People talking

back to Jutta's Blog main page

the old rink clubhouse (Jane LowBeer)

I’m getting lots of letters (thank you!) and not a few of them worry about how this rink dustup is affecting me (i.e. distress level). And also there’s often a second question: “how can I help?”

I have a suggestion for the second question: one way to help fix things is to talk to the rink staff directly (read down for the suggested “celos approach”). But to the first question: I’m not distressed. I don’t like being insulted, but over the years I’ve sometimes had the other extreme – I have a basketful of medals and pins and a shopping bag of gold-print official thank you certificates. More to the point, all those recent notes of support have taken much of the edge off these surprising rink events -- not to mention the letters to Councillor Bravo that I was cc’d on.

Re how to help:

The question of whether city management will address the actions of their rink staff is still very much up in the air at the moment.

The inquiry or investigation:

The councillor’s form letter says there can be no meeting or even a specific response from her while there's an active workplace investigation. That’s what she’s been told by city management. But at this moment, despite the city’s legalistic wordings of the need for “confidentiality,” it appears that there is no inquiry or investigation. Up to now, Parks and Rec’s management has chosen to treat this as a workplace harassment and violence “alleged” incident, caused by me. Their investigative team sent me copies of their human rights, harassment and violence policies, which are very long (linked here and here if you want to read more). And then they insisted on their choice of Metro Hall as a meeting location, which doesn’t work for me, so I had to decline.

There is also no ongoing police inquiry, as far as I know. I was told at Fourteen Division that the officers who issued me a verbal trespass order -- without even inquiring of me about what happened -- can make that ban stick for a lifetime. So there appears to be nothing more happening there -- so far, although this specific police power might benefit from a closer look by somebody.

According to legally-minded park friends, there is no legal reason to stop park friends from talking openly and searchingly about the situation. And the most direct place, to start, is perhaps by talking to those rink staff involved.

Nils Christie and “Conflict as Property”

The “celos approach” in a case of conflict is based partly on a widely cited article published in the British Journal of Criminology almost 50 years ago, by Norwegian criminologist Nils Christie. It’s called “Conflict as Property.” Christie proposed that open and searching discussion of a conflict among the people locally affected is a precious form of a community’s property. Neighbours need to work things out, and for that you need practice.

In this case, Prof. Christie (who visited Dufferin Grove several times and also did a seminar with frontline park staff once) would say that when you move conflicts to officials downtown, that “steals” the conflict from where it might be resolved among the people directly affected. Same problem if you hire a certified expert to come in and shape the discussion(s).

Jordan and Justin’s action actually did Dufferin Grove park a favour by shining a light on the larger issues that led to the conflict – issues that need to be addressed by the local community. (For example: the effect of the city’s youth employment practices on this neighbourhood public space, and the missed community potential of the renovated rink building.)

Jutta, Isabel and Federico talking at a "rink picnic" before the ban

People talking

So, to any of you who have asked “how can I help?”: you may want to go to the rink and look for the rink guards for a conversation. I don’t mean a shouting match – getting mad won’t help (when does it ever?). Jordan and Justin were the two rink guard “players” on Feb.12, but there were about another five young staff who took part in the power games over the two weeks before Feb.12. As one of the Zamboni drivers told me, “those guys are just trying to wind you up.” It’s a youthful experiment with power, to see if you can get a grownup mad. But talking while being mad blocks insight, or at the least, it blocks a short moment when rink staff can get a glimpse of a resolute adult saying “that was not a good idea,” and leaving it at that.

Of course this situation could not have developed as it did, with the police coming to my house with their ban, without the role of the community recreation programmer (CRP). Adam Tyzler is familiar to rink users as the person whom you mainly see doing his programming activities in his office at the rink building. It would be good for him to turn away from the computer and talk to (friendly) people about what happened.

Beyond that, the CRP’s supervisor Michelle Siriani turned down my request, the day before my ban, to get together a few of us with the rink staff and herself, to talk about the situation.

The supervisor's NO to my request for a direct meeting to work things out is patterned on the current Parks and Rec staff privacy policy – all conflicts, including even between coworkers, are to be addressed only by going up the ladder.

Some park friends have talked to Michelle about my ban already, and it sounds like she listened. Good -- but the low level of rink guard supervision by both the CRP and the supervisor also need to be remedied, and that means practical talk, involving park friends and staff together, about what might work better.

Everybody can help.