Results 1 to 38 of 38

Thread: Hypocrisy Indeed - Bridge Protestor from Edmonton works for the City of Edmonton

  1. #1

    Default Hypocrisy Indeed - Bridge Protestor from Edmonton works for the City of Edmonton

    Typical of the hypocrites against the Trans-Mountain Pipeline. An insult to Edmonton ratepayers and the Province of Alberta.


    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...idge-1.4738655

  2. #2

    Default

    If he did resign from COE employ due to anticipating his participation in this, and noting the discrepancy, and initiating quitting, than that it of the highest ethics. If he stepped away from his position and will be reinstated just to technically termporarily not be employed during the protest that would be another thing. I would wonder if he is being reinstated later. Something makes me wonder about that.

    Ethically speaking he should not work for COE now or later if he is going to be essentially protesting our economy and vitality and arguably the conduit in which he gets paid.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  3. #3

    Default

    Only people that support pipelines should be allowed to work for the city? I assume you would apply that to the province and the feds as well.

    Should that be a requirement for elected representatives as well?

    Loyalty oaths towards fossil fuels.

  4. #4

    Default

    ^Where would you end with this line of thought? Edmonton exists, largely on the basis of the Oil and Gas industry. The taxation base is heavily influenced by that. It seems hypocritical to be both a COE employee (i.e. paid representative of Edmonton) and be involved in an ILLEGAL protest against the very industry in which arguably pays your wages.

    I can see people being concerned about it.

    Its not about loyalty as much as what is ethically reconcilable. The question being should one profit from, and protest the same? Apparently even the protester felt these roles were conflicting, at odds, and enough to quit.
    Last edited by Replacement; 09-07-2018 at 08:34 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  5. #5

    Default

    Seems the title of this thread is in error.

    Also, what’s the hypocrisy?

    The City of Edmonton is supported largely by the property tax base. Oil and gas pays some wages of property owners but this City was here and was quite populated before oil and gas became a large sector. We could stop all oil production and the City would still exist and many jobs would still exist without oil and gas. Moreover the net margins being made on oil and gas as reflected in wages etc may not be providing as large a contribution to this city as generally assumed.



    An old problem:

    Jan Reimer - Wikipedia

    “She criticized oil and gas development on lands claimed by the Lubicon Cree, for which she was criticized by an alderman (who had himself endorsed the oil and gas development) who urged her "to refrain from expressing views on matters that do not fall within [the city's] mandate."[29]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Reimer
    Last edited by KC; 09-07-2018 at 08:56 PM.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    ^Where would you end with this line of thought? Edmonton exists, largely on the basis of the Oil and Gas industry. The taxation base is heavily influenced by that. It seems hypocritical to be both a COE employee (i.e. paid representative of Edmonton) and be involved in an ILLEGAL protest against the very industry in which arguably pays your wages.

    I can see people being concerned about it.

    Its not about loyalty as much as what is ethically reconcilable. The question being should one profit from, and protest the same? Apparently even the protester felt these roles were conflicting, at odds, and enough to quit.
    Ranching is big industry particularly in southern Alberta. Should people not be permitted to support being a vegetarian? After all, if people stop eating meat, they're not supporting the ranching industry that pays taxes to government that then uses those funds to pay wages to various people.

    Coal power plants used to be big business. Would we be in the position of phasing them out if people weren't opposed to them? After all, they paid taxes too.

    Should people in Ontario not be allowed to promote electric vehicles because internal combustion vehicles are built there?

    I'd say that the resignation was more because his protest was illegal. You seem prepared to require people to take an oath to support any and all industries and to prevent people from protesting them.

  7. #7

    Default

    What he does on his own time is his business. I don't care if he was protesting for or against pipelines nor should it be any basis for firing.

    Breaking the law is another matter. The COE has policies and standards depending on their position and job with the COE and if they are a union member. Those rules and policies should be followed without the political drama.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  8. #8
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    ^Where would you end with this line of thought? Edmonton exists, largely on the basis of the Oil and Gas industry. The taxation base is heavily influenced by that. It seems hypocritical to be both a COE employee (i.e. paid representative of Edmonton) and be involved in an ILLEGAL protest against the very industry in which arguably pays your wages.

    I can see people being concerned about it.

