Questions about Ottawa

[lrt's friend]

I know someone who works in IT at the Bank of Canada and hit the bilingual wall mid-career. Basically, she was sent on rotating language training and would return to work periodically. During her absence, nobody did her work so she faced a backlog of work every time she came back from language training. It wasn't a good situation. I believe she also faced bilingual expectations at a more or less fixed date, which added to the pressure.

[J_Murphy]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think of it would depend on what is motivating your decision. If you really want to live in Ottawa I'm sure you can find some uni-lingual options but given that much of the civil engineering work is working for the government or with the government then uni-lingualism is probably career limiting. If you don't have any particular attachment to Ottawa and you're just looking to move to another city then I wonder if a city with so many bilingual jobs is the best idea.

Well, I don't just want to move to any City...I'm attracted to Ottawa for several reasons.

Thanks for the answers everyone. By the sounds of it, I wouldn't be completely limited to getting a job if I'm not bilingual. Obviously, it would be a benefit if I was. From my searches over the past little while, private sector jobs seem more plentiful than public, which seems to be the norm in most places.

[Acajack]

"Not knowing French" is not an unchangeable status. Just sayin'.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by acottawa

much of the civil engineering work is working for the government or with the government then uni-lingualism is probably career limiting. .

Not sure about that. The feds aren't involved much in civil engineering. They don't build many highways, roads, transit systems, etc. in this region. That's all provincial or municipal.

If you count institutional and building construction as civil engineering then the feds are involved to some degree of course, but they contract that work out. But the team that works on a new federal facility in Ottawa doesn't have to be all bilingual. The construction project can very well be carried out all in English. (Or all in French if it's on the Gatineau side.)

[J_Murphy]

And I will also add that although I am a civil engineer, my skill set is more in the environmental engineering field.

I have friends that work as consulting engineers, but their projects are all over the country. So just because I live and work in a certain city, doesn't necessarily mean that my day-to-day work will be 100% focused on projects in in that city.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

"Not knowing French" is not an unchangeable status. Just sayin'.

I think you're underestimating how difficult it is for an adult unilingual anglophone to change this fact; it's possible of course but it requires a huge amount of time and effort. Learning a new language as an adult is always difficult (ability to learn languages declines sharply after about age 12), and this is especially the case for those who didn't learn any second languages as a child (research has shown that children who learn multiple languages will have an easier time learning new languages after adulthood, while those who remained uni-lingual throughout childhood find the "after-12" barrier much more difficult to overcome).

On top of that, anglophones get very little exposure or need for other languages because of the status of English as the global lingua franca. When we travel, everyone generally speaks to us in English, all the media we consume is all in English, all the people we interact with all speak English, etc... This is unlike people who speak other languages, who generally will have some degree of natural English exposure or at the very least, some necessity of other-language exposure in general. (ie. a francophone who travels around the world is far less likely to find people able to speak French, so to some extent they'll be forced to use English as an intermediary language or pick up a phrasebook, which gives them some practice in multilingualism.. whereas an anglophone will just expect everyone to speak to them in English and it generally works if they stick to the more touristy areas--this is true even in countries like China and Hungary where overall English fluency is low).

Even in Europe, anglophones (living in the UK and Ireland) are far less likely to learn second languages than continental Europeans.

It's certainly possible for a 40 year unilingual anglophone to learn French but the amount of time and effort required would be huge.. especially given that they can get a job literally anywhere else and not have to ever worry about putting in said time and effort.

The federal language requirements are a big part of the federal government's inefficiency and general bureaucratic incompetence, IMO, because they effectively shut out the majority of Ottawa-Gatineau's workforce from wanting to work there thus severely limiting availability of talent (note: I'm not saying there aren't talented francophones and bilinguals.. it's just that they only make up a fraction of the population, so the chance that the "best talent" is among that group is simply mathematically smaller). The feds talk a lot about the things they have to do to attract better talent.. well giving an actual career path for unilingual anglos would be one of the biggest ways to do this. Separating the departments linguistically like was proposed in Laurendeau-Dunton is the best way to do this without being unfair to francophones.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I think you're underestimating how difficult it is for an adult unilingual anglophone to change this fact; it's possible of course but it requires a huge amount of time and effort. Learning a new language as an adult is always difficult (ability to learn languages declines sharply after about age 12), and this is especially the case for those who didn't learn any second languages as a child (research has shown that children who learn multiple languages will have an easier time learning new languages after adulthood, while those who remained uni-lingual throughout childhood find the "after-12" barrier much more difficult to overcome).

