In 2020, the Black Class Action Secretariat (BCAS), a non-profit organization dedicated to addressing systemic discrimination against workers across Canada’s public institutions, filed Thompson et al. vs Canada, a federal class action representing 45,000 Black Canadians. The lawsuit seeks to address systemic anti-Black racism in the Public Service of Canada, namely discrimination in the hiring and promotion of Black employees.
After five years of litigation, the Federal Court denied certification of the class action in March 2025. Despite publicly acknowledging the pervasive nature of anti-Black discrimination in the Public Service and settling class actions with other groups in the same sector, the Canadian federal government has refused to recognize the legitimacy of the lawsuit’s claims and has spent over $15 million CAD targeting the BCAS aggressive legal injunctions.
By financing the obstruction of Black public servants from legal channels instead of taking concrete, institutional action against systemic racism, the Government of Canada has once again revealed that its commitment to fighting anti-Black discrimination is superficial and perfunctory. The Canadian federal government’s continued prioritization of public statements over effective policy only leads to further entrenchment of structural racism in the public sector—a pattern mirrored by institutions across the country, including McGill.
Black employees are chronically underrepresented in the Public Service, making up less than two per cent of managerial positions and often being hired in lower-level administrative categories. In the criminal justice system, where Black people are disproportionately targeted through over-policing and incarceration, representation is crucial. A lack of diversity and Black leadership within the Department of Justice and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) shapes outcomes for Black Canadians and further ingrains bias into already discriminatory systems.
To address these gaps, the BCAS lawsuit has demanded several tangible action items: Equitable representation, an external reporting mechanism for harassment and misconduct, financial compensation, and a Black Equity Commission to coordinate recommendations. Injuries amount to $2.5 billion CAD, with the BCAS also requesting that funds be allocated for punitive damages to deter future discrimination.
The Federal Court justified rejecting the lawsuit’s certification by asserting that its claims could risk over-expenditure, despite the government comfortably investing $15,024,452 CAD in legal dues to fight the BCAS. This funding could have been transformative if directed toward the action items identified by the BCAS, or if employed to tackle anti-Black racism in other institutions across Canada, such as the healthcare, education, housing, and child welfare systems. The federal government’s message is clear: Canada would rather invest in silencing legal claims than taking genuine steps to confront anti-Black racism.
Crucially, the lawsuit also demands amending the Employment Equity Act to create a separate category for Black employees distinct from the ‘visible minority’ designation, a term used to identify groups eligible for equity measures. This strategy of demarcation erases complex differences in experiences between racialized groups in Canada, instead choosing to define ‘visible minorities’ in the negative, as “persons other than Indigenous people who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour”—a framing that positions whiteness as the default against which everyone else is defined. By homogenizing all racialized groups into a single umbrella category, this approach neglects how systemic racism targets Black Canadians through distinct mechanisms that lead to disparate inequities.
This pattern of neglect for comprehensive reckoning is not confined to the federal government. Bound by the Employment Equity Act, McGill’s own policies are too shaped by the presence of the ‘visible minority’ designation and its accompanying negligence, with McGill’s commitment to reconciling its history of racism and slavery remaining superficial. Reporting and faculty testimonies continue to document severe underrepresentation of Black professors, hostile workplace environments, systemic discrimination against Black faculty, exclusion from senior leadership, and an over-reliance on Black labour to drive anti-racism efforts.
The BCAS has since appealed the Federal Court’s refusal to certify their class action. The Canadian government, its courts, and institutions like McGill are now confronted with a choice: Continue to rely on empty gestures, or take meaningful action toward fighting anti-Black racism. Institutions must disaggregate ‘visible minority’ data, institute binding hiring and promotion commitments for Black workers and faculty, and create independent mechanisms for reporting anti-Black discrimination. Not statements, not mere recognition, not diversion and distraction—radical, systemic change.
