Passed over for promotion, officer claims discrimination
A highly anticipated human rights hearing on alleged racism in the top ranks of the Ottawa police began Tuesday, laying the groundwork for what could be a watershed moment not only for the city force, but also the legacy of its chief.
Insp. Samir Bhatnagar has been repeatedly passed over for promotion, was treated differently than others because of his race and his genuine points of criticism resulted in Chief Charles Bordeleau branding him confrontational and uppity, the human rights tribunal heard.
In a complaint filed to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in November 2017, Bhatnagar, a 27-year veteran officer, claims that he was singled out as a “brownskinned man of East Indian origin.” Bhatnagar’s complaint says he was denied a promotion to superintendent — the third-highest rank in the force — and that he was the subject of differential and disproportionate treatment by Bordeleau and members of the chief ’s senior executive.
The police service (by way of its employer, the Ottawa Police Services Board) has defended itself against the allegations of racism, positing instead that Bhatnagar was denied the promotion because he was openly defiant of Bordeleau and was not suitable for Bordeleau’s group of senior officers.
The hearing formally began Tuesday for one day of evidence, packed with Bhatnagar’s family and dozens of fellow officers of various ranks attending in support, both serving and retired. Bordeleau was not in attendance.
Both sides had agreed to mediation, but could not reach a settlement before Tuesday’s hearing.
Lawyer Paul Champ, representing Bhatnagar, argued Tuesday that the tribunal should be wary of subjective measures like “fit,” “suitability” and “trustworthiness.”
It’s these measures where bias is masked, and that allow “employers to promote individuals who are most like them,” Champ argued.
Bhatnagar alleges that despite excellent performance reviews and having qualified to enter a pool of possible superintendents in 2012 and being described by his peers and supervisors as “one of the best we have” with “full potential to be chief (of police)” he has stalled in his efforts to advance in the organization under Bordeleau’s leadership.
Bhatnagar’s repeated attempts to discuss his treatment with Bordeleau did not amount to much, according to the complaint.
Bhatnagar claims he was routinely avoided, ignored or talked around.
The interactions came to a head in a November 2016 meeting where Bhatnagar expressed to Bordeleau that he felt he was being discriminated against. The reprisals only intensified thereafter, Champ argued.
Candidates of colour, like Bhatnagar, experience disproportionate blame, Champ said. What Bordeleau could have treated as “normal differences of opinion” were instead deemed confrontational or insubordinate, Champ said.
“He sat still as inspector,” while others, who were mostly white and some under police investigation during or near the time of their promotion, passed him by.
As part of his complaint, Bhatnagar received the promotional documents of those who bypassed him in the pool of candidates. Their scores confirmed the rumours and what he had long suspected, Champ told the hearing: that Bhatnagar was the best candidate based on every objective criterion.
It is, however, solely at the chief ’s discretion to promote officers to the rank of superintendent, a lawyer representing the police board (Bordeleau’s employer) argued.
The case isn’t about racism, but is about Bhatnagar’s feeling that it’s unfair he wasn’t promoted despite being qualified, lawyer Jock Climie argued.
Once applicants are interviewed, scored and get into the pool of candidates, it’s the chief’s prerogative to promote whomever he wants into a “trusted inner circle” to carry out his vision or mandate.
The evidence is “overwhelming ” that Bhatnagar’s “negative” views of the chief were well-known, Climie said.
Climie also told the hearing that it makes “perfect sense” for any police chief who is routinely “criticized, attacked, challenged” internally, externally and by the media to surround himself with people who will support him. Those individuals aren’t yes men, but are supportive of the chief’s vision, Climie said.
There is a difference between “challenging” and “undermining,” he argued. The force doesn’t dispute that Bhatnagar is qualified, but said he was passed over because he didn’t support Bordeleau’s vision.
But if that’s the defence, it’s one that aims to justify the denial of the promotion not on the basis of racism, but favouritism, Champ argued. The “unfettered discretion” on promotional decisions is a “recipe for discriminatory decision making,” Champ said.
Indeed, the force’s defence has been a window into the leadership style of a chief.
Former Ottawa police chief and current Sen. Vern White took the stand as Bhatnagar’s first witness. White, Bordeleau’s predecessor, was chief of the Ottawa force from 2007 to 2012.
White told the hearing that Bhatnagar was recognized as a leader throughout the organization.
“He didn’t accept what we’ve always done as being right,” White said. Bhatnagar “never held back if there was a concern” and was “always willing to speak out” in the search for solutions, White said.
The former chief identified Bhatnagar as a possible future deputy chief or even chief back in 2011. He told the hearing he fully expected to see Bhatnagar as a superintendent by now.
While White agreed that he, too, made decisions on superintendent promotions, he didn’t base them solely on scores and would even prevent candidates from entering the pool if he thought the person wasn’t up to the job. He also testified that he never did so based on whether he liked someone.
“I’m sure I’ve promoted people I didn’t like. I’m sure I’ve been promoted by people who didn’t like me,” he said.
Champ then asked him how he would determine whether a candidate would be loyal.
“I didn’t need loyalty,” White said. “The only loyalty I needed was for the organization and community.”
Bhatnagar is seeking a promotion and back pay retroactive to 2012, which is roughly $110,000 in lost income had he been promoted. He’s also seeking that the tribunal order an amendment to Ottawa police promotional policies to restrict the discretion of a chief to promote whomever he’d like to the rank of superintendent.
The hearing is not scheduled to resume until May 2019 — the same month Bordeleau’s contract as chief is set to expire.