Human Resources Committee on Feb. 21st, 2019

[John Barlow]

Yes, it's commendable. I don't think there's enough detail in this bill to ensure there won't be additional costs.

Contrary to my colleague Mr. Long's comments the other day, we made some significant changes to the temporary foreign worker program in 2014. Maybe we went a little too far on the restrictions. You were talking about the red tape and obstacles to accessing the temporary foreign worker program, specifically with the LMIA. I hear all the time that it's taking longer and longer to navigate through the system. A lot of them have just given up; it takes too long is too costly.

We've talked about something like a trusted-employer program for those who have been in the system for five years with no problems. They have been audited and everything's been clear.

[Monique Moreau]

Yes.

[John Barlow]

Have you had conversations along that line? What would you do to make the LMIA program more streamlined or easier to access?

[Monique Moreau]

Certainly. It's problematic for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the cost went up significantly in 2014 and is now $1,000 for a small business. If you're applying for three, four or five positions, that becomes significant.

You have to remember that a small percentage of our membership does rely on the program. It's about 10%, but for those who do, it is critical to their business. The delays you mentioned end up causing business owners to miss a season, for example. I'm thinking of beekeepers in Saskatchewan who were waiting.... I think the most recent complaint we've had is that members are waiting nine to 12 months for the approval of their LMIA. This particular bee farm—I'm probably going to use the wrong terminology—was waiting for beekeepers, and they didn't arrive, so they essentially missed their honey collection season that summer.

With hot-air-balloon operators, for example, codes are not keeping up with how job definitions are changing. This has seemingly improved, but we're hearing too that business owners don't understand why their applications were rejected. They get vague letters saying, “You were rejected.” Is it because you didn't put the postal code on your application? Is it because your evidence of trying to hire Canadians wasn't sufficient? It doesn't necessarily clarify the reasons for the business member, who's now out $1,000, a significant amount of money for a small business owner.

Our perspective on that has been to improve the LMIA—certainly the cost, and to perhaps consider refunding business owners if they don't get a successful application. It shouldn't be an earnings process for the federal government.

[John Barlow]

A revenue generator?

[Monique Moreau]

Thank you. It shouldn't be a revenue generator.

Secondly, there has to be something done with the time frame, or perhaps there's a short response time so that within two weeks you hear that yes, your application is complete; yes, you have all the elements; and now you're into perhaps the six-month backlog. I think even having some feedback looped to the business owner about where their application is in the process—yes, you're close, or no, you're not—will allow them to then make alternative arrangements within their business.

Lastly, we're big advocates of something called the “introduction to Canada visa”, which is something we have suggested. Once a business has gone through the process and the steps of bringing that individual into the country, it works very hard to settle them into the community, to make sure they're feeling supported by doing the language training and some of the other things my co-witnesses have mentioned today. But then then they leave. We think that's a lost opportunity. We would encourage putting them on a path to permanent residency once they've been in the country and are proven to be embedded in the community. Allow them to change employers certainly, if they will, but they shouldn't necessarily be kicked out of the country.

Lastly, we're also big advocates of an employee's bill of rights. That's part of a report I can share with the committee if there's interest.

[John Barlow]

I'll pass my time on to Kerry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

He's given you a whole minute.

[Kerry Diotte, Edmonton Griesbach, CPC]

Very quickly, I think we've all been in Ubers and cabs and so forth and end up talking to people who have come recently to Canada and are highly skilled. They could be plumbers, electricians, doctors, and they can't get certified to work in Canada.

Mr. Bronk, is there a quick solution to that or something you could offer?

[Robert Bronk]

There is something in place. It's called an “equivalency assessment” that the Ontario College of Trades does. You can present your training and they will review it, and then they will deem you to have your so-called certificate of apprenticeship, your C of A. They won't make you go through the whole apprenticeship again. That then allows you to write the C of Q, which is a certificate of qualification. That enables you to become a journeyperson in Ontario, and if it's a red seal trade it's recognized across Canada. That exam is Canadian-specific. Our building codes, etc., are Canadian-specific, so even though that person might have been qualified in his or her country, they still need to know what the building code is. They can expedite that process and apply for an equivalency exemption so they don't have to go back for three eight-week blocks and prove their work hours. They can do that process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

We have MP Hogg next, please.

[Gordie Hogg, South Surrey—White Rock, Lib.]

Thank you. I will be sharing my time with the ever brilliant and prescient parliamentary secretary Cuzner.

[Some hon members]

Oh, oh!

[Gordie Hogg]

A number of the issues that have been talked about here are certainly present in metro Vancouver as well, and we've seen a number of examples of people trying to respond to those things. Affordability seems to be the pre-eminent issue we're hearing about or getting feedback on, to the effect, “We can't afford to live here”, despite the fact, as has been pointed out, there are great salaries coming out of the trades in particular. We're also seeing a number of tradespeople living outside of the metro area who are now being compensated for travel. They're saying that they're not going to take a job there unless...and they're in a strong negotiating position with that. That's changing the labour force a bit as well.

With respect to the SMEs, do you have any data or metrics with respect to the number of people who are actually going into part-time as opposed to full-time work, with an expectation that there aren't as many benefits associated with the latter? Is that something you've confronted? We've heard anecdotally this is happening.

[Robert Bronk]

Are you asking me?

[Gordie Hogg]

No, I wasn't. I was going to ask Monique.

[Robert Bronk]

Sorry, I wasn't sure who you were asking.

[Gordie Hogg]

You can answer it, too, if you wish.

Sorry, but with respect to the SMEs....

[Monique Moreau]

Are you asking whether there are more part-time jobs offered at the SMEs?

[Gordie Hogg]

Some employers are saying they want to go with part-time jobs rather than offering full-time positions because part-time jobs don't have as many benefits, and therefore they can—

[Monique Moreau]

Oh, I see. It's just to save on the costs.

[Gordie Hogg]

Is that anything that you're—

[Monique Moreau]

A labour shortage is a labour shortage. Most of our employers are looking for full-time, long-term employees to come and fill those labour gaps. In our experience, contractual or part-time work really is only starting to make headway, if you will, in areas like IT and consulting, where it's still prevalent. But by hiring two part-time workers to avoid having to pay benefits instead of hiring one full-time worker, they're doubling their training costs and ultimately doubling their payroll and red tape. Many of our business owners are happy to get one solid employee, to keep them, to train them and to do what they can to tenure them into their organization.

[Gordie Hogg]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Mr. Cuzner.