Tracy Isaacs

In 500 Word Column, Western News

Compliance with FCP is everyone’s concern

At a recent general membership meeting, members of Western’s Caucus on Women’s Issues were interested to hear that the University had recently undergone a Federal Contractors Program (FCP) compliance review. The FCP monitors the employment equity situation of institutions, like Western, that receive over $200, 000.00 from federal grants and contracts.  Institutions deemed noncompliant could lose their eligibility for federal funding.

In September, the President’s Standing Committee for Employment Equity (PSCEE) was told that, after the review officer’s visit, the University was given until October 15 to show that it has a plan for addressing areas in which it appeared, to the FCP officer, to fall short. Otherwise, it risked non-compliance. Given the consequences of non-compliance, it is unacceptable and worth noting that most members of the University community, including members of search committees in the academic units, have little idea of the FCP’s requirements. It is troubling that the documents outlining the specific areas of concern and the University’s response are confidential. Given the potential cost of non-compliance, our compliance with FCP employment equity requirements ought to be everyone’s concern. It is unclear whose interests are being served by keeping information about the FCP’s requirements and the recent review from the Western community.

At the institutional level, Western has taken some steps to address employment equity. We have the Equity Services and PSCEE. Our newly revised Workplan document (an FCP requirement) outlines the University/Strategy for meeting the FCP’s seven equity objectives. Last year, a joint UWOFA and administration committee outlined employment equity guidelines for appointments committees and promotion and tenure committees to follow.

These welcome efforts are insufficient to address the institutional problem of employment inequity. Although indispensable, PSCEE and Equity Services cannot alone enact a significant institutional change. The University is treating our difficulties in meeting employment equity goals as a problem to be addressed from the top down. The Workplan assigns responsibility for the implementation of most employment equity goals to PSCEE and Equity Services, some to Human Resources, the Provost, or the VP Administration, but none to Deans and Chairs, and none to appointments committees. Surely Deans and Chairs, who have perhaps the greatest impact on each unit’s hiring practices, ought to be involved in the discussion about employment equity and the development and implementation of strategies to move the institution forward. And surely appointments committees, who write job ads, make short-lists, interview candidates, and decide to whom to offer positions share some of the responsibility for meeting the FCP’s requirements. Making progress on the employment equity front is going to require a multi-level, collective effort.

The FCP does not force arbitrary goals on institutions under federal contracts. The program was implemented in 1986 in an effort to rectify an unjust system of practice that has a long tradition of favouring able-bodied white men, and disadvantaging others. The goal of addressing injustice is a moral one. If the moral obligation to take bias out of our hiring practices will not motivate search committees, then perhaps the legal obligation, and the consequences to all of us if the University is ever found to be noncompliant, will finally encourage more effort.

Tracy Isaacs, President, Western's Caucus on Women's Issues

Return to Issues/Cases Page