IBPOC Cultural Professionals Network
Justification Letters
An easy way to explain the value of our sessions to your team
You asked for help, and we listened.
Many of you have shared with us that it can be difficult to attend IBPOC Network sessions during work hours.
We purposely schedule our workshops and Tea and Talks during the day because they are professional development opportunities that you have a right to attend. However, we understand that convincing your teams and managers of the value of our sessions is not always easy.
In an effort to make it easier for you, we’ve created two letters of support that you can use during those conversations. Below you’ll find two versions of our network justification letter.
Version 1 can be edited to include your name, your manager’s name, and any additional arguments you find valuable in those conversations. Use part of it, all of it – it’s there for you to do with as you see fit. This letter downloads as a word document.
Version 2 is written by the BCMA on your behalf. This is for conversations where you might feel that the weight of our organization’s support is needed. This letter downloads as a PDF.
This version can be downloaded and edited by you (word document).
This version is written by the BCMA on your behalf (PDF format).
Still finding it a challenge to justify your participation in our events to your team?
Contact Jazmin at communications@museum.bc.ca and she’ll be happy to write a personalized letter that speaks to your involvement in the network.
Why the name IBPOC (Indigenous, Black, and People of Colour)?
Originally launched under the name BIPOC Network, Indigenous BCMA members reached out and suggested using the term IBPOC to recognize that the discussions and activities facilitated through this network are taking place on the ceded, unceded, and sovereign territories of Indigenous communities across what is now referred to as British Columbia. The BCMA recognizes that we are uninvited guests on these territories and wish to center this network around respect and reconciliation.
We recognize that grouping such distinct identities together suggests an interchangeability that fails to articulate the differential ways that racialized people experience race and racism and will continue to evolve and update our language in consultant with the community.
