10e8c6ae-e75e-4a58-8b38-e15c58b51dda

Protected Grounds

The difference between unintentional discrimination and a defensible operation.

Protected Grounds of Discrimination Summary

PART 1 — WHAT WE'RE DOING WELL We make our calls based on what the job requires. We match people to work based on skills, training, and capacity, not assumptions about who they are. Our supervisors talk in terms of role needs and production goals when setting assignments. That anchor to job requirements is something our crew recognizes. PART 2 — WHY THIS MATTERS TO US When opportunity flows unevenly or camp setups miss dignity and comfort, it shows up in morale, teamwork, and output. People notice patterns and will leave or disengage if they feel decisions depend on who you are or who your supervisor is. Consistent, transparent decisions help us move faster with less friction and earn trust that keeps good people coming back. Handling issues the same way across the board reduces second-guessing and keeps the crew focused on the work. PART 3 — OUR STANDARD We make decisions on work assignments, opportunity, housing, and discipline based on job requirements, operational needs, skills, performance, and readiness. Protected personal characteristics—like gender, race, age, religion, disability, family status, sexual orientation, or any other irrelevant personal trait—are never part of our decision-making. Opportunities to learn, lead, or take on better work move through the crew by clear role criteria and are applied the same across supervisors. Camp and living arrangements are set up to support rest and dignity for everyone, with privacy and comfort treated as part of safety and productivity. Similar situations are handled in the same way, reasons are explained, and we keep clear notes on the decision. PART 4 — WHERE WE'RE BUILDING Right now, we don't always handle similar situations the same way, and we don't always write down how we got to a call. That leaves room for mixed messages between supervisors and makes it harder for us to stand behind decisions when questions come up. Getting steadier here will keep the crew's focus on production instead of guessing at how things are decided. We see that the path to stepping up or getting the best work isn't equally clear across supervisors. When patterns depend on who you work under, people read it as favouritism and it slows development and bench strength. Tightening up how opportunity moves will help us grow leaders in every camp and keep solid hands with us longer. Our camp and housing setups are mostly built around logistics, and we haven't given enough weight to privacy, comfort, and dignity for everyone. When spaces are cramped, noisy, or awkward for some crew members to use, people don't recover well and it shows in mood, safety, and pace the next day. Treating camp design as part of doing good work will pay back in rest, retention, and our name in the industry.

Discrimination in Hiring

What fair hiring actually looks like in a fast-moving, referral-driven industry.

Discrimination in Hiring Summary

PART 1 — WHAT WE'RE DOING WELL We run a consistent, structured hiring process from first contact to offer, and our supervisors follow the same steps. Our interviews stay focused on functional ability and clear job requirements, not personal territory. We define and share the physical and operational demands of each role with every candidate so expectations are clear. Our leaders handle health disclosures respectfully and consistently, and we can explain every hiring decision based on the role’s requirements. PART 2 — WHY THIS MATTERS TO US We know that fair, consistent hiring brings in the right people and sets them up to succeed. When we stick to clear requirements and job-focused conversations, we avoid bias, build trust, and earn a stronger reputation in the communities we work in. Decisions tied to the work are decisions we can stand behind with our crews and our clients. This helps us keep good people and run a solid, safe operation. PART 3 — OUR STANDARD We define the duties, physical demands, and working conditions of each role up front and share them the same way with every applicant. We look for proven reliability, a safety mindset, teamwork, and the functional ability to meet the job’s demands. We assess these through job-related questions and, where appropriate, practical checks of functional ability; we do not ask about personal life or other non-job topics. Every supervisor follows the same steps and documents the decision based on the stated requirements. If someone shares a health condition, we focus on what accommodations may allow them to meet the requirements and keep the conversation respectful and consistent. PART 4 — WHERE WE'RE BUILDING All checklist items are in place and working well; we’ll keep at it and revisit our process next season to make sure it still fits the work and our crews.

Duty to Accommodate

Balancing fairness to the individual with the realities of the operation.