    Its not about loyalty as much as what is ethically reconcilable. The question being should one profit from, and protest the same? Apparently even the protester felt these roles were conflicting, at odds, and enough to quit.
    Ranching is big industry particularly in southern Alberta. Should people not be permitted to support being a vegetarian? After all, if people stop eating meat, they're not supporting the ranching industry that pays taxes to government that then uses those funds to pay wages to various people.

    Coal power plants used to be big business. Would we be in the position of phasing them out if people weren't opposed to them? After all, they paid taxes too.

    Should people in Ontario not be allowed to promote electric vehicles because internal combustion vehicles are built there?

    I'd say that the resignation was more because his protest was illegal. You seem prepared to require people to take an oath to support any and all industries and to prevent people from protesting them.
    emphasis added...

    you have no more of an idea than i do as to why he really resigned.

    i personally doubt that it's "more because his protest was illegal", nor should it be. at least not any more than it should be for the leader of the green party and member of the parliament of the country.

    my guess - and it's as good as yours - is that he thinks his "statement" is stronger with a resignation that without it and that it's simply another form of protest for him. which might make him a stronger holder of his principles than the aforementioned mp. or it might simply be that he was going to leave anyway (or already had) and that he chose the timing of both to get as much outside leverage for that decision whether they were related or not.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  9. #9

    Default

    Unless these lawbreakers walked or rode animals to Vancouver and back the title stands.

  10. #10

    Default

    That would be animal abuse...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  11. #11

    Default

    By your logic, if someone has had heart surgery and is opposed to fossil fuels they should be fired from their job because the electricity used in the OR came from natural gas or coal.

    Basically, everyone that doesn't believe in 100% unfettered use of oil and gas should not be allowed to work.

    Our society runs on oil and gas. There's no way around that. But that doesn't mean that we can't work towards reducing our reliance on it. But, apparently, if you do that you're supposed to be unemployed and live in the dark.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Unless these lawbreakers walked or rode animals to Vancouver and back the title stands.
    Seems that it’s questionable whether the guy still “works for” or ‘worked for’ the City of Edmonton. Your title says “works for”.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    ^Where would you end with this line of thought? Edmonton exists, largely on the basis of the Oil and Gas industry. The taxation base is heavily influenced by that. It seems hypocritical to be both a COE employee (i.e. paid representative of Edmonton) and be involved in an ILLEGAL protest against the very industry in which arguably pays your wages.

    I can see people being concerned about it.

    Its not about loyalty as much as what is ethically reconcilable. The question being should one profit from, and protest the same? Apparently even the protester felt these roles were conflicting, at odds, and enough to quit.
    Ranching is big industry particularly in southern Alberta. Should people not be permitted to support being a vegetarian? After all, if people stop eating meat, they're not supporting the ranching industry that pays taxes to government that then uses those funds to pay wages to various people.

    Coal power plants used to be big business. Would we be in the position of phasing them out if people weren't opposed to them? After all, they paid taxes too.

    Should people in Ontario not be allowed to promote electric vehicles because internal combustion vehicles are built there?

    I'd say that the resignation was more because his protest was illegal. You seem prepared to require people to take an oath to support any and all industries and to prevent people from protesting them.
    Well lets use your example. If you happen to be a vegetarian in cattle country that's perfectly fine. Nobody expects that you HAVE to consume the cattle. But if you want to be in local town council in cattle country, you might reflect that your values are not congruent with that of your constituent community and so are poorly suited to be able to represent their interests.

    Plus you ignored the biggest point I made (out of convenience in your attempt to argue) is that the individual resigned themselves. Seemingly out of a sense of either conflict, ethics, or even as Kcantor mentioned to add to a grander statement that I even resign for principles. Good for him. Seems like a highly principled conscientious objector.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Seems the title of this thread is in error.

    Also, what’s the hypocrisy?

    The City of Edmonton is supported largely by the property tax base. Oil and gas pays some wages of property owners but this City was here and was quite populated before oil and gas became a large sector. We could stop all oil production and the City would still exist and many jobs would still exist without oil and gas. Moreover the net margins being made on oil and gas as reflected in wages etc may not be providing as large a contribution to this city as generally assumed.



