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

This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?

My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.

But what if that wasn't true?

Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.

The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!

I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.

You May Also Like

1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.

Please add your own.

2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you


3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.

“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”

“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”

4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:

“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”

“What’s end-game here?”

“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”

5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:

“What would the best version of yourself do”?