Frances Bula header image 2
← →

NPA mayoralty candidate Leonard Brody talks about what he wants for the city

June 11th, 2014 · 46 Comments

Well, at last, someone willing to talk about what he wants to do if he does end up running.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Swerve Lurf

    Leonard Brody currently has Denver, CO listed as his current hometown on Linkedin. http://www.linkedin.com/in/lbrody

    He could have updated that for all the people who wanted to learn something about him.

    You know, I guess it’s not all that important, but people will googol after reading the papers. Other than that I think he seems like an alright guy.

    Am I being neurotic? I dunno.

  • spartikus

    I have the same point on Leonard Brody that I did for Kirk Lapointe:

    Do you get to run the show?

    Do you get to make the platform? Input on the candidates for councillor? Etc.

    Would a Brody/Lapointe be comfortable running under the same flag as social conservatives Woo & Denike?

    Or is this simply an attempt to put a centrist veneer on the Armstrong/MacDonald show?

    Etc.

  • spartikus

    Apparently he’s withdrawn.

  • Bill Lee

    #3 above is to Jeff Lee’s Vancouver Sun blog (generally not noticed or read)
    The blog is more speculative and questioning, (and did link and mention Frances Bula’s interview with him in the Globe and Mail)
    Here is his posting for the newspaper/web-page this morning.

    Linkname: NPA mayoral candidate Leonard Brody pulls out of campaign
    URL:
    http://www.vancouversun.com/news/mayoral+candidate+Leonard+Brody
    +pulls+campaign/9932185/story.html
    Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:08:45 GMT

  • Bill

    @#3

    Probably just as well as successful entrepreneurs rarely transition successfully to politics. Why? Because in the public sector it’s all about process and appearing to be doing something. In the private sector it is about results and actually accomplishing something.

  • chow

    Bill, aren’t cliches wonderful?!?! No need to think, just spout your favourite stereotype. In your your case that would be the officially sanctioned Fraser Institute/Ayn Rand line.
    If Brody dropped out from Peter Armstrong’s in house beauty pageant so quickly, I suspect it had more to do with the demeaning process Armstrong was putting him (and the others ) through than the horrifying thought of endless committee meetings and insufferable ribbon cuttings..

  • F.H.Leghorn

    Not to mention those f***king NPA hacks. Oh wait, I just did.
    Having a municipal party controlled by Peter Armstrong is almost as bad as having one controlled by Peter Wall.

  • Bill

    @chow #6

    Cliché? Perhaps but it doesn’t make it any the less true. It is the failure to recognize the inherent limitations of government that facilitates the overreaching of the less competent when they get in power.

  • teririch

    @Bill #5

    At least Brody had the integrity to make the decision before versus later.

    Unlike Robertson triggering a costly ($500K) bye-election when he moved from a lack luster NDP MLA backbencher to become Vision’s ‘Manchurian’ candidate.

  • teririch

    @chow #6

    Niki Sharma was moved up the ranks by Vision.

    Did the members vote on that – or what she just annointed by the executive?

    Isn’t that move the reason certain PB councillors are not running this year?

  • MB

    Bill 5:

    In the private sector it is about results and actually accomplishing something.

    chow 6:

    Bill, aren’t cliches wonderful?!?! No need to think, just spout your favourite stereotype. In your your case that would be the officially sanctioned Fraser Institute/Ayn Rand line.

    Thank you both for reminding me to try once again to get paid for the 200+ hours overtime owed to me from a private sector consultant, one who demanded I work the first six months straight without one day off. It drove me to the public sector.

    Having this experience under my belt made me appreciate the private consultants and contractors who not only a very good at what they do on the projects I now manage, but treat their staff with respect and therein won their loyalty. These private firms are in the minority.

  • Bill

    @MB #11

    “owed to me from a private sector consultant” – Singular

    “made me appreciate the private consultants and contractors” – Plural

    “These private firms are in the minority.”