    An old problem:

    Jan Reimer - Wikipedia

    “She criticized oil and gas development on lands claimed by the Lubicon Cree, for which she was criticized by an alderman (who had himself endorsed the oil and gas development) who urged her "to refrain from expressing views on matters that do not fall within [the city's] mandate."[29]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Reimer
    The population here was around 1M less in the metro region before major oil and gas(but not before coal). Its unlikely the population would be this much more without the inception of oil and gas and petrochemical industry. WE would be Saskatoon, essentially.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-07-2018 at 12:56 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  15. #15

    Default

    Really the only people insulted by this are people who deserve not just insults, but the worst kind of pain and suffering in all aspects of their lives.

    He is a citizen, and as a citizen is entitled to have views.

    We are loyal to the crown, not to industries or ideologies.

    And if we are loyal to an ideology, why don';t we simply kill off everyone who doesn't adhere to it?

    God, some of you people are such creeps, it is not even funny.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    ^Where would you end with this line of thought? Edmonton exists, largely on the basis of the Oil and Gas industry. The taxation base is heavily influenced by that. It seems hypocritical to be both a COE employee (i.e. paid representative of Edmonton) and be involved in an ILLEGAL protest against the very industry in which arguably pays your wages.

    I can see people being concerned about it.

    Its not about loyalty as much as what is ethically reconcilable. The question being should one profit from, and protest the same? Apparently even the protester felt these roles were conflicting, at odds, and enough to quit.
    Ranching is big industry particularly in southern Alberta. Should people not be permitted to support being a vegetarian? After all, if people stop eating meat, they're not supporting the ranching industry that pays taxes to government that then uses those funds to pay wages to various people.

    Coal power plants used to be big business. Would we be in the position of phasing them out if people weren't opposed to them? After all, they paid taxes too.

    Should people in Ontario not be allowed to promote electric vehicles because internal combustion vehicles are built there?

    I'd say that the resignation was more because his protest was illegal. You seem prepared to require people to take an oath to support any and all industries and to prevent people from protesting them.
    Well lets use your example. If you happen to be a vegetarian in cattle country that's perfectly fine. Nobody expects that you HAVE to consume the cattle. But if you want to be in local town council in cattle country, you might reflect that your values are not congruent with that of your constituent community and so are poorly suited to be able to represent their interests.

    Plus you ignored the biggest point I made (out of convenience in your attempt to argue) is that the individual resigned themselves. Seemingly out of a sense of either conflict, ethics, or even as Kcantor mentioned to add to a grander statement that I even resign for principles. Good for him. Seems like a highly principled conscientious objector.
    The person in the story was not a representative of council but an employee. Are you saying that all employees must pledge fealty to oil and gas before the city could employ them? And if they were an elected representative, isn't that what having an election is about? Selecting someone to represent the people? Of a group of ranchers elected a vegetarian, isn't that a decision that's up to them?

    I offered my opinion (note - opinion!) that the resignation was because they were committing an illegal protest. It's the last line in the message you quoted. Hardly ignored at all. I guess that was out of convenience in your attempt to argue, as you say.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Really the only people insulted by this are people who deserve not just insults, but the worst kind of pain and suffering in all aspects of their lives.

    He is a citizen, and as a citizen is entitled to have views.

    We are loyal to the crown, not to industries or ideologies.

    And if we are loyal to an ideology, why don';t we simply kill off everyone who doesn't adhere to it?

    God, some of you people are such creeps, it is not even funny.
    “the only people insulted by this are people who deserve not just insults, but the worst kind of pain and suffering in all aspects of their lives.”

    Always enjoy your cheerful attitude towards those you disagree with.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Seems the title of this thread is in error.

    Also, what’s the hypocrisy?

    The City of Edmonton is supported largely by the property tax base. Oil and gas pays some wages of property owners but this City was here and was quite populated before oil and gas became a large sector. We could stop all oil production and the City would still exist and many jobs would still exist without oil and gas. Moreover the net margins being made on oil and gas as reflected in wages etc may not be providing as large a contribution to this city as generally assumed.



    An old problem:

    Jan Reimer - Wikipedia

    “She criticized oil and gas development on lands claimed by the Lubicon Cree, for which she was criticized by an alderman (who had himself endorsed the oil and gas development) who urged her "to refrain from expressing views on matters that do not fall within [the city's] mandate."[29]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Reimer
    The population here was around 1M less in the metro region before major oil and gas(but not before coal). Its unlikely the population would be this much more without the inception of oil and gas and petrochemical industry. WE would be Saskatoon, essentially.
    Yes you are right there. I’ve argued that public servants should take a pay cut when oil and gas prices fall. Their jobs may have no direct relationship to the sector but nonetheless indirectly everything is connected.

