top of page
Protected Grounds
The difference between unintentional discrimination and a defensible operation.
What We Are Doing Well
We set up camp and living spaces with care, and we are confident we get this right. We plan layouts with comfort and dignity in mind, and we pay attention to privacy around sleeping areas and shared facilities. When issues come up in camp, we address them quickly and make adjustments so everyone can rest and reset. Our crews know camp is run thoughtfully and that matters in long stretches away from home.
Why This Matters To Us
We know the rest of our decisions need to be just as steady. When work assignments and discipline are handled the same way every time, crews trust the call and focus on production. When opportunity moves based on the job, not on who asks loudest or who a supervisor knows best, people stick around and step up. Getting this right strengthens safety, morale, and our reputation as a fair outfit.
Our Standard
Our calls on work assignments, training, and promotions are based on the requirements of the job and proven performance, not on personal characteristics or protected grounds. We match tasks to skills, certifications, readiness, and safety, and we make the reasons clear. Camp and housing are set up for comfort, privacy, and dignity for everyone. Performance issues and complaints are handled with the same steps every time: we listen, set expectations, and record what was agreed. Supervisors are expected to apply this standard consistently across crews.
Where We Are Building
We have been inconsistent in how similar situations are handled from one supervisor to the next, and we do not always write down why a call was made. Tightening this up will cut down on second guessing, keep stories straight between shifts, and make handovers cleaner.
At times our decisions lean on habit or assumptions instead of the actual requirements of the role. Clarifying the criteria for each assignment will help us match people to work faster and avoid missed potential.
Opportunity does not always move the same way across crews. Aligning how we hand out higher responsibility tasks, training spots, and extra hours will build trust across the camp and develop more leads for next season.
Our Next Steps
- Set up a simple decision log for supervisors to note key calls on assignments, discipline, and housing, plus the reason tied to job requirements.
- Hold a short supervisor huddle at the start of each shift to line up on criteria for the day’s assignments and any planned rotations.
- Post a rotation tracker for higher responsibility tasks, training spots, and extra hours so we can see at a glance who is up next.
- Do a mid season check on three decisions per supervisor to confirm the reasons are consistent and tied to the work, then share what we learn at the weekly ops meeting.
- Use one standard one page form for performance issues and complaints, fill it out every time, and store it in the crew binder and shared drive.
Discrimination in Hiring
What fair hiring actually looks like in a fast-moving, referral-driven industry.
What We Are Doing Well
We move fast when folks reach out, and we keep first contact simple and straight. We lean on referrals and supervisor read to spot solid hands with real field experience. We follow up quickly and give clear next steps so candidates are not left guessing. We aim to treat people with respect and be straight about the work and the season ahead.
Why This Matters To Us
We want a hiring process we can stand behind in busy season so good people know where they stand and we can explain our calls. Clear job requirements and job‑focused conversations help us bring on people who can do the work safely and well, including folks from the communities we work in. Keeping the process the same across supervisors prevents mixed messages and keeps it fair. Handling health disclosures properly protects the worker and the crew, and helps us keep experienced hands when adjustments are possible.
Our Standard
Our hiring looks for proven reliability, safe work habits, and the functional ability to meet the role's physical and operational demands. We share the same role requirements with every candidate, then use a common set of job‑focused questions to check skills, fitness for the terrain and hours, and readiness for camp and travel. We score answers against the requirements and keep short notes so our decisions are clear and consistent across supervisors. If a health condition or limitation is raised, we keep the discussion on what tasks are essential and what adjustments are possible, and loop in management as needed to make a call that keeps the crew safe. Offers are made only when the candidate meets the requirements we have laid out.
Where We Are Building
We have not written out the physical and operational demands for each role, and we are not sharing the same description with every candidate. Without that, it is too easy to make calls based on gut feel, and new hires can be surprised by the pace, terrain, or camp setup.
Our hiring conversations can drift into personal territory, and we lack a steady way to handle health disclosures or talk about limitations. Keeping questions tied to the work and asking about functional ability and possible adjustments, not personal details, is what protects privacy and still lets us make a safe, fair call.