    Hmmm, now remind me, which ones are in the minority?

    And why are you now competent to look after the taxpayer’s money when you weren’t able to safeguard your own financial interests?

  • spartikus

    Building on my earlier point, it’s quite possible a guy like Brody doesn’t want to be associated with, oh, stuff like this.

    MB: DNFTT

  • teririch

    @MB #11:

    People in the private sector work OT and they do it for various reasons.

    Furthering one’s career, for instance.

    You look at someone like self made billionaire, Jim Pattision that still at his age, is in the office by 4:30 am every morning.

    But then again, he is of a different era, when people worked hard to get ahead.

    Now, people want everything handed to them.

  • teririch

    @spartikus #13:

    So?

    They agreed to listen to the concerns of some citizens.

    Perhaps you find it odd as it is not the common practice of Vision and not a $25K lunch where who knows what was discussed.

    It also isn’t know whether the Vision SB Cllrs were invited.

  • brilliant

    @MB11-are we trading anecdotes? Lemme tell you about the civil servant I knew who sent 50% of their work time playing solitare on their desktop.

    @Spartikus -he was obviously unhappy enough with Vision to consider it. Maybe Gregor should have just got him a taxoayer-funded private road, like he did for his other millionaire buddies.

  • chow

    teri richardson @ 14 , you are well known on this website for writing dumb things. This one is right up there.
    Unless someone is in certain positions, employees in both the private and public sectors are entitled to be paid for overtime. There is no reason that they should not claim what they are entitled to. If you are idiotic enough to work overtime and not claim for it, well, I am sure your employer is grateful as the money is going straight into the employer’s pocket but it/he/she is also breaking the law. Do you really want to be both a sucker and someone who works for an employer who flouts the law.
    As for people in the past working hard as opposed to younger people today, that is pure unmitigated, complete and utter horse crap. Whether they want to or not, they have to work harder if they want to get hired or keep a job. On top of that they have to contend with people like you telling them that if they claim their lawful entitlements, well, they are lazy and just want everythng handed to them. Pathetic.
    There is a difference between Jimmy Pattison and most people: he owns a multi-billion $ empire and he gets to keep not only the product of his own labour but his work forces as well. He works because he wants to and good on him. However, that is a lifestyle that he has chosen and one that most people don’t want. It does not make them lazy or entitled. If they insist on being paid for the work they do in accordance with their contract and the laws of British Columbia or Canada, well, good on them.

  • Richard

    @teririch

    You ageist nonsense is really tiresome, inappropriate and just plain wrong. Please apologize to all the great hardworking young people out there.

  • chow

    Sorry, teririchardson, while your post #14 is pretty dumb, it is no match for your post #15.
    Denike , well known social conservatives, and Woo as a well known homophobe and nutbar, are trying to suggest that west side realtors are concerned about the new policy of the VSB which they seem to think may affect West side property prices because they perceive potential Asian clients as being more homophobic. This concern should be addressed how? By denying protection to LGBT students so that West Side property values can stay in the stratosphere?
    So Vision doesn’t meet with them to discuss these concerns? I can only say that if that is the case, Vision has gone up a notch in my estimation.
    With any luck Woo and Denike will be defeated in the next election. And Spartikus has a point, Brody probably doesn’t want to be associated with these “types”.

  • teririch

    @chow (Alice)

    Jimmy Pattison created a multi-billion dollar empire.

    Nobody gave it to him and he didn’t inherit it.

    And where exactly did I mention anything about not beign paid for work?

    Sorry to ruin you (typical) rant.

  • rph

    Chow you may be entitled to overtime, but in many jobs you do not receive it. The employer however, will also not dock you if you need a couple of hours off for a medical appointment, or if you arrive late due to traffic.

    It is when the scales are unbalanced that you have to decide if you are better off with or without that job. And (from my personal experience) there are many employers out there who are quick to tilt those scales in their favour.

