Canada to End Closed Work Permits, IRCC Latest Updates
In a recent report, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology recommended that restricted work permits be discontinued by Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
The Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP), which was established in 1973 to assist Canadian employers in filling urgent job vacancies when neither Canadians nor permanent residents were qualified or applied, was the subject of the report’s analysis. The TFWP was intended to be the last option for Canadian businesses, but the research claims that it has evolved into a crucial part of the country’s labor market.
Investigating and researching topics that affect Canada, standing committees like the Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology report their findings to the government for review and possible action. The Senate serves as both the legislative and investigative branch of the Canadian Upper House of Parliament.
How does the TFWP Work?
For many new immigrants, programs like the TFWP have become a common route to permanent status. They travel to Canada to gain work experience there, which might be useful for applying for permanent residence via programs like Canadian Experience Class and Express Entry.
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) must provide a positive or neutral Labor Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) to employers who want to hire under the TFWP. This document demonstrates to the Canadian government that employing a foreign national won’t have a detrimental impact on the country’s labor market or economy.
Before filing an LMIA, employers must fulfill several conditions, including advertising for a predetermined amount of time and presenting proof that no Canadian or permanent resident is suitable for the post or that no applications have been received. An employer may provide a valid LMIA to a prospective employee so that they can include it in their application for a work visa with the IRCC.
Once an employee is hired, the employer is required to pay them a set wage, provide them with housing and healthcare, and provide a safe, harassment-free work environment.
The TFWP grants closed work permits, which limit an employee’s employment options to one during their stay in Canada. They can lose their immigration status if they quit their jobs. Instances of employer abuse are an exception to this rule.
Improvements for Employers and Employees
Much of the criticism that has been voiced about the TFWP’s evolution is detailed in the success report. The fact that neither employers nor employees are satisfied with the TFWP is one of the recurring themes. The employer-specific work permit creates structural impediments to migrant workers’ access to rights and safeguards and makes them more susceptible to abuse by unscrupulous individuals.
Employers’ concerns about the program are also highlighted in a recent analysis by the Cooper Institute, particularly about seasonal workers. In addition to discussing the pressures that arise from the almost paternalistic relationship that develops between employers and employees when the latter rely on the former for necessities like housing and healthcare, the article expressed employers’ frustration at not being able to adequately train or plan their years of work with a transient labor force.
Further noting that well-meaning and compliance is a report by the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology. Employers are unable to promote highly skilled personnel for excellent performance, extend service, or relocate staff as needed.
Phasing Out Closed Work Permits
Within the next three years, the SOCI wants the government to phase away employer-specific work permits to lessen the vulnerability of temporary foreign workers. The Cooper Institute agrees, urging the IRCC to award permanent resident status to all migrant workers instead of employer-specific work permits.
According to the Cooper Institute, it would be advantageous as migrant workers’ living and working conditions differ significantly from those of their Canadian counterparts when they lack full permanent citizenship status. Because of their temporary immigrant status, they are considered a different class of workers and face substantial obstacles to having their labor rights protected.
It mentions that when it comes to helping TFW advocates understand their rights and acclimate to life in Canada, many of the Settlement Services supported by the IRCC are inaccessible. As an alternative to the current TFWP, the success report suggests that the government look into the sector under region-specific work permits.
It implies that companies may benefit from this, as they are usually the ones who foot the bill for employee housing, transportation, and healthcare. According to the paper, firms might help workers with work permits tailored to a sector or region by paying a regional authority that would handle part of the administrative burden.
Improving Communication
One major program failure that has emerged is inadequate communication, the Senate was informed by the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology. The TFWP is now being handled by several departments, and there hasn’t been constant communication between them.
For instance, workers’ rights aren’t usually communicated to them. It is easier for non-compliant firms to temporarily improve work conditions because some employers are subject to duplicate workplace inspections, which are typically disclosed in advance. Additionally, the lack of data structure makes it challenging to measure program outcomes.
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science, and Technology has responded by stating that the creation of a Migrant Work Commission by the Canadian government is imperative. The Canadian government would be represented on this panel, along with commissioners for employers and migratory workers.
The commission would represent TFWs’ rights and operate as a single point of contact for reports of abuse and maltreatment through Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and the IRCC. Additionally, it would organize yearly meetings with pertinent parties and endeavor to develop a research program to gather, examine, and distribute information regarding the experiences of migrant laborers in Canada and their function in the market.
Numerous other recommendations were included in both reports, such as improving the pre-arrival data for TFW workplace inspections and growing the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) to enable more migrant and temporary workers to become permanent citizens.
The government has 150 calendar days from the date a standing committee provides a report to either provide a response or provide an explanation for why one has not been provided, according to Senate-outlined legislation.
Conclusion
Stay updated on the latest information regarding work permits, visa applications, paths to permanent residency, and visa-sponsored employment by following us on Newsnowgh.com.
Important Data in Table Format
| Key Aspect | Current Situation | Proposed Changes |
|---|---|---|
| TFWP Start Year | 1973 | – |
| LMIA Requirement | Positive or neutral LMIA | – |
| Work Permit Type | Closed (employer-specific) | Open or sector/region-specific |
| Employer Responsibilities | Wage, housing, healthcare | Shared with regional authority |
| Employee Vulnerability | High due to tied work permit | Reduced with open permits |
| Communication Issues | Poor inter-departmental comms | Improved with Migrant Work Commission |
| Government Response Time | 150 days | – |
Summary
The report suggests significant changes to the TFWP, aiming to improve conditions for temporary foreign workers and address employers’ concerns. Ending closed work permits and improving communication are key steps toward a more fair and efficient system.
