Thank you, Chair.
OCASI is concerned with the human rights of migrant workers in Canada. These workers are an important part of our communities and our economy and deserve to be treated in a fair and equitable manner while having their rights recognized and respected. While we are encouraged by government efforts to increase accountability in the program and particularly to impose consequences for non-compliance by employers, there is a potential that some of these amendments may have unintended negative consequences for migrant workers and may increase their vulnerability to further abuse and exploitation
Regarding clause 308 on the publication of employer names and addresses, in 2009, the government promised to publish the list of bad employers on the department website. Despite the number of instances in which employers were found to be in violation of the program, the list was not posted online until 2011, and, once created, published no names for another three years. Today, the list contains just five employers. Without sufficient resources for enforcement, employer violations can go unchecked and the names and addresses will never be published on the list. The government must give the same priority to investigation by ESDC and enforcement as it does to the processing of labour market assessments and employer permits.
Regarding clause 311 on employer fees, regardless of what the government has intended, we have heard that in many cases the increased LMIA fees are being downloaded directly to the worker. Raising fees to $1,000 in June 2014 increased the financial burden for a significant number of workers rather than acting as a deterrent to the employer or recruiter. This situation can be dealt with by developing a comprehensive recruiter licensing system where one is not already provided in provincial legislation and by holding employers and recruiters jointly liable for downloading fees and penalties to the worker.
Regarding clause 307, while the intention is to enforce compliance through the threat of suspension or relocation as it applies to the employer, this clause will punish the worker at the same time by suspending or revoking his or her work permit. The worker's legal status in Canada is tied to a valid work permit, which is tied to the employer. When that permit is suspended or revoked, a worker is left without legal status in the country through no fault of his or her own and in fact is rendered more vulnerable. Workers who are dependent on the employer for housing and means of support, particularly when these are part of the terms of employment, will be left without status, income, shelter, and food. These factors will serve as a major disincentive for the worker to report abuse.
Instead a mechanism should be provided to stop the removals of migrant workers where abuse has been reported, and the affected worker should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency. At the very least, the worker should be given an open work permit to find another employer, pay any debts, support their families, and be shielded from employer reprisals. Such a provision would act as an incentive for workers to come forward to help with enforcing the compliance regime and make the employers more accountable.
Clause 313 introduces a new provision for the government to collect, retain, and use the social insurance number. It seems to be an unnecessarily intrusive way of ensuring employer compliance. One former member agency that works with migrant workers told us that CIC already asks their clients to provide their SIN. They found that the information is used to find and deport out-of-status clients. These are workers who are out of status but working and using the SIN to pay income tax and who are then punished for doing so.
There's a place for a temporary migrant worker program in Canada's mix of immigration programs, but we're troubled by the levels to which migrant workers have been recruited, particularly in Ontario where permanent residency has decreased while temporary migrant worker numbers have increased. Permanent residency leading to citizenship must always be the foundation of our immigration and protection programs. Just like reducing worker vulnerability, it should be part of any of our labour market programs
Thank you.