On top of that, anglophones get very little exposure or need for other languages because of the status of English as the global lingua franca. When we travel, everyone generally speaks to us in English, all the media we consume is all in English, all the people we interact with all speak English, etc... This is unlike people who speak other languages, who generally will have some degree of natural English exposure or at the very least, some necessity of other-language exposure in general. (ie. a francophone who travels around the world is far less likely to find people able to speak French, so to some extent they'll be forced to use English as an intermediary language or pick up a phrasebook, which gives them some practice in multilingualism.. whereas an anglophone will just expect everyone to speak to them in English and it generally works if they stick to the more touristy areas--this is true even in countries like China and Hungary where overall English fluency is low).

Even in Europe, anglophones (living in the UK and Ireland) are far less likely to learn second languages than continental Europeans.

It's certainly possible for a 40 year unilingual anglophone to learn French but the amount of time and effort required would be huge.. especially given that they can get a job literally anywhere else and not have to ever worry about putting in said time and effort.

The federal language requirements are a big part of the federal government's inefficiency and general bureaucratic incompetence, IMO, because they effectively shut out the majority of Ottawa-Gatineau's workforce from wanting to work there thus severely limiting availability of talent (note: I'm not saying there aren't talented francophones and bilinguals.. it's just that they only make up a fraction of the population, so the chance that the "best talent" is among that group is simply mathematically smaller). The feds talk a lot about the things they have to do to attract better talent.. well giving an actual career path for unilingual anglos would be one of the biggest ways to do this. Separating the departments linguistically like was proposed in Laurendeau-Dunton is the best way to do this without being unfair to francophones.

Not sure I agree with this take. It isn't harder for Anglophones to learn other languages than any other group - we are just less inclined as a general rule, and we use the dominance of English as an excuse. Speaking French really is a job-related skill in a lot of cases. I have no idea how separating departments into linguistic silos could possible increase efficiency.

In any event, this bilingual/not bilingual theory is a false dichotomy. Federal government jobs require varying levels of French, depending on the nature of the job. I don't have numbers, but in my experience, the number of jobs that are English essential or require no more than a B level of French would constitute the majority of positions. And to be clear, a B level of French is very attainable for the vast majority of anglophones. Almost all of us took French in school - if you went to grade 9 and put in any kind of effort, you would be at a B-level. Is it really an insurmountable challenge for most to get back to a grade 9 level of French?

[Marshsparrow]

Canada is a bilingual country and requires a bilingual public service - unless a national discussion is to occur to change this fact the reality of working for the federal government will be that there are certain positions that you must be bilingual - to claim ignorance or the fact that you are unable to learn a second language is lazy - the actual time wasted on this debate is a preoccupation for many outside of the civil service (many anglophones) - now let me get back to being an inefficient civil servant and I can guarantee you its not just because we are second rate citizens / left overs who couldn't secure a more lucrative job somewhere else.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

Not sure I agree with this take. It isn't harder for Anglophones to learn other languages than any other group - we are just less inclined as a general rule, and we use the dominance of English as an excuse.

I disagree. English is the principal language of the global tourism industry, the global travel industry, global trade, popular culture and most academic disciplines. People learning English have many more opportunities to be exposed than people learning other languages.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I disagree. English is the principal language of the global tourism industry, the global travel industry, global trade, popular culture and most academic disciplines. People learning English have many more opportunities to be exposed than people learning other languages.

Sure it might take a bit more effort, but it’s still not particularly hard for anglophones in Canada to reach a level of proficiency in French that makes them eligible for a large majority of public service jobs. And I say that as an anglophone who grew up in a city that was basically entirely anglophone. Unlike Ottawa, where exposure to French is constant. I

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I think you're underestimating how difficult it is for an adult unilingual anglophone to change this fact; it's possible of course but it requires a huge amount of time and effort. Learning a new language as an adult is always difficult (ability to learn languages declines sharply after about age 12), and this is especially the case for those who didn't learn any second languages as a child (research has shown that children who learn multiple languages will have an easier time learning new languages after adulthood, while those who remained uni-lingual throughout childhood find the "after-12" barrier much more difficult to overcome).

On top of that, anglophones get very little exposure or need for other languages because of the status of English as the global lingua franca. When we travel, everyone generally speaks to us in English, all the media we consume is all in English, all the people we interact with all speak English, etc... This is unlike people who speak other languages, who generally will have some degree of natural English exposure or at the very least, some necessity of other-language exposure in general. (ie. a francophone who travels around the world is far less likely to find people able to speak French, so to some extent they'll be forced to use English as an intermediary language or pick up a phrasebook, which gives them some practice in multilingualism.. whereas an anglophone will just expect everyone to speak to them in English and it generally works if they stick to the more touristy areas--this is true even in countries like China and Hungary where overall English fluency is low).

Even in Europe, anglophones (living in the UK and Ireland) are far less likely to learn second languages than continental Europeans.

