Lawyer questions officer’s exam scores
A Windsor police officer who launched a human rights complaint alleging she was passed over for advancement because she’s a woman faced a barrage of questions Friday about “vague answers” and alleged “poor” performance on failed promotion exams.
In an often argumentative exchange, Windsor Police Service lawyer Suzanne Porter repeatedly pointed out that Staff Sgt. Christine Bissonnette finished last on the promotion lists in 2015 and 2016.
“Total score, you ranked last in the competition. Correct?” Porter asked Bissonnette during a cross-examination.
The human rights tribunal, which resumed this week, has being continuing off and on since early 2018. Bissonnette, currently on leave, filed the human rights complaint after she failed to be promoted to inspector in 2015 and 2016. She has argued she is just as qualified as the men who were promoted past her, and that “systemic discrimination” is keeping her down.
Windsor police Chief Pam Mizuno, who was promoted over Bissonnette, sat in on the hearing on Friday.
Bissonnette, who was hired as a cadet in 1987, previously said male officers were hand-picked by higher-ups for specialized training that made them eligible to sit on panels rating candidates for promotion.
She argued the training gave those officers insider knowledge that helped them succeed when they competed for their own promotions.
Porter put it to Bissonnette Friday that the competencies the police service focused on for the promotions were made available to all candidates wishing to compete.
“Yes,” Bissonnette responded. “I’ve answered that question several times.”
Porter also pointed out that other candidates improved their scores each time they applied for a promotion, while Bissonnette did not. “Individuals who competed in the process more than once would appear to improve their scores from one to the next,” said Porter. “Other than you.”
Bissonnette, who has previously argued it was discrimination and not her skill set or test answers that prevented her promotion, responded with: “Correct.”
Porter also frequently referred to negative feedback from panel members deciding the promotions. She said Bissonnette received low scores on oral and written answers for “lacking detail,” and some of Bissonnette’s answers were “poorly written,” “vague” and had “little substance.”
Porter suggested to the officer her answers “did not meet the target level.”
“I disagree,” said Bissonnette.