    Additionally, that logic could also support the case for increasing taxes across the whole population when oil and gas prices fall. You might be a farmer or a logger or doctor or dentist, but your quality of life is nonetheless somewhat dependent on energy exports. Similarly if cattle exports fall, oil and gas workers should also be asked to step up and help that sector and anything it otherwise contributes to - such as sustaining cities.


    However existing plant and existing pipelines would somewhat sustain a large population. Future pipelines such as the transmountain would one, increase efficiency and competitiveness of current stranded investment (current suboptimal overproduction) and two possibly enable further expansion of oil sands development. We seem to have sized our population and economy based on continued foreign investment to the tune of tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars for continued construction of ever more oil sands plants.

    Moreover much of the value of oil and gas as reflected in the size of the population isn’t due to “value added” but simply the value of the asset sold. (Essentially just a liquidation of the family jewels.) We might as well have been selling off the forests, mountains, streams, water etc. (remaining crown land holdings) and without oil and gas we might instead have been doing just that. Maybe selling more coal based electricity generation or exporting water.

    It needs to be recognized that foreign investors that inject literally hundreds of billions of dollars into our economy to build oil sands plants and pipelines not only expect to earn a “return on” their development dollars but also a “return of” their investment dollars. A history of losses would stop the gravy train of foreign investment so we essentially have to cut our own selling price (royalty rates) to ensure an overal profitability to the sector. (A bit like a ponzi scheme where shareholder returns forever get diluted in order to make payouts).

    So yes, City employees that protest against pipelines, in a small way do threaten the continuation of the scheme. People that take foreign trips, buy foreign goods, purchase foreign properties and retire to them (taking their pensions and savings with them) also undermine our province’s economy and reflect a similar disloyalty.
    Last edited by KC; 10-07-2018 at 09:26 AM.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Unless these lawbreakers walked or rode animals to Vancouver and back the title stands.
    Seems that it’s questionable whether the guy still “works for” or ‘worked for’ the City of Edmonton. Your title says “works for”.
    From the time I posted the link to the first entries afterward the news article was edited to add that he had resigned. It is telling that no one wants to post when this hypocrite resigned including him. Hopefully a stint of jail time will be in the offing.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Unless these lawbreakers walked or rode animals to Vancouver and back the title stands.
    Seems that it’s questionable whether the guy still “works for” or ‘worked for’ the City of Edmonton. Your title says “works for”.
    From the time I posted the link to the first entries afterward the news article was edited to add that he had resigned. It is telling that no one wants to post when this hypocrite resigned including him. Hopefully a stint of jail time will be in the offing.
    I’m not sure if many law breaking protesters go to jail.

    I’m curious if you would consider Albertans travelling abroad on vacation to be hypocrites as well. We develop our oil and gas to build our economy and anyone in business understands that the bottom line measurement of business success is the net wealth it creates that can be retained.

    So people that take the the proceeds of our efforts and inject them into foreign economies, rather than our own economy, are significantly undermining the whole reason behind depleting our resources.

    Maybe Albertans that live cheaply here but then spend their money on foreign travel, foreign goods should lose their jobs too. Worse than protesting a future development, these people are robbing hard working Albertans of the profits that they have already made through direct or indirect sacrifices.

    Those are profits and liquidated asset value that rightly should circulate here in Alberta so it reaches those that don’t have direct ties to the energy business.

    An oil and gas worker that takes home a big paycheque and then hops on a plane to some foreign resort is robbing many Albertan resource owners of an opportunity to share in the benefits of selling off their birthright and who may even be paying a price in a higher cost of living because of the inflationary consequences of growing a population to enable extracting and liquidating more and more of a resource.
    Last edited by KC; 10-07-2018 at 09:57 AM.

  21. #21
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    Unless these lawbreakers walked or rode animals to Vancouver and back the title stands.
    Seems that it’s questionable whether the guy still “works for” or ‘worked for’ the City of Edmonton. Your title says “works for”.
    From the time I posted the link to the first entries afterward the news article was edited to add that he had resigned. It is telling that no one wants to post when this hypocrite resigned including him. Hopefully a stint of jail time will be in the offing.
    I’m not sure if many law breaking protesters go to jail.

    I’m curious if you would consider Albertans travelling abroad on vacation to be hypocrites as well. We develop our oil and gas to build our economy and anyone in business understands that the bottom line measurement of business success is the net wealth it creates that can be retained.

