Privatization kicks in....and these FP owners need to cut costs to increase their profits. How? STAFFING, TO START.
Good questions!
Thread 1/5
RE: Staffing/Fair wages:
I've talked about how this system reflects the trifecta of racism/sexism/ageism: https://t.co/hcjb0fB5xr
*We have a majority older, female resident population cared for my a majority racialized, female workforce.
Privatization kicks in....and these FP owners need to cut costs to increase their profits. How? STAFFING, TO START.
https://t.co/HZiDGTAwPE
4/8.
— Dr. Vivian Stamatopoulos (@DrVivianS) December 12, 2020
Most troubling is this tidbit from the "Perfect Storm" report where you all recommend the use of gendered & racialized immigrant workforces instead of providing domestic workers fair wages and livable working conditions.https://t.co/yRqCvMWwHb pic.twitter.com/ZCDPRkTEoz
Big problems here as well. I have reviewed these in an interview I gave with @PnPCBC by comparing the case of Australia to Canada and how our inspection regime FAILS in comparison and leads, to what I call, institutionalized violence.
https://t.co/9C2djuAXF7
Make no mistake. This is institutionalized violence.
— Dr. Vivian Stamatopoulos (@DrVivianS) October 24, 2020
When will you act to stop it @fordnation @DrFullertonMPP #onpoli #ltc
<excerpt from tonight\u2019s interview> pic.twitter.com/17apvYOdjV
https://t.co/tlUw8gSrBO
To boil it down, we scaled back on facility-wide (RQI) inspections DRAMATICALLY under @fordnation @DrFullertonMPP and that was a big problem matched only by the LACK OF EFFECTIVE PENALTIES to hold bad actors accountable.
More from Society
You May Also Like
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?