Duty to Accommodate Summary

WHAT WE'RE DOING WELL We lean toward finding what's possible when someone brings up a limitation. We start from a place of listening and we balance the worker’s needs with safety and production. When something can’t be done, we focus on explaining the limits clearly and respectfully. We aim to keep people on the essentials where we can and make note of what we discussed so everyone stays aligned. WHY THIS MATTERS TO US This matters to us because steady, respectful accommodation conversations help us keep good workers on the crew and finish strong. When we spot situations early, explore options consistently, and record what we decide, supervisors aren’t guessing and workers know where they stand. Being able to explain why we can or can’t make an adjustment keeps trust even when the answer is no. It lines up with how we want to operate: fair, safe, and focused on getting the work done. OUR STANDARD We recognize accommodation needs when a worker raises a health, injury, disability, family status, pregnancy, religious, or similar limitation that affects their duties. We meet privately, listen to what’s going on, and review the essential duties of the role to see what adjustments could work—task changes, schedule tweaks, gear or vehicle changes, buddying, different blocks, or temporary productivity targets. We weigh safety, crew impact, contract timelines, costs, and whether the adjustment is temporary or longer term. If something workable is identified, we try it with check-ins; if it can’t be done safely or would put an unreasonable load on the operation, we explain the limit and why. We document what was raised, options considered, the decision, and the next check-in, and we keep details confidential except for those who need to know to implement it. WHERE WE'RE BUILDING We need to sharpen how we recognize when accommodation applies beyond obvious physical injuries. Things like family status pressures or health conditions that show up as fatigue or availability can trigger a conversation too. Getting better here helps us catch issues early, avoid mixed messages, and support people before small problems turn into bigger ones on the block. Our process for exploring what’s possible and documenting decisions isn’t consistent across supervisors. Some of us keep notes and others rely on memory, which makes it hard to be fair and to explain our calls the same way across crews. Tightening this up helps us make steadier decisions, show our reasoning if asked, and keep work moving without confusion. We also want to improve the conversations themselves and how we explain limits. Leaders need to approach these talks with curiosity and respect, and be able to say no — when that’s the right call — in a way that protects safety and relationships. That matters for morale in tough stretches, and it helps us keep production steady without burning people out.

Duty to Prevent

Building the conditions where problems are less likely to occur — and easier to address when they do.

Duty to Prevent Summary

PART 1 — WHAT WE'RE DOING WELL We make our supervisors the reporting point and ask people to bring things forward early. We talk about setting the standard and making it safe to speak up, not waiting for a formal complaint. When someone raises a concern, we listen and try to deal with it straight and without drama. Our aim is a crew that can bring issues to their lead and be heard. PART 2 — WHY THIS MATTERS TO US We know that clear expectations and a known path to raise concerns keep small issues from turning into big problems in the bush. When supervisors set the right tone, crews trust them, morale holds, and production stays steady. When the pathway isn’t clear or consistent, people hesitate, problems hide, and safety and quality take a hit. Getting this right means fewer surprises, faster course corrections, and a crew that looks out for each other. PART 3 — OUR STANDARD Our standard is simple: we treat each other with respect, and there’s no room for harassment, bullying, or discrimination. Supervisors set the tone by being calm, fair, and consistent, keeping their door open, and listening first. If you have a concern, bring it to your direct supervisor or another designated reporting point; you will be listened to, taken seriously, and we will follow up and close the loop. We will keep your information as private as we can, we won’t tolerate retaliation, and we’ll explain the next steps and timelines. These expectations are stated at the start of the season and reinforced on crew talks so everyone knows where the line is and how to speak up. PART 4 — WHERE WE'RE BUILDING We don’t yet have clearly defined, shared behavioural standards laid out for every worker at season start. That leaves room for different interpretations between crews and camps, which can lead to mixed messages and friction. Getting this clear helps everyone know the line and back each other up. We haven’t spelled out a simple reporting pathway that every worker can name, including what happens after they speak up. Without that, people may sit on issues or try to work around them, and problems get bigger than they need to be. A known path keeps concerns moving to the right place early. Our supervisors aren’t yet consistent in modeling the respectful tone and steady communication that makes people feel safe to speak. Inconsistency makes workers guess, which buries information we need to manage risk and quality. A steady tone from leaders keeps trust high and work focused. We don’t have written policies or proof that our leaders have been trained on respectful conduct and how to handle concerns. Without that foundation, the standard can slip under pressure or change person to person. Having it documented and trained keeps our approach consistent across supervisors, camps, and shifts.

