Republican News · Thursday 30 May 2002

Fair employment distortions

Chill Factor or Kill Factor
The effects of sectarian intimidation on employment in West Belfast
By Robbie McVeigh and Charlie Fisher
The West Belfast Economic Forum

The British government defines chilling as a perception rather than experience and its inclination, where it does accept that sectarian intimidation occurs, is to "assume symmetry between the effects of chilling on Protestants and Catholics"

The nationalist community in the Six Counties, particularly in areas such as West Belfast, has long been told by the British government, by unionists and by some academics, that when it comes to sectarian intimidation and discrimination, it has been living, and continues to live, in a state of false consciousness.

The false consciousness theory applies equally to nationalist accusations in respect of unionist/British racism; the conduct of the security forces; the way in which the institutions of state carry out their functions; the way social policy is determined, and so on. These institutions are not at fault, runs the argument; rather it is the pathology of certain Catholic communities, which perceives such intimidation and discrimination where none exists.

The same argument is applied to discrimination in employment and sectarian harassment in the workplace. The Catholic 'chill factor' is routinely dismissed by government ministers and by unionist politicians. Rather than accept that nationalist fears of sectarian intimidation or violence with regard to employment are based on actual experience, ranging from verbal abuse to actual assassination, they continue to argue that chilling is based on a largely unsubstantiated belief amongst Catholics that there are areas where it is not safe for them to work. Atrocities such as the killing of postal worker Daniel McColgan and the threats against Catholic workers that followed it do little to dent institutional certainty that certain parts of the Catholic community in the North suffer from a kind of collective psychological disorder which makes them unwilling, or incapable, of venturing outside the narrow confines of their own areas.

This 'chill factor' is also dismissed by certain unionists and their loyalist cohorts in their racist stereotyping of nationalists as work-shy. It is often the case that those most vocal in their offensive accusations that Catholics do not want to work are the very people most involved in creating intolerable working conditions for them, either by engaging in sectarian harassment themselves or by tolerating it in others.

In this important, and highly readable new study, Robbie McVeigh and Charlie Fisher set out to examine and quantify the effect of the 'chill factor' on the continuing employment differential between Catholics and Protestants and specifically its effects on employment in West Belfast. The course of their research has thrown up a number of crucial aspects of chilling that merit further investigation.

In the absence of a substantive body of research into the mechanics of chilling, the authors have made a significant contribution to the task of creating a frame of reference for evaluating the chill factor - defining it, determining how it operates on a practical level, and actually quantifying the effect it has on unemployment.

For example, they explore the fact that the definition of 'chill factor', like almost everything else, has not escaped political imperatives. They discuss in some detail the British government's definition of chilling as a perception rather than experience and its inclination, where it does accept that sectarian intimidation occurs, to "assume symmetry between the effects of chilling on Protestants and Catholics". It chooses to ignore the evidence that, overwhelmingly, intimidation is directed at Catholic workers (according to one study, something like 88% of those who have experienced intimidation at work are Catholic men; the figures for Catholic women are lower, although they are still disproportionately the victims of harassment). Political considerations also led the government to introduce the idea that chilling applies to employers and, as ever, that it is the fault of republicans. For example, a report produced by the British Embassy in the USA in 1998, said that:

"For many years sectarian murders were a regular occurrence in Northern Ireland and members of both communities were reluctant to seek jobs outside areas in which they felt safe. The 'chill factor' has also affected employers, making them reluctant to locate in areas worst affected by republican violence where new jobs would have most benefited the Roman Catholic community."

As a consequence of their findings, McVeigh and Fisher vigorously dispute the perception-only theory. In popular discourse, they say, the 'chill factor' "often assumes the status of a cultural failing on behalf of northern Catholics - it is implied that they do not want to work in particular areas because to do so might make them uncomfortable. Thus emphasis is often placed on the fact that people feel at risk rather than the fact that they are at risk. Chilling is explained in terms of community insularity and perception rather than rational assessment of risk."

However, they insist, over and over again, that chilling is not merely a perception. It is based on a "rational assessment of risk" and occurs "because people have been routinely and systematically intimidated out of certain areas and certain forms of work through the use, and threat of use, of violence". In this sense, they say, "the 'chill factor' might, more properly, be named the kill factor".

McVeigh and Fisher also comprehensively challenge those cherished notions of 'balance' that infect institutional discourse and prevent the system from dealing effectively with the issue of sectarianism.

The writers adopt a simple but powerful argument to confront the failures of various organisations and instruments of state. This includes the FEC (Fair Employment Commission) and the Equality Commission, which continue to promote what McVeigh and Fisher call "the fair employment paradigm"; the fact that statutory authorities continue to behave as if Catholics and Protestants suffer equally from sectarian discrimination, when all the evidence suggests otherwise. They point out that, although the legislation against sex and race discrimination protects everyone equally in terms of the number of interventions made by the relevant statutory bodies, there is a practical acknowledgement of the simple fact that, in reality, it is women and people of colour who suffer the most sexual and racial harassment. In the Six Counties, so far as sectarian discrimination is concerned, no such framework for acknowledging an imbalance exists.

Of course no one, including McVeigh and Fisher, is arguing that sectarian intimidation in the workplace is one-way; Protestants do experience sectarian harassment, including actual violence and threats of violence. But, they say, the insistence on 'balance' actually prevents the problem of all sectarianism being properly addressed.

"The discourse around fair employment remains studiously balanced," they say. "It does not address the specific historical disadvantage of Catholics in the same way as gender and race. Everyone should, of course, be protected from sectarian discrimination, but actors should not collude in the process of pretending that Catholic and Protestant experience of that discrimination is the same. They have to address directly the question of who is more likely to be chilled".

Their conclusions on the effects of the 'chill factor' in West Belfast are emphatic; around a quarter of the adult population of the area has experienced harassment in the workplace and consequently chilling has "structured the labour market and the experience of work in a profound way.

"This is a process which is created by lived experience and realistic assessment of threat," they say. "It does not represent some pathological inability to leave one's own community. It does not represent a self-imposed ghettoisation. It represents the reality of a society in which violence and the threat of violence is endemic in the workplace and its surrounding environment."

McVeigh and Fisher are also certain about the wider importance of facing up to the 'chill factor'.

"It is precisely because the 'chill factor' is a symptom of instability and an absence of peace that it must be tackled. Addressing the 'chill factor' is a key part of the process of creating peace and stability; ignoring the 'chill factor' is key part of the process of reproducing instability and conflict."