Veterinarians win discrimination case
B.C. tribunal orders college to compensate 13 India-born vets over racist treatment
The B.C. Veterinary Medical Association “engaged in systemic discrimination” against IndoCanadian vets associated with discount clinics, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has concluded.
Tribunal member Judy Parrack found that the association — which became the College of Veterinarians of B.C. in 2010 — “tolerated and facilitated the discussion of wide-ranging and race-based allegations” about Indo-Canadian vets. The case dragged on for more than a decade.
She ordered the association to end the discriminatory practices and to pay 13 vets born and trained in India $2,000 to $35,000 apiece plus interest for “injury to dignity, feelings and self- respect,” plus more than $45,000 in total for various claims of lost wages and expenses.
The governing body is also ordered to review certain disciplinary complaint files cited in the case, post an anti-discrimination policy on its website and provide a one-day training program for staff, contractors, volunteers and various committee members targeting racial discrimination.
Hakam Bhullar, the owner of Atlas Vet Clinic in Vancouver, was awarded $30,000. He said Friday that he finally feels vindicated but that the case took a heavy financial and personal toll. He estimates the vets put $1.7 million into fighting the case.
“I wasn’t fighting for money, I was fighting for justice,” he said in an interview. “You don’t know the hell I’ve lived through and continue to live through.”
He asserted that the discrimination was based not just on Indo-Canadian vets charging less, but where they are from.
Bhullar said he’s noticed no improvement in the situation and is asking the B.C. government to take over the “old boys’ club” — the College of Veterinarians of B.C.
College president Nick Shaw could not be reached Friday for comment. No one at the Ministry of Agriculture was available to comment, either.
The vets had sought $60,000 for Bhullar “due to the impact on him of being singled out and targeted by the BCVMA” as the ringleader.
Bhullar did not provide documentation on lost income “as a result of having his registration erased” by the governing body from December 2009 to March 2011. He testified he “reduced the number of clinics that he was opening and focused more on his real estate business.”
Pavitar Bajwa received the largest compensation at $35,000. He testified he worried the governing body might close his practice and was unable to take his son to India for a visit, fearing a surprise inspection of his facility.
“He does not make any decisions to buy or sell property as he is always concerned that he will lose his licence,” according to the 485-page decision. Bajwa also testified that “being called one of Dr. Bhullar’s loyal lieutenants made him feel like he was in a war with the BCVMA, which was stressful.”
The human rights hearing heard tape recordings of Robert Ashburner, former chairman of the association’s conduct review committee, made without his knowledge. He made inappropriate remarks, “such as his comment about only half of the veterinarians from the Punjab being decent people, the negative commentary about the education system in the Punjab, and that Dr. Bhullar, even if not licensed, would hire other incompetents, which the evidence had shown were IndoCanadian veterinarians.”
Instead of conducting a proper investigation into the recordings and Ashburner, the association assumed that Bhullar and others had “lied and/or manipulated the recording,” Parrack found.
Ashburner had been speaking to Heather Pendragon, who used to work with Bhullar in a mobile vet clinic and taped the phone conversation.
“A poisoned relationship” developed between the two parties, with the association accusing the Indo-Canadian vets of “playing the race card,” the decision continues. “The BCVMA was closed to the possibility that racial stereotyping (conscious or not) was at play.”
Parrack found that the association’s stereotyping included the “unfounded, negative and generalized view of the low- cost services being provided” by Indo-Canadian vets.
She also noted that Bhullar in his testimony about disciplinary complaints against him often failed to answer questions directly. “It was an unfortunate approach” that made him “appear unco-operative and obstructionist,” she said.
Parrack said the association’s English proficiency requirements were “largely unattainable” by the Indo-Canadian vets and “higher than that selected by other professional associations, though the BCVMA incorrectly and repeatedly asserted otherwise, despite being advised of the error.”
The governing body also selected Indo-Canadian clinics for unscheduled inspections based on “unsubstantiated rumours and anecdotal complaints” about their practices. Only one facility owned by a Caucasian veterinarian was listed for an unscheduled inspection.
Parrack criticized the association for failing to notify Indo- Canadian vets of a complaint until the investigation was underway or finished, alleging in numerous cases that they falsified their medical records, assuming their information was less credible than others, and appointing investigators who had already formed the view that Bhullar and others “were dishonest and possibly ungovernable.”
She added that the association “generally argued that some of the complainants’ witnesses lied when giving evidence before this tribunal. I have dealt with this issue above, and for the most part, I have disagreed.”
Various human rights complaints were filed starting in 2004 and were combined to become one case in 2005.
I wasn’t fighting for money, I was fighting for justice. You don’t know the hell I’ve lived through and continue to live through.
HAKAM BHULLAR
VETERINARIAN