Conrad Eder: Does the government prioritize hiring competent workers? - National Post
The Canadian flag flies atop the Peace Tower on Centre Block of the Parliament buildings. Photo by Errol McGihon/PostmediaArticle contentTwo candidates pass each other in a corridor: one is heading into a job interview; the other has just finished. Neither will be evaluated merely by ability, education and experience. Who gets the job will also depend on skin colour, gender and other factors of group identity. This is Canada’s federal public service, today.
A new study by the Aristotle Foundation reviewed 301 federal job postings across 59 departments, agencies and Crown corporations. Forty-two per cent prioritized, or potentially prioritized, applicants based on identity characteristics, while 4 per cent restricted, or potentially restricted, a candidate’s eligibility on the same basis.
These figures are striking and yet likely understate the full extent of DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) hiring practices in the federal public service, as the review captured only what hiring managers chose to include in public job postings.
Columnist Jesse Kline keeps you up to date with what’s happening in Israel and the effects of antisemitism on life here in Canada. Friday mornings.
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Channel Israel will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Just because a posting did not mention employment-equity targets, identity-based preferences, or group-based restrictions does not mean such practices are not in force. In fact, federal legislation gives departments considerable latitude to incorporate DEI practices into their hiring processes.
However, perhaps ironically, not all DEI measures are created equally.
A policy that offers applicants with disabilities accommodations throughout the interview process is fundamentally different from one that gives selection preference to members of a particular group. Both may be framed as upholding diversity, equity and inclusion, but while the first removes an obstacle to fair competition, the second unfairly biases the competition altogether.
That distinction matters because Canadians can support an inclusive public service while rejecting identity-based preferential and restrictive hiring practices. They can favour inclusive, diverse workplaces without believing that access to public employment should be weighed against an applicant’s race, sex, disability, or other identity characteristics.
And that’s exactly what public opinion reflects. A 2025 Léger survey found that a majority of Canadians disagreed that, when hiring, it is important for employers to take a candidate’s cultural background into consideration. Even among segments of the population that preferential and restrictive hiring policies are purported to benefit, accounting for identity characteristics in hiring was unpopular.
