Division of labour: Suggested improvements to TFW program

  • June 27, 2016

Domestic workers, nannies, farm labourers and low-skilled service-sector employees. When we hear about abuses of the temporary foreign worker program – lower-than-minimum wages, poor working conditions – it is always this class of workers that is on the receiving end. And when people talk about foreign workers brought in to do jobs at wages that artificially supress pay rates in an area, it’s employers of these workers who bear the brunt of the criticism.

At the same time, rules and regulations passed by the former government to try to address these abuses also affect the employers of the high-skilled workers that you never hear about – the ones filling jobs for which there truly are no qualified Canadians, who are paying fair salaries. The jobs where the power imbalance between employer and employee is far less pronounced.

On the one hand there’s a need to protect both foreign workers and Canadian workers from abuses of the TFW program – such as having Canadian employees train their foreign replacements – and on the other, there’s a need to recognize that when properly deployed the TFW program can be a driver of economic prosperity that benefits all Canadians.

In a letter to a parliamentary committee reviewing the TFW program, the CBA’s Immigration Law Section suggests cutting through that tension by separating high-skilled and low-skilled foreign workers into two distinct programs.

“(A)dvertising and other requirements that are suitable for low-skilled positions are not in line with business realities related to high-skilled roles,” writes Stéphane Duval, chair of the Section. “Also, the balance of power between employers and high-skilled workers is fundamentally different than when dealing with low-skilled occupations, and must be distinguished when developing abuse-prevention and compliance policies and processes.”

Training and education will create a cadre of high-skilled Canadian workers in the medium and long terms, the letter says, but in the short term, foreign workers are filling documented gaps in essential skills and experience in the work force.

“Temporary foreign workers with skills in short supply in the labour market allow Canadian businesses to pursue opportunities and projects that would otherwise not proceed, thereby creating employment for others.”

To that end, the Section recommends the program for high-skilled workers focus on the net benefit to the economy, be flexible enough to take industry norms and business realities into account, reflect the difference in balance of power, and be efficient and less bureaucratic.

While we believe that a flexible, effective and efficient TFWP for high-skilled workers can be developed, we recommend in the alternative that high-skilled workers be governed by the International Mobility Program. This would require that Labour Market Impact Assessment-exemption categories, such as C-10 (Significant Benefit) or C-11 (Entrepreneurs), be elaborated to facilitate employment of certain high-skilled foreign workers without having to first prove that obtaining an LMIA is impractical. This policy would also require review of the Comprehensive Ranking System criteria in the Express Entry system to ensure that individuals working in Canada on LMIA-exempt work permits are also eligible to claim CRS points for arranged employment without obtaining an LMIA.

Employers of low-skilled workers are also bending under the strain of the TFWP rules following the last overhaul. Low-skilled workers fill a critical role in Canada too, the Immigration Section says, especially in rural areas. The Section offers up a number of recommendations to increase transparency, improve consistency and to reduce compliance issues.

“The CBA Section welcomes reasonable efforts to protect foreign workers and the Canadian labour market from abuse and unfair practices by employers,” the letter says. “We have identified a number of concerns with the current compliance regime. In particular, lack of transparency and appropriate processes, overly harsh penalties and the lack of an effective appeal process undermine efforts to create a flexible, responsive and predictable structure for Canadian businesses and workers.”

[0] Comments

CBA members may sign in to comment.