    So people that take the the proceeds of our efforts and inject them into foreign economies, rather than our own economy, are significantly undermining the whole reason behind depleting our resources.

    Maybe Albertans that live cheaply here but then spend their money on foreign travel, foreign goods should lose their jobs too. Worse than protesting a future development, these people are robbing hard working Albertans of the profits that they have made direct or indirect sacrifices for. Profits and liquidated asset value that rightly should circulate here in Alberta so it reaches those that don’t have direct ties to the energy business and may even pay a price in a higher cost of living because of the inflationary consequences of growing a population to enable extracting and liquidating more and more of a resource.
    cool... using a straw man to argue with a straw man. ecologically friendly i suppose but pretty pointless on both sides.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  22. #22

    Default



    Our own actions are always justifiable in our own eyes.

  23. #23

    Default

    Breaking the law isn’t good but people do it all the time and still lead very successful lives. (Eg smoke dope then become premier or prime minister, etc)

    Outside of the whole breaking the law issue here, I don’t mind freedom of expression and I don’t think that protesting a pipeline is cause for the City to end someone’s employment with them.

  24. #24
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,771

    Default

    Let's just reset here for a minute. This guy was an employee of the city. He wasn't elected. He's simply an employee. If he wants to be a hypocrite (if that's what he is), then that's fine. The city can't and shouldn't be expected to screen applicants for entry-mid level jobs to the point where they're grilling them about their ethical concerns and leanings. His was not a political job. He's just some dude earning a paycheck just like Joe Sixpack swinging a weed-whacker around on a boulevard. Should every employee of the City Of Edmonton have to support everything the city does to such a degree that they even have to support industries in the rest of the Province because they are beneficial to the city's bottom line?

    No. This is ridiculous. If he's still an employee he should be reprimanded/disciplined appropriately for the legal implications caused by his decisions. His stance on Oil (or any other beliefs) should have no bearing on anything work-related unless he's actively using his status as an employee, or his position, to push those beliefs and ethical leanings on others. As far as I can tell he wasn't wearing an "I WORK FOR THE CITY OF EDMONTON" t-shirt. That information came out as part of the media scrutinizing the protestors.
    Last edited by Alex.L; 10-07-2018 at 10:32 AM.

  25. #25
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.L View Post
    Let's just reset here for a minute. This guy was an employee of the city. He wasn't elected. He's simply an employee. If he wants to be a hypocrite (if that's what he is), then that's fine. The city can't and shouldn't be expected to screen applicants for entry-mid level jobs to the point where they're grilling them about their ethical concerns and leanings. His was not a political job. He's just some dude earning a paycheck just like Joe Sixpack swinging a weed-whacker around on a boulevard. Should every employee of the City Of Edmonton have to support everything the city does to such a degree that they even have to support industries in the rest of the Province because they are beneficial to the city's bottom line?

    No. This is ridiculous. If he's still an employee he should be reprimanded/disciplined appropriately for the legal implications caused by his decisions. His stance on Oil (or any other beliefs) should have no bearing on anything work-related unless he's actively using his status as an employee, or his position, to push those beliefs and ethical leanings on others. As far as I can tell he wasn't wearing an "I WORK FOR THE CITY OF EDMONTON" t-shirt. That information came out as part of the media scrutinizing the protestors.
    Agreed. There are countless businesses in any province that benefit the metropolitan city. If you impose a gag order against criticizing them on civic employees, there would be no end to it.

    "How dare you protest the strip club across from your kids' school! That place pays property tax!"

  26. #26

    Default

    I don't know where people get the idea that being a "hypocrite is fine." Where I was born and raised - Alberta - that is not a trait to be admired in the slightest.

  27. #27
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    I don't know where people get the idea that being a "hypocrite is fine." Where I was born and raised - Alberta - that is not a trait to be admired in the slightest.
    Nobody said it was admirable. Just that their hypocrisy is their problem and if they can reconcile that then why should I care?

  28. #28

    Default

    Should groups like MADD and Alcoholics Anonymous lose their government funding because their efforts lead to fewer people drinking which is a major source of revenue for the province and the country? Should stores be required to sell tobacco products because it's taxed as well? What about people who buy electric cars? Should they be fired for not supporting the oil industry?

