CDN-NDG borough called toxic workplace
A report made late last year says that CDN-NDG borough is a toxic workplace. The troubles that have plagued their borough hall are not limited to that level – it seems every service run by the borough is dealing with internal dissensions. And the borough director, Stéphane Plante, says he’s been trying to fix it while mayor Sue Montgomery says not enough is being done. The timeline in the first article starts with the election of Montgomery, but do the problems there only date from the start of her administration?
Jack 09:32 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
This from Stephane Plante ,”Je dois vous avouer que c’est extrêmement difficile. Moi, je suis habitué à ces procès d’intentions. ” When ever I hear a debate in french between two public figures I always hear this defense and it’s almost as if the debate or disagreement ends there. Is their anything comparable in english?
Kate 09:59 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
Jack, can you unpack that a bit? I’m not sure how I’d understand “procès d’intentions” in this situation.
walkerp 10:03 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
That is a good one! It really has multiple meanings and seems a great phrase to use when you want to accuse others of behaving badly without being too specific. From what I can gather it means quite a range of bad social/political behaviours: impugning others with having ulterior motives, putting words into people’s mouths, assuming the worst motivations. Quite nice. I’m surprised I haven’t encountered it before.
walkerp 10:04 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
Maybe what Stephen is trying to communicate is that when he is asked for something and responds with an answer, it is always assumed that he is up to something sneaky and he is quite used to that.
walkerp 10:13 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
Okay, just read the article. The report concludes that the harrassment and toxic work environment comes from the managers in several divisions. Stephane Plante oversees them all and he is pointed out as not doing anything to change or even supporting the bad behaviour: “« Il n’y a pas de conséquences. Le grand boss les protège », a déploré l’un d’eux en parlant du directeur d’arrondissement, Stéphane Plante.”
This is the guy that the mayor is protecting?! Are they related? She fires Sue Montgomery from her party for creating a toxic workplace, but this other report seems to show that the guy who took out the complaint against Annalisa Harris is the one who has been overseeing the whole show where all the real toxicity is going down.
Je ne le comprends pas. I want somebody to hold Valerie Plante’s feet to the fire on this one. I would like some real answers.
Kate 10:21 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
walkerp, I’ve never seen any indication Stéphane Plante is a relative of the mayor’s. I’d think journalists would be all over it if they knew he was. …in fact, in the final paragraph in this Gazette piece from January, Marian Scott says he isn’t a relation.
Jack 11:17 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
I just hear that phrase so often when people argue or things get heated, on “La Joute” or “Mordus de Politique”. It almost always ends the argument. Literally reading it, it is what generally you are debating….someones intentions. How does that become a trial of their person. Can someone with some linguistic savvy take it a part for me. I’d appreciate it.
Clément 12:05 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
The OQLF has a definition of the term, but does not offer a translation
http://gdt.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/ficheOqlf.aspx?Id_Fiche=17560158
I did find this, which has some contextual translations https://fr.glosbe.com/fr/en/faire%20un%20proc%C3%A8s%20d'intention
For some odd reason, Termium came up empty.
Jack 15:27 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
Merci Clement ! C’est une phrase incroyablement difficile à traduire. La quantité de choix en anglais est extraordinaire, même avec le contexte.
MarcG 16:40 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
Perhaps “I’m used to these false accusations” would be similar in English.
Kate 20:58 on 2020-10-07 Permalink
Sounds like it would fit, MarcG.
Reading about this issue, it really does sound to me like Stéphane Plante rules the borough like his own fief, and simply doesn’t accept Montgomery having her own ideas. So the whole organization is split along lines of loyalty to one or the other, from the highest fonctionnaire to the newest hire tightening the nuts on the snowblowers. But it’s impossible to know how Montgomery handled realizing she was meant to be a figurehead, simply signing off on what the sitting fonctionnaires were doing. (I’m just sussing this from external observation – I don’t have an inside line, and don’t even live in the borough.)
What I would like to know is why Valérie Plante gave Montgomery – then a member of her own party – the heave-ho and took the side of the civil service in this matter.
dwgs 07:13 on 2020-10-08 Permalink
That sounds like a pretty accurate take on things from what I’ve seen here in NDG. As much as I like my neighbourhood I gotta say that the city works crews are among the worst I’ve seen in terms of the give a sh*t factor.
dhomas 15:45 on 2020-10-08 Permalink
There’s a good thread on “procès d’intention” on Wordreference here :
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/proc%C3%A8s-dintention.63444/
Another good site for context-based translations:
https://context.reverso.net/
Azrhey 17:43 on 2020-10-08 Permalink
People use Procès d’intentions as an everyday thing these days, originally it is a criminal code expression, as in you can’t charge someone why what they intend to do/say/believe because there is always the chance they can change their minds. So in Code Napoléon ( compared to the older royal decrees ) it was a big novelty that you cannot do it.
For example : “I want to kill the motorcyclist that revvs by my window every night at 2am” is not a crime. As it is only intent. If I start buying land mines online then they can charge me because my intent is not an intent anymore it’s a plan.
Politicians very often do procès d’intentions and it’s always a slipery slope: “Valérie Plante wants to ban SUVs on the island of Montreal”is a procès d’intentions, maybe she does, maybe she doesn’t, but as long as as she doesnt write it down and make it official, it’s a procès d’intentions because you can’t judge people for what they want to do in the future. OTOH, media is not a court of law, so it’s not like they are bound by the same rules….