It's certainly possible for a 40 year unilingual anglophone to learn French but the amount of time and effort required would be huge.. especially given that they can get a job literally anywhere else and not have to ever worry about putting in said time and effort.

The federal language requirements are a big part of the federal government's inefficiency and general bureaucratic incompetence, IMO, because they effectively shut out the majority of Ottawa-Gatineau's workforce from wanting to work there thus severely limiting availability of talent (note: I'm not saying there aren't talented francophones and bilinguals.. it's just that they only make up a fraction of the population, so the chance that the "best talent" is among that group is simply mathematically smaller). The feds talk a lot about the things they have to do to attract better talent.. well giving an actual career path for unilingual anglos would be one of the biggest ways to do this. Separating the departments linguistically like was proposed in Laurendeau-Dunton is the best way to do this without being unfair to francophones.

As far as I know, the fed has no difficulty with recruitment, nor is there any reason to think that unilingual individuals are somehow better qualified for public service positions that bilingual individuals. In my 30 years of public service experience, I can't say I came across any case where bilingualism contributed in some fashion to incompetence.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

As far as I know, the fed has no difficulty with recruitment, nor is there any reason to think that unilingual individuals are somehow better qualified for public service positions that bilingual individuals. In my 30 years of public service experience, I can't say I came across any case where bilingualism contributed in some fashion to incompetence.

I agree. The one impact I see of bilingualism is less diversity (geographically and ethnically) as the Ottawa-Montreal corridor seems to dominate.

[Marshsparrow]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I agree. The one impact I see of bilingualism is less diversity (geographically and ethnically) as the Ottawa-Montreal corridor seems to dominate.

I'm not certain where that info comes from - when you ask people in Ottawa where they are from you are hard pressed to find somebody that was actually born here, grew up here and now lives here - most are from elsewhere. On my team of 30 they are all from various geographical locations.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

As far as I know, the fed has no difficulty with recruitment, nor is there any reason to think that unilingual individuals are somehow better qualified for public service positions that bilingual individuals. In my 30 years of public service experience, I can't say I came across any case where bilingualism contributed in some fashion to incompetence.

You're shrinking your recruitment base by excluding 83 percent of the national population (and half the local population) from most jobs.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You're shrinking your recruitment base by excluding 83 percent of the national population (and half the local population) from most jobs.

That's assuming that it's impossible for the unilingual anglophones that are in that 83% (there are also unilingual francophones in there) to learn French. Which would be an incorrect assumption.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

You're shrinking your recruitment base by excluding 83 percent of the national population (and half the local population) from most jobs.

"Most jobs"? Half of the public service is located outside of Ottawa, and the vast majority of those jobs are not bilingual. In my organization in Ottawa ( a Crown corp), a good 40-50% of the jobs, including a majority of the professional and technical jobs, are not bilingual. And for those that are bilingual, a majority are at a B level, which is attainable for most anglophones (particularly given that training will be included any time there are recruitment issues). Bilingualism is a job skill that can be acquired just like any other.

This idea that anglophones are excluded from most jobs is not factual.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by phil235

"Most jobs"? Half of the public service is located outside of Ottawa, and the vast majority of those jobs are not bilingual. In my organization in Ottawa ( a Crown corp), a good 40-50% of the jobs, including a majority of the professional and technical jobs, are not bilingual. And for those that are bilingual, a majority are at a B level, which is attainable for most anglophones (particularly given that training will be included any time there are recruitment issues). Bilingualism is a job skill that can be acquired just like any other.

This idea that anglophones are excluded from most jobs is not factual.

It's also IMO false to claim that the federal public service has trouble recruiting good people, or that it has trouble recruiting people in general.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by phil235

"Most jobs"? Half of the public service is located outside of Ottawa, and the vast majority of those jobs are not bilingual. In my organization in Ottawa ( a Crown corp), a good 40-50% of the jobs, including a majority of the professional and technical jobs, are not bilingual. And for those that are bilingual, a majority are at a B level, which is attainable for most anglophones (particularly given that training will be included any time there are recruitment issues). Bilingualism is a job skill that can be acquired just like any other.

This idea that anglophones are excluded from most jobs is not factual.

If the goal of an anglophone is rise to management, there is a barrier. As I pointed out in the previous post, this applies to professional and technical jobs as well.

There is a perception (rightly or wrongly) amongst the Anglophone Ottawa community that the public service is full of barriers. I have also observed that the culture is totally different than the private sector. Then add the recent Phoenix fiasco.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's also IMO false to claim that the federal public service has trouble recruiting good people, or that it has trouble recruiting people in general.

It's not the case of being unable to hire good people, its that the process is so bloody long and laborious that many people give up waiting.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

It's not the case of being unable to hire good people, its that the process is so bloody long and laborious that many people give up waiting.

Agreed, but this is unrelated to the language requirements of some positions.