Duty to Recognize

Bringing the same situational awareness you apply to physical risk into how you read your crew.

Duty to Recognize Summary

PART 1 — WHAT WE'RE DOING WELL We actively watch crew dynamics on the block, in trucks, and in camp, and our supervisors notice when the tone or relationships shift. We look beyond obvious harassment to pick up on uneven treatment, emerging accommodation needs, and tension that’s building under the surface. One-on-ones and quick check-ins are routine, and we pay attention to small tells like pairing changes, jokes that land wrong, or a dip in engagement. If a concern brushes up against a supervisor, there’s a clear path around them to someone with authority, and we act as soon as something hits our radar, even informally. PART 2 — WHY THIS MATTERS TO US Catching things early keeps our crews steady and prevents small slights or misunderstandings from turning into camp blowups or turnover. Our reputation and schedule depend on handling issues quickly and fairly, so people trust that speaking up won’t get buried or drag on. Staying alert to patterns—not just single incidents—protects safety and production and saves us the cost of re-seating crews or losing contracts. Making sure concerns about leaders move up fast keeps accountability real and shows no one is above the standard. PART 3 — OUR STANDARD We scan the social weather every day—on the line, in the trucks, and back at camp—and flag shifts in mood, inclusion, or fairness. The duty to respond starts the moment any leader becomes aware of a concern in any form: a comment, a rumour, a text, or even body language. When something surfaces, we slow down if needed, check facts, document what we know, and loop in management promptly. If the concern involves the supervisor, it bypasses them and goes straight to management through the posted route that everyone knows. We follow through, communicate what we can to those affected, and make sure the issue is actually resolved. PART 4 — WHERE WE'RE BUILDING All items are in place and working; we’ll revisit this next season to make sure it still holds up.

Duty to Respond

What good response looks like when it matters most.

Duty to Respond Summary

PART 1 — WHAT WE'RE DOING WELL We move fast when a concern comes up, and our supervisors know the first steps that make a worker feel heard and taken seriously. We act early rather than waiting, and we know when immediate protective steps are needed and who has the authority to make those calls. Similar issues get handled at a similar level across our supervisors and crews, and there’s a clear path to raise a concern about a leader if needed. We document, investigate, and follow through so people know what happened and why. PART 2 — WHY THIS MATTERS TO US We run better when the crew trusts that speaking up leads to fair, timely action. Early, consistent responses keep small problems from turning into camp‑wide headaches and let our leaders work with confidence. Clear protective steps and a solid investigation process mean we can stand behind our decisions on safety, conduct, and employment. That’s how we protect people, production, and our reputation in the field. PART 3 — OUR STANDARD When a concern is raised, we stop and listen, thank the person, and note basic facts: who, what, when, where. The supervisor assesses risk and, if needed, takes immediate protective steps on the spot—separating parties, reassigning, pausing work, or arranging safe lodging or transport—and documents the action. The supervisor has authority to make these protective calls and notifies the operations/safety lead the same day; if the supervisor is named, the concern goes directly to the owner/GM or safety lead. We then determine if a formal investigation is required, gather statements, document findings and decisions, and communicate the outcome to those involved. We check back to ensure the fix is holding and there’s no retaliation. PART 4 — WHERE WE'RE BUILDING All items in this area are in place for us right now, and we’ll revisit the standard next season to make sure it still fits what we’re seeing on the ground.