Our process is not consistent across supervisors, and hiring decisions are not always explained back to the job requirements. That inconsistency creates mixed messages for candidates and can open us up to avoidable risk when decisions are questioned.
Our Next Steps
- Draft one-page role requirement cards for our key roles with physical demands, hours, travel, camp setup, terrain, and ticket requirements, and hand the same card to every candidate.
- Build a short interview sheet with job-focused questions that test functional ability for the role, and use it for every hire.
- Set up a simple 0–3 scoring grid tied to the role requirements and keep notes in a shared folder or paper forms so decisions can be explained.
- Run a 30-minute tailgate with supervisors before hiring push to walk through the requirement cards, question sheet, and scoring so we hire the same way.
- Create a short script for health disclosure talks, including who to loop in and how to discuss essential tasks and possible adjustments, and keep it in the hiring kit.
Duty to Accommodate
Balancing fairness to the individual with the realities of the operation.
What We Are Doing Well
We have a clear process to evaluate reasonable adjustments that keep a worker on the essential duties. We document every accommodation conversation, the options we tried, and the final call so supervisors and owners have the same record. When a request cannot be reasonably implemented, we can explain the safety or operational limits and communicate that respectfully. This consistency helps crews understand the why behind decisions.
Why This Matters To Us
We want to keep good planters and operators on our crews, and that depends on catching accommodation issues early and talking them through without drama. Recognizing when accommodation applies, not just obvious injuries, keeps us from missing chances to keep someone productive and safe. Building more open, collaborative conversations means workers raise limits sooner and supervisors handle tough calls with confidence. That is how we run a fair camp and make decisions we can stand behind.
Our Standard
When a limitation affecting work comes up, we treat it as an accommodation conversation and start with the essential duties and safety requirements of the role. We listen to the worker, gather the facts, and explore reasonable options that could keep them performing the core tasks without creating new safety risks or undue hardship. We use our standard form to record what we discussed, what was tried, and the decision, including a check-in date if the plan is temporary. If a request is not workable, we explain the limits clearly and respectfully and note what alternatives were considered. We keep communication steady so the crew knows the plan and who is responsible for follow up.
Where We Are Building
We need to get better at recognizing when a situation calls for accommodation, not just when there is a visible injury. Family status, pregnancy, religion, and disability that is not obvious can also trigger the duty to accommodate, and missing those signs leads to uneven decisions and lost workers we could have kept.
Our conversations need more openness. If workers do not feel comfortable raising limits or asking for support, we get surprised in the block and end up making rushed calls. A more collaborative tone helps surface issues early and keeps trust high across crews.
Our Next Steps
- Run a pre-season tailgate that spells out what accommodation covers in BC and give field examples beyond injuries, like family status, pregnancy, religious observance, and mental health.
- Issue a one-page laminated cheat sheet for supervisors: protected grounds on one side, essential duties and safety limits on the other, plus who to phone for a second opinion.
- Build a standing line into daily safety meetings: invite workers to flag limits privately right after the meeting or by text to the supervisor.
- Do a 30-minute practice at the next supervisors' meeting to role-play an accommodation chat: ask open questions, outline essential duties, and explain limits respectfully.
- After any accommodation decision, hold a quick debrief the same week to review what signs were present and whether it should be treated as accommodation next time.
Duty to Prevent
Building the conditions where problems are less likely to occur — and easier to address when they do.
What We Are Doing Well
Why This Matters To Us
Our Standard
Where We Are Building
Our Next Steps
Duty to Recognize
Bringing the same situational awareness you apply to physical risk into how you read your crew.
What We Are Doing Well
We keep close tabs on crew dynamics and pick up when something shifts enough to warrant a closer look. Our supervisors read more than production numbers, they notice tone on the block, who is getting sidelined, and when someone might need an accommodation. We catch early signals across the board, not just obvious harassment, including uneven treatment and tension building under the surface. Day to day we stay present on the ground and check in so concerns get noticed early.