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.L View Post
    Let's just reset here for a minute. This guy was an employee of the city. He wasn't elected. He's simply an employee. If he wants to be a hypocrite (if that's what he is), then that's fine. The city can't and shouldn't be expected to screen applicants for entry-mid level jobs to the point where they're grilling them about their ethical concerns and leanings. His was not a political job. He's just some dude earning a paycheck just like Joe Sixpack swinging a weed-whacker around on a boulevard. Should every employee of the City Of Edmonton have to support everything the city does to such a degree that they even have to support industries in the rest of the Province because they are beneficial to the city's bottom line?

    No. This is ridiculous. If he's still an employee he should be reprimanded/disciplined appropriately for the legal implications caused by his decisions. His stance on Oil (or any other beliefs) should have no bearing on anything work-related unless he's actively using his status as an employee, or his position, to push those beliefs and ethical leanings on others. As far as I can tell he wasn't wearing an "I WORK FOR THE CITY OF EDMONTON" t-shirt. That information came out as part of the media scrutinizing the protestors.
    ironically the ex employee was a "Social marketing coordinator" who of course IS representing the city, even with "marketing coordinator" in his job title. Did you even read the article or just stopping by with one size fits all formulaic response?

    Next, the employee HIMSELF recognized the conflict of interest inherent in his roles and accordingly QUIT.

    You are correct that your post was ridiculous.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-07-2018 at 04:56 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  30. #30
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    I don't know where people get the idea that being a "hypocrite is fine." Where I was born and raised - Alberta - that is not a trait to be admired in the slightest.
    I took it to mean that it shouldn't be an issue for your employment.

  31. #31
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man From YEG View Post
    I don't know where people get the idea that being a "hypocrite is fine." Where I was born and raised - Alberta - that is not a trait to be admired in the slightest.
    I'm not seeing how he's a hypocrite in the context of his former employment with the CoE, given the dictionary definition of hypocrisy. Could you please explain?

    Definition: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not : behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel His hypocrisy was finally revealed with the publication of his private letters.; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion

    So what belief/virtue/religion was he feigning in contradiction of his true beliefs? Are CoE employees required to sign or recite some sort of Pledge of Allegiance to the oil/energy industry that I'm unaware of? I don't support the protest and am more than happy to see them prosecuted. But as far as hypocrisy goes, I'm not sure how that specifically applies to him because he's a CoE employee. Or are you saying that anyone who protests against the energy industry while not living a 100% zero carbon lifestyle is a hypocrite, and therefore whether or not he was a CoE employee is irrelevant?

  32. #32

    Default

    A related concern is that the very role that this person has is superfluous to what a COE could be focusing on and is not even very remotely attached to what priorities would be congruent for most Edmontonians.

    Basically another pie in the sky initiative and program and lets get all our energy from farting and pedaling bikes and support sustainable bs. This is the kind of programming and mindset your City of Edmonton is sponsoring;


    Now if this position, and a whole program like this were eliminated what loss would even be noticed?


    https://www.glassdoor.ca/job-listing...?jl=2828903103

    One after another of needless measure overkill from the city setting up individual programs like this that in themselves could be said to be incongruent. Does each initiative really require a program team and program head? Bureaucracy at its finest.


    So I'm really curious about this. Did the Edmonton protestors car pool to Vancouver, or take the Via rail train, or even cycle there (that would be consistent...) or did they use multiple vehicles and or a flight to get there. Keeping in mind that even driving there round trip, in one vehicle was a use of fossil fuels. The article noted they "travelled there" This would be investigative, and fitting, to describe how they travelled. It would denote either consistency, or inconsistency. The interesting thing is countless people in social media have questioned the form of transportation used by the protestors to get to Burnaby. Why is our media not asking about that? Ftr, no, they did not Cycle, or walk to Burnaby, alas, they used fossil fuels to get there.

    Of note this protest action also resulted in the dispatching of several police cars and police boats, consuming fossil fuels, resources, and costing money. For a symbolic and futile gesture of civil disobedience.

    Also to remind this is an active Green Peace protestor who has been involved in several other protests requiring police and resource intervention. Often by the COE and at COE resource and expense. For instance putting similar signs up on HLB in Edmonton, involvement in Occupy Edmonton years ago. Where are the journalists in questioning why COE, an Oil and Gas City if ever there was one, hiring active and ongoing Greenpeace members and protest participants for COE marketing positions?

