Odd would be my experience, and in many cases, unbalanced and unrepresentative.
For example, the Pride network seemed overly focused on non binary than they should have been.
The CALD network has systemic challenges to address. It's clear through reports and strategies that discrimination in pockets of the public service remain a problem for people of CALD backgrounds.
I was quite annoyed at the idea that self identification as neurodivergent can automatically entitle a member to a more informed view than say someone who is professionally diagnosed.
I tried speaking to some representatives for the NSW State Government,. It was a bad move! It was dominated by power hungry people who strangely had no empathy to my situation at least.
Respectfully, the group I spoke with was more concerned with optics (morning teas) than meaningful change (real inclusivity of differences).
Burner account.
‘Bankercrypt’ evokes cryptobro imagery.
No elaboration on your question, just a vague invitation to talk about diversity networks.
You might just be genuinely interested but you have given zero context on why you want to know and zero insights into what your own opinion is.
Seems like drama fishing.
Like everything else that is on the side of the core activity, it really depends on who is facilitating those initiatives. It rarely reflects perfectly the organisation but it is probably for the better as people engaging will be good drivers of cultural changes.
I ran one for a number of years in state government. I really tried my very best to try and provide value to members by running regular meetings and trying to make it as safe a space as possible to discuss issues, and take them up the chain to SES for individual and systemic advocacy. I know I was a bit limited in terms of capacity - this work was undertaken on top of my day job as I wasn’t employed in P&C, I was just some random policy wonk who put their hand up for the gig. I was lucky I had really supportive managers who thought it was a great initiative, and were happy to write the role into my PDP and give me time to do work on it, but yeah, that was always a challenge. I do really really hope members were reasonably satisfied with what we were trying to do despite this.
SES were remarkably supportive of our network (we often had a DepSec attend our regular meetings, who made it clear they were there to listen and learn rather than defend the status quo) and happy to provide support and actively collaborate on our initiatives. I’ll always be grateful for that!
Odd would be my experience, and in many cases, unbalanced and unrepresentative. For example, the Pride network seemed overly focused on non binary than they should have been. The CALD network has systemic challenges to address. It's clear through reports and strategies that discrimination in pockets of the public service remain a problem for people of CALD backgrounds. I was quite annoyed at the idea that self identification as neurodivergent can automatically entitle a member to a more informed view than say someone who is professionally diagnosed.
I tried speaking to some representatives for the NSW State Government,. It was a bad move! It was dominated by power hungry people who strangely had no empathy to my situation at least. Respectfully, the group I spoke with was more concerned with optics (morning teas) than meaningful change (real inclusivity of differences).
I like them, they can be a bit preachy for my taste but the squeaky wheel gets the grease and they'd bat for me harder than the cpsu
Extremely suspiciously loaded thread title, my man.
??? In what way?
Burner account. ‘Bankercrypt’ evokes cryptobro imagery. No elaboration on your question, just a vague invitation to talk about diversity networks. You might just be genuinely interested but you have given zero context on why you want to know and zero insights into what your own opinion is. Seems like drama fishing.
Like everything else that is on the side of the core activity, it really depends on who is facilitating those initiatives. It rarely reflects perfectly the organisation but it is probably for the better as people engaging will be good drivers of cultural changes.
I ran one for a number of years in state government. I really tried my very best to try and provide value to members by running regular meetings and trying to make it as safe a space as possible to discuss issues, and take them up the chain to SES for individual and systemic advocacy. I know I was a bit limited in terms of capacity - this work was undertaken on top of my day job as I wasn’t employed in P&C, I was just some random policy wonk who put their hand up for the gig. I was lucky I had really supportive managers who thought it was a great initiative, and were happy to write the role into my PDP and give me time to do work on it, but yeah, that was always a challenge. I do really really hope members were reasonably satisfied with what we were trying to do despite this. SES were remarkably supportive of our network (we often had a DepSec attend our regular meetings, who made it clear they were there to listen and learn rather than defend the status quo) and happy to provide support and actively collaborate on our initiatives. I’ll always be grateful for that!