Pros
Amazing front-line staff and volunteers Working with animals
Cons
- Poorly Managed: Toxic management and directors that would sooner fire those that come forward with concerns over the conduct of management than actually deal with the issue, or fire staff due to “re-structuring” while not offering them a job in another department. Have created a culture of complacency where those working under them just keep their heads down and not point out any shortcomings. There is a fear of repercussions if you ever challenge or question the decisions of those in charge. - Not a Safe Environment for Queer People: Would rather keep a transphobic manager than support their trans and/or queer staff. - Directors Unwilling to Listen to Feedback or Critique, Place Blame on Staff: After an engagement survey where multiple staff addressed their concerns, the directors decided that instead of holding themselves accountable and working with the staff to address shelter shortcomings, decided to have a presentation on how to be more resilient. Somehow think that their staff just aren’t “resilient” enough despite having to work long hours for poor pay, constant under-staffing, little management support, and having to handle the mistreatment of animals daily. - Focused More on Numbers and Getting Animals Out The Door than Their “Core” Values: They claim to have a culture based on courage, compassion, commitment, and collaboration, but they are adopting out more and more behaviourally questionable animals into unsuitable homes simply to get them out of the shelter and boost their live animal outcome, with little regard for the input from their trained Behaviour Specialists or their most senior adoption counsellors. Open adoptions only works when there are responsible placements. PLUS open adoptions is based off of kill shelters in the US that euthanize behaviourally complex dogs, so it is irresponsible to try to apply the same practices without doing the extra work to ensure that it is a successful placement.