    It took me 15 minutes to uncover several past protest involvements that would be arguably a conflict with his COE hiring.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-07-2018 at 05:39 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  33. #33

    Default

    Perhaps the greatest irony is we have here a U of A Mining Engineering graduate protesting pipelines, and that was employed by the COE to support renewable energy and limit use of non renewable resources. Wait, what? No inconsistency there..

    The same person also has traveled a bit. This too easily found online. How is that reconciled in his belief system?
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-07-2018 at 05:53 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  34. #34

    Default

    OK, so nobody involved with the city, either as an elected representative, employee or contractor is permitted to say anyhting negative about the oil, gas or coal industries on pain of losing their jobs. Do I have that right?

    What other industries would you include in that list?

  35. #35

    Default

    Another update. The COE ex employee is now calling any opposition to the stunt "trolling", Is claiming that the "National Broadcast Corporation" (lol) is biased and got him fired. He's also blaming, angry that people (trolls) made the connection at all to his employment with COE, and the protest stunt, and calling him out on it. So it seems as if the individual quit under duress or suggestion.

    But lets remember that this is the COE "Social Marketing Coordinator" busy calling people that disagree with him "trolls" online. I'll leave the readers to gauge if this is behavior of merit for such a position. Anybody can check his twitter account or other social media accounts. He's basically burning himself online with his comments.

    But in general his social media accounts, use of language, decorum are very inappropriate and not conducive to such employment representing the COE. Is it interesting that A COE hiring of a "Social marketing coordinator" and which even cites the use of online media in the job description did not even check his activity online. Because if they did this hire should certainly not have occurred.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-07-2018 at 06:20 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Should groups like MADD and Alcoholics Anonymous lose their government funding because their efforts lead to fewer people drinking which is a major source of revenue for the province and the country? Should stores be required to sell tobacco products because it's taxed as well? What about people who buy electric cars? Should they be fired for not supporting the oil industry?
    Unlike MADD, Alcoholics Anonymous receives no money whatsoever from any level of government or industry. No one can donate except members. Basically they pass a basket for a silver or bill collection.

    This is in accordance with their 7th Tradition which states:

    7. Every AA Group ought to be fully self supporting, declining outside contributions.

    It is exactly the same with Cocaine Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Crystal Meth Anonymous et al.

  37. #37

    Default

    I stand corrected. However, there are other groups that are dedicated to helping people with alcoholism. Apparently they should also be fired because liquor taxes help support such programs, at least according to the OP.

  38. #38
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.L View Post
    Let's just reset here for a minute. This guy was an employee of the city. He wasn't elected. He's simply an employee. If he wants to be a hypocrite (if that's what he is), then that's fine. The city can't and shouldn't be expected to screen applicants for entry-mid level jobs to the point where they're grilling them about their ethical concerns and leanings. His was not a political job. He's just some dude earning a paycheck just like Joe Sixpack swinging a weed-whacker around on a boulevard. Should every employee of the City Of Edmonton have to support everything the city does to such a degree that they even have to support industries in the rest of the Province because they are beneficial to the city's bottom line?

    No. This is ridiculous. If he's still an employee he should be reprimanded/disciplined appropriately for the legal implications caused by his decisions. His stance on Oil (or any other beliefs) should have no bearing on anything work-related unless he's actively using his status as an employee, or his position, to push those beliefs and ethical leanings on others. As far as I can tell he wasn't wearing an "I WORK FOR THE CITY OF EDMONTON" t-shirt. That information came out as part of the media scrutinizing the protestors.

    ironically the ex employee was a "Social marketing coordinator" who of course IS representing the city, even with "marketing coordinator" in his job title. Did you even read the article or just stopping by with one size fits all formulaic response?

    Next, the employee HIMSELF recognized the conflict of interest inherent in his roles and accordingly QUIT.

    You are correct that your post was ridiculous.
    I did read it. Did his personal views skew official city posts as a social media coordinator? Pretty unlikely. While that sounds like a job that would be In charge of direct postings on various media, I'm confident that he would have been coordinating timing of posts on various platforms, ensuring continuity and managing the pre-edited messages during events, construction, etc. not writing them.

    Good that he recognized and took action on it, but as was pointed out above it's likely that move was purposeful in order to add to his profile for the inevitable news story.

    Again, he's a hypocrite, but that's really nobody's concern except his and his direct supervisor's.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •