On Oct. 27, Alberta’s Justice Minister Mickey Amery and Premier Danielle Smith announced proposed changes to the Alberta Human Rights Act.

They did it behind the imaginary spectre of the “DEI hire.” 

They claim they are ending the practice of public institutions hiring people from disadvantaged backgrounds because of their identity, and instead Alberta will hire based on merit and merit alone. 

The thing is, there are no documented cases of a “DEI hire.”

The Alberta government is just creating another enemy. Standing beside the spectre of immigrants, Justin Trudeau, and Quebec, the UCP would like you to focus on their newest enemy:  the DEI hire.

The new legislation proposes to remove exemptions for provincial bodies to utilize policies and programs that seek to improve “the conditions of disadvantaged persons or classes of disadvantaged persons,” which includes people historically discriminated against based on gender, skin colour, race, religion, income, physical abilities, sexual orientation, and more.

Here’s what section 10.1 of the Alberta Human Rights Act actually does: it says a program meant to improve conditions for a disadvantaged group isn’t, on its own, discrimination. It’s the same principle in section 15(2) of the Charter. It is a shield, not a quota.

Nothing in it requires anyone to hire a less qualified person. An employer can widen a recruitment pool, run a mentorship program or do targeted outreach, and still hire the best candidate. The same section protects programs like Alberta’s grants for women studying STEM.

If the government believes a 10.1 program has pushed a better applicant aside, it should name it. It hasn’t, and the premier admitted the province doesn’t even track employees by race.

Arguing that someone else was the best hire

Hidden in the claims of rampant DEI hires is an implication that illustrates the darker beliefs of the UCP.

Since the Alberta Human Rights Act acknowledges that certain individuals experience disadvantages because of their race, religious beliefs, class, colour, gender, disability, etc., it therefore acknowledges that there are those who experience advantages on those same grounds.

You must keep this in mind because when people weaponize the idea of these hires, they’re arguing that someone else was the best person for the job.  

If they claim a woman is a DEI hire, they’re saying that there was a more qualified male applicant.

If they claim a Black person is a DEI hire, they’re saying that there was a more qualified white applicant.

If they claim a lower-income person is a DEI hire, they’re saying a rich applicant was more qualified.

The premise for combating DEI hires hinges on the suggestion that programs and policies that seek to correct discrimination in employment are discriminatory toward white people, toward men, toward Christians, toward able-bodied people, and so on.

Postmedia reported that the province has no data on so-called DEI hires, yet they are the premise of its new legislation.

The search for data to back up the DEI claims

The lack of data is not for a lack of trying. The province has been researching the question of diversity, equity, and inclusion for several years now.

In 2025, the province’s Expert Panel on Post-Secondary Institution Funding and Alberta’s Competitiveness, chaired by University of Calgary economist Jack Mintz, examined whether universities were putting DEI ahead of merit in hiring and enrolment.

The panel reported no instances of DEI superseding merit, except in the cases of rural and Indigenous enrolment and Indigenous staffing.

The panel did support some DEI practices, such as reserving seats for Indigenous students and rural Albertans. But it said extending the same consideration to other groups, like low-income or minority applicants, would be discriminatory.

The 2025 report laid the groundwork for the Justice Minister’s decision to change the Alberta Human Rights Act to eliminate public institutions from having policies and programs that seek to improve conditions for Albertans from disadvantaged groups protected by the Alberta Human Rights Act (gender, race, place of origin, physical ability etc.).

The referendum hypocrisy on hiring

As an aside, there is a degree of hypocrisy in the province’s announcement on the heels of the referendum. The first question on the referendum asked Albertans to support a new DEI hiring policy: giving Albertans first priority on job opportunities.

This is the promotion of employment opportunities based on an individual’s place of origin. Place of origin is specifically outlined in the Alberta Human Rights Act as a protected ground, meaning that employers cannot discriminate between applicants based on where they come from.

The province has spent millions asking Albertans to endorse a plan that included allowing Albertans to be first in line for employment, ahead of other applicants. If an Albertan is the “best person for the job” then they’ll get the job. Isn’t that the point of merit-based hiring? No policy would be required.

If you end up receiving a job from Alberta-first hiring opportunities, you would be Alberta’s first real DEI hire.

Qualified people get jobs they’re qualified to do

The reality is that DEI hires are not real.

Since the province has no data showing DEI hires are real, and its own expert panel recommended ending these programs without documenting a single case of one overriding merit, there’s only one conclusion to draw.

People who get the jobs or those who get accepted to university are the most qualified. This includes those from diverse and marginalized backgrounds.

The UCP just created another bogeyman, the DEI hire, and I feel sorry for every qualified woman, immigrant, person of colour, and anyone who comes from a protected class that will now have to bear that accusation.

No matter how many people accuse them of being a DEI hire, I hope they are reminded often that they are qualified, they were hired on merit, and they have always been the best person for the job.