Why This Matters To Us
When we catch small problems early, we protect crew trust and keep the day moving. Letting issues simmer costs time, erodes relationships, and can drag production and safety down. A tight operation depends on leaders paying attention before a complaint lands, so we can sort things out while they are still simple. That is how we keep contracts on track and our people wanting to come back.
Our Standard
Our standard is to stay attuned to what is happening on our crews at all times and to act the moment a concern comes to our attention, even if it is informal or second hand. When a leader notices a shift or hears a concern, they slow down, ask basic clarifying questions, make sure people are safe, and decide whether to separate folks while it gets looked at. They note what they saw or heard and bring it to someone with the authority to act the same day. We do not wait for a formal complaint to start responding. If a concern involves the supervisor, it is escalated off the crew to management outside that reporting line.
Where We Are Building
Escalation when the leader is involved: We need a clearer path for concerns that name the supervisor. Right now it can depend on who is around or who someone trusts in the moment, which risks delays and mixed messages. Tightening this up matters because people will only raise issues if they know it will reach someone who can act and not circle back to the person they are worried about.
Legal trigger point: Some leaders are unsure exactly when the duty to respond kicks in on informal information. That uncertainty can lead to waiting until things are blatant or written down, which lets problems grow and makes fixes harder. We want everyone aligned that awareness means action, so small signals get handled before they become crew problems.
Our Next Steps
- We post a simple escalation map in crummies, lunch tents, and the cook shack with names and phone numbers of off-crew contacts.
- We assign an off-crew contact for each camp and announce it at kickoff tailgates and over the radio on day one.
- We run a 30 minute scenario drill with crew bosses on what to do when they hear an informal concern, including when the boss is the subject.
- We start a pocket-sized log for supervisors to jot date, time, what they saw or heard, and who they passed it to, so nothing gets lost.
- We add a one-line reminder to daily tailgates: if something feels off, say it, and leaders will act the same day.
Duty to Respond
What good response looks like when it matters most.
What We Are Doing Well
We handle similar concerns at a similar level across our supervisors and crews, and our people recognize that as fair. We also have a clear path for raising a concern about a supervisor that reaches someone with the authority to act. We take consistency seriously and make decisions without favoritism. That steadiness helps crews stay focused on the work.
Why This Matters To Us
Quick, solid first steps build trust and keep small problems from turning into big ones. When we act early and know what protective moves are on the table, we protect people, production, and camp life. A clear investigation and clean follow through let us stand behind our decisions and show our work if questions come up later. Our leaders need simple, confident steps so they are not guessing under pressure.
Our Standard
When a concern is raised, we stop, listen, and thank the person. The on site supervisor notes the basics: who, what, where, and when, and checks for any immediate risk to safety, dignity, or camp conditions. If there is risk, the supervisor can take protective steps right away, such as separating people, pausing the task, reassigning work, or getting someone back to camp, and then calls the project manager or owner the same shift to confirm the plan. Within 24 hours the supervisor briefs the project manager or designated investigator, who decides if it is a formal investigation, leads the fact finding, and oversees documentation. We record actions and outcomes, and we close the loop with those involved so they know what will happen next and when they will hear back.
Where We Are Building
First response is not consistent. We have not set a common first five minutes play, which leads to uneven starts and can leave a person feeling brushed off.
We hesitate on early action. We sometimes wait when the issue is clear, which adds risk and sends the wrong message about our standards.
Protective authority is unclear. It is not obvious who can separate people, pause a block, or move someone to camp, which slows us down when a fast call is needed.
Our investigation and follow through need tightening. Steps, documentation, and how we share outcomes are not consistent, which weakens our files and makes it harder to show what we did and why.
Our Next Steps
- Issue a pocket first response card for leads with the first five steps and who to call, and hand it out at kickoff.
- Run a 30 minute tailgate with all supervisors on early action triggers using two recent scenarios from our own work.
- List the person with protective call authority on each crew’s daily ops sheet and post the after hours contact chain beside the sat phone.
- Adopt a simple 24 hour concern log and require a same day brief to the project manager or owner on every new concern.
- Build a lightweight investigation kit with a one page form, photo log, decision record, and a close out script, and do one tabletop practice per crew.
bottom of page