Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 25th, 2008

[Andrew Kenyon]

It's interesting. There are a variety of different types of labour disputes, of course, and we have to look at each one on a case-by-case basis. If there are negotiations under way for a new collective agreement, for instance, we want to make sure there's no impact on the outcome of those negotiations by bringing in temporary foreign workers. We want to always ensure that the temporary foreign workers enjoy the same benefits under a collective agreement when they're operating in a unionized environment. And if there is an actual labour dispute, a strike, for instance, we will generally refuse a labour market opinion simply because of the impact.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

So then, you're saying that employers make a request, which the department evaluates on the basis of these four criteria and, if the department's response is favourable, the employer can go ahead and hire the worker.

Do you follow up in some way with this employer to see if the four conditions have been met and if the employer is treating these workers decently and properly?

You circulated a small pamphlet at the start of your presentation in which we read that workers must be informed of their rights. What type of monitoring is done after the worker has been hired to ensure that the employer is fulfilling the terms of the contract with society?

[Andrew Kenyon]

Again you've hit on a very interesting question and one that preoccupies me as well as my minister.

Our ability to do investigations or verification of employers after we issue an LMO is quite limited at this point under current regulations, and we realize that this is an issue. We need to work more closely with other enforcement authorities in the provinces as well as with our colleagues in the federal government in order to do these. This is one of the reasons why we're developing information sharing agreements with the provinces, so that we can identify when there are problems and can notify the appropriate authorities to ensure that enforcement actions are taken.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

What you're saying then is that no systematic follow up is done.

[Andrew Kenyon]

If an employer is asking for an extension of a labour market opinion, we can check on their compliance with measures. But up to that point, there's very little we can do.

Another interesting development is under the expedited labour market opinion process that I mentioned in my presentation. Recognizing the limitations that the current regulatory provisions place on us, what we have done is include a provision in the application process whereby employers consent to allow us to do after-issuance verification, which I think is quite an important development, because it allows us to do the work that clearly we all agree needs to be done.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

If it comes to your attention that an employer is not respecting these criteria or is not treating employees properly, can you, pursuant to the regulations in place, turn down a subsequent request from this employer on the grounds that in the past, he has failed to comply with the regulations?

[Andrew Kenyon]

The legal advice we're receiving on this at this point is a bit mixed. But to the best of my knowledge, at this point we don't have the authority to assess past performance when we're checking on new labour market opinions. This is again one of the issues we have to address in future regulatory development.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you, Mr. St-Cyr.

Madam Chow.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In five years, if we look at 150,000 temporary foreign workers coming to Canada each year, to use this year's figure, we're looking at 750,000 or three quarters of a million workers. Your document said that about 25,000 of them will get landed immigrant status—that's about 3.3% who would get to stay—and you're looking at something like 725,000 who will not be able to stay, which means they are not likely going to be able to get landed immigrant status.

These workers, it seems to me, have absolutely no power. I've heard cases of abuse, exploitation of these workers, and overcrowding of accommodations. They put their money into employment insurance, but they can't get any of it because they have to leave. Some provinces don't have health insurance until they've been here for more than three months. Their family members most likely are not able to join them and never really would have a chance to join them.

We are setting up a system that, in my mind, at the end of the day, is going to be driving down Canadian wages. These workers basically have very little in the way of rights. The minute they complain.... Their permit is really for that job, for that employer; the visa is not really for the employment period of, say, two years. That has been one of the recommendations previously, and I notice that it hasn't been quite implemented yet.

Also, we know there are recruiters overseas, and some of them are pretty unscrupulous. They ask for $5,000, $10,000, and they promise the sky. There's no training. They come in, they don't know the safety measures, and they don't know the labour laws.

What has the department done, whether it's from CBSA or the CIC, to make sure the recruiters overseas, those who are operating in not a very legal manner, are punished?

I notice that none has gone to jail. I can't see that many have been charged. Who really is in charge—is it CIC, or is it CBSA, or is it the RCMP—to make sure that at a bare minimum these workers coming in would not have these recruiters just exploiting them?

[Les Linklater]

Mr. Chair, these are issues of great concern, not only to the departments here today but also to our provincial colleagues. In fact, as Mr. Kenyon has mentioned, information-sharing agreements with the provinces are being developed to help us share information around infractions not only of federal statutes but also of provincial statutes.

For example, the four western provinces all have legislation on the books that makes it illegal for recruitment agencies to charge a fee to the prospective employee. Although they may charge the employer for their services, it is illegal under provincial statute for them to charge the employee.

When an employee comes forward with that type of information, either to HRSDC or to CIC or CBSA, we direct them to the appropriate provincial officials. We do, I think as Mr. Kenyon pointed out, recognize that the systematic follow-up is something we need to work on through future regulatory initiatives.

The key to that is being able to share information with the provinces more freely and between the three federal departments that are involved to make sure we're bringing all of our tools to the table to look at the activities of recruiters.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Your visa office staff are not trained to ask the question about whether you are in fact being charged. I've seen cases where the employees complain before their trial would actually get to court--their day in court. They're already deported because they lost the job. Of course, the employer then fires them. This means that no charge would ever stick because they've gone. So why would any employee report? There's no opportunity.... We don't have any law to say that if you do complain, we will stop all removal against you. I haven't heard that.

I've noticed that the CBSA in fact do not stop the deportation, and CIC overseas don't ask the employee whether they are being charged or not. So how would that system work? The provincial government says, well, it's not our responsibility. So how would that work?

[Les Linklater]

These are very difficult issues, Mr. Chair, and there's no denying that more work needs to be done in these areas.

When it comes to the activities of recruiters overseas, it's very difficult for CIC to have enforcement action taken against foreign-based recruiters. For example, we would require the cooperation of local law enforcement agencies that may in fact be operating in full compliance with local legislation. That does make it problematic should we think that temporary foreign workers could have been mistreated.

As part of our moving forward with regulatory changes, however, we recognize that there are situations where employees who have come to Canada will find themselves in situations of distress not of their own making. We would want to look at appropriate remedies, so that the employer, or the employer because of their activities, is penalized for any action that has caused distress or made the worker more vulnerable, and not penalize the worker. So we would look at some sort of regime to provide a safety net for workers in those types of situations.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I asked the question on the order paper to CBSA as to how many Canadian-born children have been deported because their parents are undocumented workers. I got back a response saying that CBSA don't have that and other agencies do not keep these kinds of statistics.

Does CIC have these statistics as to when you deport undocumented workers? Some of them have Canadian-born kids. How many Canadian children have been deported, say, in the last two to three years? Does anyone have any statistics on that?

[Robert MacDougall]

Mr. Chair, I would say the answer to that would be zero, in that we don't remove Canadian-born Canadian citizens. The parents may be subject to removal, and obviously they will be likely to take the kids with them, yes.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Yes. I can't imagine they would leave the kids in Canada.

[Robert MacDougall]

We certainly respect that you want to keep the families together and so on. But as far as keeping statistics on the number of those cases where that has occurred....

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Well, let me go in another direction. How many Canadian families--

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

The time is up. I guess we can get it on the next round.

I'd like you to comment, though, on the part of Ms. Chow's question that dealt with the EI. Would a temporary foreign worker pay EI? If the temporary foreign worker pays EI and can't draw employment insurance, is that fair?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Yes, but they can't draw on it because the minute they are unemployed they're gone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

That's right; they're gone after the harvest is over, or what have you.

So they would pay EI premiums, would they not?

[Andrew Kenyon]

Yes, they actually do pay EI premiums.

It's not an easy issue to address, because the principle behind EI is that you're allowed to collect EI premiums if you're available for work in Canada, but of course the temporary foreign workers you mentioned leave the country and therefore are not eligible.

On the other hand, what we're asking employers to do is to provide consistent conditions for temporary foreign workers, i.e., if they work under the same conditions as Canadians, they will pay the same deductions as Canadians.

It's an issue we're aware of. I have to admit at this point that we don't have an answer for it, but we're looking at it. It's not an easy one to fix.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Yes, you should. If you're not eligible to draw unemployment insurance, you shouldn't be paying premiums.

[Andrew Kenyon]

Exactly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Mr. Komarnicki, and then Mr. Bevilacqua.