    Yah, you may be a sucker if you work continual unpaid hours, but you are also an employed sucker in a city with a shortage of good jobs. “Insisting” often gets you the door, or closes the door on promotions and references.

    I suppose if enough people refuse those kinds of working conditions then the employer will have difficulties getting staff. Foreign Temp Workers anyone?

  • teririch

    @Richard #18:

    Well, Richard- my so called ‘ageist’ rant has been formed thru experience.

    No apology. And trust me when I tell you, I am not alone in that opinion. (As I think back to the assistant that was hired in at one of the shops I worked at who after 2 months, quit, because she and her boyfriend broke up. Ot the one after that who was let go because she spent more time texting than working)

    http://news.yahoo.com/employers-see-perks-hiring-older-workers-144536527–finance.html

  • chow

    teririchardson @ 20. No-one suggested the Pattison did not “create” his empire. However, he did it with the assistance of a whole passle of employees. Remember the lowest selling salesman who got fired each month.
    No, you didn’t expressly mention not being paid for work but if you look at MB’s comment #11 and your response, it is either suggesting that claiming overtime is bad (you know those hardworking people in the private sector who don’t) or is a complete non sequitur. Hell, it may even be both and an insufferable ageist comment to boot.

  • spartikus

    The NPA need to deal with Denike and Woo or they may lose Lapointe as well.

  • teririch

    @chow #19 (whos is sounding more and more like waltyss)

    The allegations you are making against Ms. Woo and Mr. Denike, should the be true, will be well documented.

    Kindly post links so the rest of us can be come as ‘enlightened’ as you.

    I listened to the mother of a transgender child on the radio last week speaking to this issue. And she pointed to the fear and discrimination of these kids as the result of people being misinformed.

    So by your reasoning, Woo and Denike sitting down and talking to people and perhaps addressing concens face-to-face is a bad, bad thing.

    As for Vision not meeting with them should they have been invited (still to be determined) does their lack of public ‘consultation’ shock anybody?

  • teririch

    @Saprtikus:

    Wow.

    That is rich telling the NPA they need to deal with their Clls. condsidering som of the winners Vision protects.

    Jang for one.

  • spartikus

    And the NPA have now expelled Denike and Woo from the party. Which is the right move.

  • Chow

    Teririchardson, as spartikus rightly asks, which is the right move: expelling them from the NPA caucus about an hour after they appeared on Stephen Quinn’s show, OTC, or meeting with homophobic nutbars more concerned about their property values than fostering inclusion of LG BT youth. We know where you stand and I know where I stand. It rarely happens but this time I am with the NPA. However I did think that it was a bit of a nose stretcher when Cllr. Ball on OTC tried to convince Stephen Quinn that chucking them just after their appearance was just a coincidence.
    And ms. Richardson, which homophobic elected officials among its ranks is Vision protecting? Or are we again demonstrating our inability to stay on topic?

  • Richard

    @teririch

    You are using the actions (or inactions) of some to judge all which is fundamentally wrong. Please stop it. Just because you have had poor experiences with some young people it does not give you the right to judge all of them. Could be your poor mansgement abilities that are the problem.

    Seems like some in every generation always complain about kids these days. Get over it. They will be fine in spite of your efforts.

  • brilliant

    @Chow 28- b-b-but those numbers are part of our glorious multicultural misc. Day it ain’t so!

    It must tie “progressives” in knots when they see the huge amount of “New Canadians” falling in with Evangelical Christian sects or other groups advocating to incorporate such enlightened policies as Sharia Law into Canadian life.

  • Bill

    @Richard #29

    “They will be fine in spite of your efforts.”

    If the world didn’t extend beyond our borders I might even agree with you but it doesn’t and the current generation is woefully unprepared to overcome the challenges they are facing. Take a look to the south to see what hopey changey gets you. It’s just a preview of the mess we will be in if Trudeau, aka Obama lite, succeeds in becoming Prime Minister.

