So I see the Tories brought in a monolingual Auditor General, there are two sides to this argument of course one of which that brings up the point that the job was listed as requiring a bilingual candidate.
I'm not sure where I fall on this, I am not a lover of the bilingual requirements of our country but if you limit who can apply to a position through job requirements on the application and then pull a 180 on it when it's convenient... I dunno.
The Queen can speak French, let's hire her to be her own representative in Canada. Free beer and all the poutine she can eat!
K, extra blind today, it's the AUDITOR GENERAL not the GOVERNOR GENERAL.
*sigh* why can't this day end?
If every job posting had no wiggle on the requirements I would have not been highered at several previous jobs.
However language is a hard skill to pickup.
Well this is kind of a high profile gov't job so lots of Liberals are saying that is *should* be a requirement :)
1. If the job ad says fluency in both languages is essential, then candidates should be measured on said essential skill
2. Current law says I can demand to be served by my government in French; if I meet with the new AG he won't be able to comply unless he hires a translator - this will then require an increase in the budget of the OAG to pay for
3. My beef is that this appears as patronage (not sure if there's a connection between the new AG and Harper, but it sure looks like patronage)
4. Notwithstanding all this, if people want to repeal the Official Languages Act and make Canada officially an English-only country, then fine
Quote from: Mr. Analog on November 04, 2011, 04:40:04 PM
K, extra blind today, it's the AUDITOR GENERAL not the GOVERNOR GENERAL.
*sigh* why can't this day end?
Might I suggest that today you do not drive nor operate heavy machinery? ;)