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.

20 years ago (pre-Harris privatization), nursing homes were staffed primarily by NURSES (hence the name, NURSING HOMES).

Privatization kicks in....and these FP owners need to cut costs to increase their profits. How? STAFFING, TO START.
What unfolded over the last 20 years as Privatization increased was the reversal of the staffing mix from majority nurses to majority PSWs (who are an unregulated workforce comprised primarily of racialized women who are often new to Canada).
This strategy is NOT NEW (its how the 2nd phase of predatory capitalism took hold) by expanding quite literally on the backs of women, often from the Global South whose labour is assumed to be both cheap and disposable (I studied this in my PhD).
And indeed, @Revera_Inc in their recent report defending their COVID performance expressed these same calls for an increased use of a gendered & racialized workforce....seeking to have @fordnation adjust immigration policies as a result ⤵️
https://t.co/HZiDGTAwPE
RE: INSPECTIONS.

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
Full interview here:
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.
Hope that helps! @MaryFernando_ :)
SORRY THREAD 1/8 lol

More from Society

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


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?