THe previous Post was Responded to like this

I hope you are well

I have had a chance to look at the attachments the message in detail and as stated here are my thoughts / observations / suggestions:

1. Compared to the UK your willingness to engage a citizen as a communications officer is a stark yet welcome difference. It would unlikely that I would be given the same consideration and ‘personal touch’ and for that I am grateful.

2. I don’t doubt the dedication to equity and diversity of the department – although it is unclear whether the approach includes direct education aimed at eradicating discrimination. However I feel this message has not got through to some of your colleagues given my observations of the department and the behaviour of some fire-fighters e.g. the Engine 30 incident.

3. I understand your position as far as privacy and legality when it comes to personnel issues. That is precisely why I was shocked at the FOX5 statement that DCFD suggested this could be ‘disgruntled employees’. As previously stated FOX5 either misrepresented DCFD, or the dedication to fairness and the respect for and obligations to the employee(s) is in question in this instance. Which is why I made the statement about ‘as fair as possible’ it was not pedantry (although I am not suggesting that is your position).

4. I am glad to hear progress has been made under Chief Rubin’s tenure but again I would suggest that despite the reputation of the Equity and Diversity program and the organization that produced it, it – like other programs in this regard – has seemed to have fallen short of the mark (assuming Engine 30 staff participated). To illustrate, the second paragraph of the pledge you attached it is entirely at odds with the ‘Buck Stops Here’ incident. Furthermore, it may be seen as a backlash to it and the training, bottom line: the training did not fill those fire-fighters with the tools to properly engage and discuss the issues and did not convince them to want to change.

5. In fact the pledge has to be backed up with tools to achieve its aims i.e. with support and education to achieve this. We cannot act like we can just turn off racism and other forms of prejudice like a tap. The issues run much deeper. I am aware of citizens and professionals who would be happy to engage on this matter. There may be even some in the DCFD but these issues promote a climate of fear i.e. “if I come forward and tell you my truth are my colleagues adult enough and professional enough not to alienate and exclude me?”

6. I think there are wider issues within the context of equity and diversity practice that do not aid the situation, for example, the language. We seem to want to bring about tolerance not respect. I again appreciate the ambiguity of language but if we mean respect say respect. Tolerate has other meanings like ‘allow’, ‘endure’, ‘put up with’. I tolerate my neighbours’ taste in music or the smell of public bathrooms. I respect my fellow citizens, not because I respect diversity but because I just plain respect them.

7. This issue of respecting diversity instead of tolerating it is really about the fact that by being tolerant I can be 100% diversity aware and compliant and still be 100% bigoted (I still dislike them and negative views about them, I just don’t act like that – a bit like politicians do with journalists huh! - that is I simply learn to adapt my behaviour. To bring about real change the context needs to be brought forward to the 21^st century where tackling prejudice and discrimination are the solutions. Equity and diversity, whilst honourable and well-intentioned - in the past decade, particularly around race - have not solved the problems they intend to, at least the evidence points in that direction.

8. In terms of the structure, one observation / question of mine is how does the role of Diversity Management Officer rank against a Battalion Fire Chief, or Assistant / Deputy Fire Chief? Equal, higher, lower? I am interested as this can often mean that the amount of influence, power, budget and outcomes (or lack of the aforementioned) are determined / maintained by structure. In many other organisations the diversity chief is not ‘as big a chief as other chiefs’. This also applies to the support within that division of the department i.e. I note that there is one other officer holding the rank of Sergeant.

In conclusion DCFD is not alone in its experiences, how it reacts and progresses are the important parts. However, this is no consolation to those who have experienced and are experiencing this situation, and this lack of trust and belief in the department can only be exacerbated if people are made to feel like they are the problem i.e. disgruntled employees.

Thank you again for the materials I do understand your direction better. I am happy to assist in the future and will keep a keen eye on developments. Once again thank you for your courteous reply, and hope you understand that I write with the intention of contributing to improvement and change not just to vent. I am happy to assist with suggestions for practical action(s) in tackling prejudice and discrimination and am happy to further my dialogue with the DCFD in this regard.

Yours sincerely,