  • Chris Keam

    “Almost two-thirds of us are working more than 45 hours a week – 50-per-cent more than two decades ago. Work weeks are more rigid, with flex-time arrangements dropping by a third in the past 10 years. To top it off, only 23 per cent of working Canadians are highly satisfied with life. That’s half as many as in 1991.”

    People are working longer and are less happy. Common knowledge and easily verified.

  • Chris Keam

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/canadas-work-life-balance-more-off-kilter-than-ever/article4673216/

  • Bill

    @Chris Keam #32

    “Almost two-thirds of us are working more than 45 hours a week – 50-per-cent more than two decades ago.”

    This statistic seemed so far off base so I had to read the report myself and after reading the following on the first page of the report I knew that something was amiss:

    “The study looks at the work-life experiences of 25,021 Canadians who were employed full time for 71 public, private and not-for-profit organizations. Just over half (52%) of these respondents were public servants, 34% worked in the NFP sector and 10% worked in the private sector”

    Now everyone knows you do not stand in front of the exits from government offices at 4:00 pm or you are likely to be trampled yet according to this report most are working over 45 hours a week. The only clue to this apparent discrepancy was that the hours reported were for “work related activities per week.” This might include a good hearty breakfast, commuting time, lunch time, talking about work over the dinner table and maybe even shopping for work clothes. Or maybe playing solitaire for 50% of the time just makes it seem like the work day is 10 hours long.

    The Employment and Social Development Canada measure of hours worked is probably closer to what we all have experienced. The trend of hours worked is generally less and not more.

    http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=19

  • Chris Keam

    “In 2012, of all the time available to Canadians, 10.0% of this time was spent on paid work. This is an increase of about 1.3 percentage points, since 1976 when approximately 8.7% of all available time was spent on paid work.”

  • Chris Keam

    Previous quote from Bill’s quoted report.

    This quote is from the article I referenced:

    “One of the major limitations of the study may serve to make the results even more telling. Participants, largely public servants and not-for-profit workers earning more than $60,000 annually, skewed the result toward higher income than the Canadian average. (The median total family income in 2010 was $69,860, according to Statistics Canada.) The study found that the less-affluent the family, the more likely it was to feel burdened by excess workloads, so the higher-income skew could mean that the picture of work-life balance in the study – however gloomy – is actually a “best-case scenario,” Prof. Duxbury said.”

  • Bill

    @Chris Keam #35

    You omitted to copy the paragraph before the one you did reference:

    “Another way of showing how much time Canadians spend working is to measure how many hours a year Canadians spend at paid work compared to the total number of hours available to them in a year (365 days x 24 hours x total population). This provides a measure of how much paid work time is used to support and sustain the whole society.”

    So this is not a measure of how much each individual is working but rather total paid working hours over all hours including those that are not in the work force. And guess what has happened to the demographic profile over that time. The proportion of under 14 years old has been declining so it is not surprising that the percentage of working hours has increased since the proportion of individuals of working age has increased. This measure tells you absolutely nothing about what percentage individuals are working of the total time available to them.

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-003-x/2007001/figures/4129871-eng.htm

  • Jeff Leigh

    @Bill #37

    “The proportion of under 14 years old has been declining so it is not surprising that the percentage of working hours has increased since the proportion of individuals of working age has increased”

    Yes, I see that decline in the graph. But I also see a line showing that the proportion of individuals over age 65 rose due to longer life expectancies, and another (perhaps the most significant) line that shows the proportion of individuals of working age is….constant. How does that support your premise? You appear to be arguing against your own data.

  • Chris Keam

    People gonna believe what they want to believe.

    “It’s the third such study in two decades by professors Linda Duxbury of Carleton University and Christopher Higgins of the University of Western Ontario.”

    I think I prefer to believe the conclusions of people with a track record.

