By Andréanne Langevin
This morning I learned something new. I was skimming through the local news and I saw an article that caught my attention: Quel avenir pour la prime au bilinguisme? (What is the future of the bilingual bonus?) In the article, the journalist explains how federal government workers can earn a lump sum of 800$ per year if they can prove their bilingualism (with a language test). She also writes how this bonus was implemented in 1977 and was supposed to be abolished in 1983 once the government had successfully populated its various departments with enough bilinguals to serve the Francophone and Anglophone populations. However, the bonus was never abolished and it now represents about 60 million a year in federal taxpayer money (Beaudoin, 2019).
Professionals and government representatives interviewed for the article raised a few interesting points. On the one hand, a union leader deplores the fact that the bonus has had no indexing since its creation. In today’s value, a bilingual government worker should receive an additional 3000$ instead of the original 800$. On the other hand, some policy makers argue that it would be beneficial to abolish the bonus. Instead, those funds could be redistributed to better train employees in their second language and foster bilingualism in a more genuine way within the government. This opinion is supported by a 2017 report which concludes that many government employees receiving the bonus did not in fact use their second language at work (Beaudoin, 2019).
I am not sure what to think about this issue. I do have many questions about this ‘bonus’. One: why should people be paid to learn both national languages in Canada? Why is the government unable to set linguistic standards and encourage its workers to perfect their second languages without monetary incentive? I am also skeptical of the language test the employees must pass in order to receive a bonus; do they pass it once and get the approval or do they have to demonstrate that they maintained their language skills every few years? Finally (and somewhat selfishly), I speak English and French in my workplace, why don’t I get a bonus?
In their 2017 article, researchers Drolet, Bouchard, and Savard put emphasis on how excessively difficult it is for some linguistic minorities to get served in Canada in a language they can understand. Given this information, could the Canadian government consider paying a bonus to an employee who masters a first or second language other than English or French? In this case, would the employee be as deserving as a French-English bilingual?
I realize this post is mainly a long list of questions. I was completely unaware of the ‘bilingual bonus’ before reading a little more on this issue. I am looking for some opinions in the comments. What do you think? Should the bonus remain in effect or should it be abolished in order to redirect the funds to something else? And if your answer is ‘Yes’, where should the federal government invest this money?
Looking forward to reading you!
Beaudoin, D. (2019) Quel avenir pour la prime au bilinguisme? Retrieved from Radio-Canada: https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1157149/prime-bilinguisme-fonction-publique-federale-langues-officielles. March 11th 2019.
Drolet, M., Bouchard, P., & Savard, J. (Eds.). (2017). Accessibility and active offer: Health care and social services in linguistic minority communities (Health and society). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Wow, Andréanne! Fort intéressant tout ça! j’en aimerais un prime, moi aussi ! et je crois que cela représente un vrai problème idéologique de dénommer cela un “prime au bilinguisme” alors que nous avons clairement beaucoup d’employés du gouvernement qui parlent plus qu’une langue (dont un serait AN ou FR). Je me demande aussi ou exactement est distribué ce prime – je sais qu’en appelant la ligne téléphonique de la RAMQ on entend de suite que “la régie vous informe qu’elle communique d’abord en français avec sa clientèle” Bonne question aussi à savoir quel test pourrait bien attester un bilinguisme adéquat, approprié, maintenue, etc. Je sais que professionnellement parlant, les Orthophonistes ne sont permis d’exercer la profession au Québec qu’en passant soit par un examen de français de l’OQLF soit en ayant réussi à l’épreuve unique du ministère de l’éducation en SecV : non-ideal dans le sens que 1) les orthophonistes ouvrant uniquement en anglais n’ont aucunement besoin du français et ceci cré un bias, bien plus que la valeur d’un boni, contre les étudiants des autres provinces canadiens que nous invitons à poursuivre leurs études dans le domaine ici ainsi que de nous priver, potentiellement, des meilleurs candidats dans le domaine. 2) Tout anglophone montréalais a dû passer cet examen et si nous pensons aux anglophones montréalais que nous connaissons, clairement ce ne sont pas tous des utilisateurs d’un français dans lequel on aimerait voir offert des services orthophonique – le tout crée un effet (peut-être bien non-voulu) de priver à certains des emplois et ainsi, des bonis de bien plus que $800 – et ce, sur la base d’un “bilinguisme” louche.
(I made an effort to respond in French on purpose – I honestly do not think I would get through any amount of schooling in my second language. Thinking, let alone writing, in a second language is so effortful – kudos to all of you (the strong majority!) who are doing all of this in languages other than your most comfortable!)
Salut, qui a écrit cela svp? 🙂
Peut-être Amelia? Let’s ask her…
Hi Andréanne,
Very interesting question! From my understanding, if a person works for government, s/he should be able to speak both English and French if it is required as both of them are official languages. It should not be a bonus but a requirement, a skillset that a candidate should possess. If the person can speak a language other than English or French, then it could be considered as a bonus. Just like the applicant possesses extra skills and s/he therefore negotiates the salary with the employer. However, if a person works for private company or any place else than the government, I don’t think being bilingual is a basic requirement. The salary of the person who is bilingual or multilingual could be higher than monolingual person.
Cixiu
oui! sorry! c’était moi, Amelia, qui ai contribué ci-haut! pardonnez mon anonymat accidentel!
The situation you describe is one of the inevitable side effects of having an officially bilingual language policy at federal level. As you point out, Andréanne, what’s odd is that it hasn’t been abolished, even though its objectives have (one assumes) been met. So perhaps now it’s an “effect pernicieux”…