.png)
What Would You Do?
A staff member comes to you after a difficult interaction with a client.
The client directed racist comments toward them.
The staff member is hurt, their colleagues are frustrated, and the leadership team is looking to you for direction.
Everyone agrees the behaviour caused harm.
What happens next is far less clear.
The client is a young person with significant mental health challenges. They are in your program because they need support. Their behaviour has had a real impact on your staff member.
At the same time, they are exactly the kind of person your organization exists to serve.
Some people in your organization believe this is part of working with complex populations. Others believe no employee should be expected to absorb this kind of harm.
What would you do?
What emerged from the conversation
This scenario generated one of the richest discussions in the first Equity Circle cohort.
The leaders in the room came from different organizations and service areas, but they were working through a similar stage of equity implementation. They had already invested time, energy, and resources into moving equity beyond training and into everyday practice.
As participants unpacked the scenario, the conversation moved quickly into the practical questions leaders face in moments like this.
What responsibility does an organization have to staff who experience harm?
What responsibility does it have to clients with complex needs?
1
Leaders need confidence applying equity in real situations
One participant shared that their organization had already invested in equity learning, consultation, and leadership development.
Staff and leaders had attended training.
They had access to resources.
They had worked with consultants.
But when a real situation emerged, leaders still found themselves asking:
"I just want to be sure. Is there more? Is there something different? What else should be done?
That question stayed with me.
It captures where many organizations are in their equity work right now.
The issue is no longer whether equity matters.
The harder work is applying equity commitments in moments where the answer is contextual, emotional, and operationally complex.
2
Staff need to know what happens after harm occurs
Several participants spoke about the importance of giving staff more clarity.
When staff experience racism, discrimination, or microaggressions from clients, they need more than reassurance that the organization cares.
They need to know what happens next.
How do they report it?
Who reviews it?
What support is available?
What will the organization do with the information?
How will decisions be made?
One participant described the need for clear structures so staff know that, while they are there to support clients, they also matter to the organization.
Another participant named the importance of debriefing with colleagues who have had similar experiences, especially for maintaining psychological safety over time.
The conversation kept returning to trust.
Staff need to trust that when harm happens, the organization has a way to respond.
3
Clear structures help leaders make better decisions
The group also talked about policies, protocols, escalation pathways, and accountability.
Not as paperwork, but as tools leaders can use when situations become difficult.
One participant reflected that their existing protocols were originally designed for harm caused by staff, not harm caused by clients. That distinction mattered.
Another participant shared that their organization was looking at how policies could better support staff who experience harm in the community.
The group did not try to create a response for every possible situation.
Instead, the conversation pointed to the importance of having enough structure that leaders are not left guessing and staff are not left wondering whether their experience will be taken seriously.
Natalie's Reflection
What stood out to me in this conversation was how carefully leaders were trying to hold multiple responsibilities at once.
They were thinking about staff wellbeing.
They were thinking about client care.
They were thinking about service mandates.
They were thinking about accountability, trust, and organizational values.
No one was looking for a simple answer. That is what made the conversation so useful.
Equity work often gets discussed at the level of values, commitments, and strategies. But leaders eventually have to make decisions in moments where those commitments become real.
This was one of those moments. And it is exactly the kind of conversation Equity Circles were designed to create.
A space where leaders can bring forward the equity questions they are actively navigating, hear what others have tried, and leave with practical ways to think through their next step.