  • Bill

    @Jeff Leigh #38

    Actually the proportion of working age people has increased from 1976. But rather than trying to adjust these statistics let’s look at what the report I referenced said about the average work week:

    “In 2012, employed Canadians were working fewer hours on average each week compared to three decades earlier. Canadians worked 36.6 hours per week on average which was down from 38.0 in 1976.”

    This is a direct measurement of hours worked per individual which is more relevant than the statistic Chris is hanging his hat on.

  • Bill

    @Chris Keam #39

    “It’s the third such study in two decades ”

    An irrelevant sample used three times is still irrelevant and can hardly be used to speculate on the entire population.

    “People gonna believe what they want to believe.”

    And not many people are going to believe that most public sector employees are working more than 45 hours per week.

  • Chris Keam

    “And not many people are going to believe that most public sector employees are working more than 45 hours per week.”

    That’s not what the study claimed. Too often you misrepresent remarks and data Bill. It hurts your credibility.

  • Bill

    @Chris Keam #42

    “That’s not what the study claimed.”

    Let’s see now –

    “Almost two-thirds of us are working more than 45 hours a week”

    “Just over half (52%) of these respondents were public servants,”

    If this is a representative sample then it is claiming that the majority of public servants are working over 45 hours per week. If not then how can they claim “almost two-thirds of us” are working more than 45 hours per week unless perhaps “us” means university professors.

    But while we are on the topic of misrepresentation, how do you justify using the totalling irrelevant statistic in #35 to support your argument? Perhaps you did not understand it so it was a case of ignorance and not misrepresentation.

  • Chris Keam

    @Bill:

    You are mistaking the article for the study. The fairly comprehensive overview of the actual study you are so critical of can be found here:

    http://www.healthyworkplaces.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012-National-Work-Long-Summary.pdf

    But you knew that, having read it over before claiming it says exactly the opposite of what it says:

    (at the top of page 14)
    “Work demands have increased dramatically over time — The amount of time employed Canadians spend in paid employment has increased dramatically over time with a substantially greater proportions of the 2012 sample (68% of the men and 54% of the women) working more than 45 hours per week than was the case in 2001 (55% of the men and 39% of the women).”

    – “how do you justify using the totalling irrelevant statistic in #35 to support your argument?”

    My contention was that, “People are working longer and are less happy. Common knowledge and easily verified.”

    Statistic in #35 (from the data you supplied) and the article and study I have cited back this up.

  • Bill

    @Chris

    “In 2012, employed Canadians were working fewer hours on average each week compared to three decades earlier. Canadians worked 36.6 hours per week on average which was down from 38.0 in 1976.”

    Methodology:

    “The weekly hours worked indicator is calculated based on the total actual hours worked at all jobs in a reference week divided by the number of people who worked during the reference week.”

    I think I will accept a broad based sample over 25,000 respondents that are totally unrepresentative of the population.

    But you are right – you are going to believe what you want to believe.

  • Chris Keam

    You forgot the footnote Bill:

    “[1] Note: The number of hours that is being measured is the number of hours spent at the workplace. It does not include hours spent working outside the workplace, for example, in caring for children.”

    Which ties in rather nicely with this excerpt from the study I reference:

    “Just over half (54%) of the employees in this sample take work home to complete outside of their regular hours on evenings and weekends (a phenomena which is referred to as supplemental
    work at home or SWAH). These individuals spend another 7 hours in work per week. ”

    and fits with the data from your citation (again):

    “In 2012, of all the time available to Canadians, 10.0% of this time was spent on paid work. This is an increase of about 1.3 percentage points, since 1976 when approximately 8.7% of all available time was spent on paid work.”

    which, once again, addresses your concern about ‘misrepresentation’. I’m talking about actual work. You’re using time spent at the office as the indicator. You’re also claiming my position is incorrect by using the wrong data to counter my argument. Clearly a waste of my time to spend any more effort on (re)stating the obvious to you. Ask around and let me know how many of your friends who are employed feel they are working less these days and get back to me.

    cheers,
    CK