about policy matters.

[Argus]

What do you think of this? Do you agree that this is how public servants should be treated if they speak out against the sitting government?

No employee gets to publicly speak out against his employer, anywhere, so far as I know. The only exception is whisteblower situations, and this is not a whistleblower situation.

I was in the public service. The rules are not put in place by the politicians, but by the organizations themselves. They are not enforced by the politicians but by the organizations. You are informed of the rules when hired, and that warning is reinforced every election period.

[Evening Star]

He was badmouthing government policy with regard to scientists while working as a scientist for the public service. We do not have nor do we want a situation where public servants get to publicly argue with the elected politicians about policy matters.

Why not? That sounds democratic. Don't e.g. public service unions do this all the time? The PBO? Auditor General?

[Evening Star]

No employee gets to publicly speak out against his employer, anywhere, so far as I know. The only exception is whisteblower situations, and this is not a whistleblower situation.

I was in the public service. The rules are not put in place by the politicians, but by the organizations themselves. They are not enforced by the politicians but by the organizations. You are informed of the rules when hired, and that warning is reinforced every election period.

I wasn't blaming Harper for this situation at all. It seems to be an Environment Canada decision. But the rules have been linked here and it's not clear that this guy did break them.

[Argus]

I don't like the way that this government has used such a heavy handed approach on scientists,

The first government scientist who tries to publish a public paper which contradicts or runs counter to Thomas Mulcair's stated policy will be told to stick it in a file cabinet and shut up. If you think differently you're naive. It's always been that way. It was just never something anyone cared about before now.

[Big Guy]

..

Edit: Teachers have been badmouthing Premiers for as long as I can remember. When I was a student, they sure as hell did it to Bob Rae (even during class time) as much as they did it to Mike Harris.

Perhaps they were in their last year before retirement, had no intention of promotions, or were union reps (who also go nowhere in the system) or did not care about keeping their jobs. I do not say it is illegal or immoral but there are ways to change things within the system. If/when you have tried all of them, have been unsuccessful and are still passionate about the issue then you go public - and you know what to expect.

[Evening Star]

The first government scientist who tries to publish a public paper which contradicts or runs counter to Thomas Mulcair's stated policy will be told to stick it in a file cabinet and shut up. If you think differently you're naive. It's always been that way. It was just never something anyone cared about before now.

See, I'm not convinced of the truth of this (and I'm not really buying that scientists belong to an elitist Central Canadian clique who have an inherent bias against Westerners). It's not what the scientists are saying.

[Argus]

I wasn't blaming Harper for this situation at all. It seems to be an Environment Canada decision. But the rules have been linked here and it's not clear that this guy did break them.

When I was with the public service the general rule of thumb was do what you want, but don't become a public figure. And although it's not part of any official policy, human nature says that this is doubly important if you're to become a public figure who opposes the sitting government. It'll give your boss a freaking heart attack, and he'll be dealing with the director and director general and deputy ministers for weeks. And none of them will think kindly about you. The overriding culture of the public service is 'don't rock the boat'. The overriding culture of senior management in the public service is focused very zealously on never coming to the attention of their bosses for anything negative.

[On Guard for Thee]

The first government scientist who tries to publish a public paper which contradicts or runs counter to Thomas Mulcair's stated policy will be told to stick it in a file cabinet and shut up. If you think differently you're naive. It's always been that way. It was just never something anyone cared about before now.

It has not always been that way, and that is why it is being cared about now.

[Evening Star]

When I was with the public service the general rule of thumb was do what you want, but don't become a public figure. And although it's not part of any official policy, human nature says that this is doubly important if you're to become a public figure who opposes the sitting government. It'll give your boss a freaking heart attack, and he'll be dealing with the director and director general and deputy ministers for weeks. And none of them will think kindly about you. The overriding culture of the public service is 'don't rock the boat'. The overriding culture of senior management in the public service is focused very zealously on never coming to the attention of their bosses for anything negative.

Yeah, this makes sense. I agree that this sort of action is not a smooth career move, which is probably why it was undertaken by someone who was close to retirement. However, official measures were taken here, which seem like they need to be backed up by official policy.

[Argus]

See, I'm not convinced of the truth of this (and I'm not really buying that scientists belong to an elitist Central Canadian clique who have an inherent bias against Westerners). It's not what the scientists are saying.

The major issue between scientists and the government is over the environment. The tories clearly don't want anyone working for them adding to the pressure on them to do something about global warming probably because they know they CAN'T do anything about global warming and don't want to waste billions trying.

So suppose Mulcair becomes PM and his government makes a big whopping deal out of us lowering our CO2 emissions, and it costs billions and billions of dollars (which it will). He's giving speeches all over the country about how important this is and how Canada will lead the way to combat global warming. You think some scientist who works for the government who does a paper which suggest that all Canada's efforts are a waste of time given the increasing emissions from other countries will be warmly congratulated by him or by the public service? He'd be embarrassing the PM and the government. His bosses would step on him hard.

[Argus]

It has not always been that way, and that is why it is being cared about now.

It has always been that way. No sitting government is going to welcome a government bureau or department coming out with arguments which contradict government policy. None did during Chretien's time because he was a vicious SOB and the senior public service lived in fear.

[BubberMiley]

When I was with the public service the general rule of thumb was do what you want, but don't become a public figure.

So if your mapleleafweb.com identity were hacked and publicly revealed, what should be the consequences for all the things you said about the Liberal government?

[Evening Star]

The major issue between scientists and the government is over the environment. The tories clearly don't want anyone working for them adding to the pressure on them to do something about global warming probably because they know they CAN'T do anything about global warming and don't want to waste billions trying.

So suppose Mulcair becomes PM and his government makes a big whopping deal out of us lowering our CO2 emissions, and it costs billions and billions of dollars (which it will). He's giving speeches all over the country about how important this is and how Canada will lead the way to combat global warming. You think some scientist who works for the government who does a paper which suggest that all Canada's efforts are a waste of time given the increasing emissions from other countries will be warmly congratulated by him or by the public service?

Probably not, because "Canada's efforts are a waste of time" doesn't sound like a scientific conclusion as much as a political opinion. If people who are publishing actual scientific findings are being suppressed because the findings "add to the pressure on [the government] to do something about global warming", then I would see that as exceptional interference.

But sure, if an Environment Canada scientist published a paper showing that global emissions were rising even after Canada's were reduced and the scientist were muzzled or his unit lost his funding, I would be among the first to oppose that.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Evening Star

[Argus]

So if your mapleleafweb.com identity were hacked and publicly revealed, what should be the consequences for all the things you said about the Liberal government?

Back then? First, the media would not have cared since anonymous writings on a little known web site would not have drawn any attention. On the other hand, if some of the things I said about my department came to the notice of my director who was a miserable, incompetent A-hole who spent most of his time trying not to ever make a decision he could be blamed for - well, he would have been very unhappy. And if my department's ethics rules are anything like others, they're completely open to the interpretation of the department, who get to decide if their interpretation was the right one or not.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Argus

[ReeferMadness]

That's irrelevant. The CEO doesn't own the company, the shareholders do. You still get fired for badmouthing the CEO, or even your boss.

See? I told you. Right wingers don't see any difference between the PM and the CEO. They're both dictators.

[On Guard for Thee]

It has always been that way. No sitting government is going to welcome a government bureau or department coming out with arguments which contradict government policy. None did during Chretien's time because he was a vicious SOB and the senior public service lived in fear.

Not the same at all if you listen to the actual scientists.