Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 1st, 2008

[Gil McGowan]

The wages for temporary foreign workers are clearly outlined in the labour market opinion. And what we're finding—

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

And they're set by which level of government?

[Gil McGowan]

By the federal level.

What we're finding—

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Sorry, the wages are set by which? The federal government?

[Gil McGowan]

The wages are set in the labour market opinion for the workers we're talking about.

One of our points is that—

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Just hold on a second.

My professor used to say that BS baffles brains. And although I come from a strong union family, what I'm hearing here are complaints that should be addressed at different levels of government.

[Gil McGowan]

With due respect, I disagree.

We have addressed these issues with the provincial level of government, and we've addressed them very vigorously.

We want to take this opportunity to talk about that portion of the responsibility that falls in the federal realm. What I'm trying to say is that the labour market opinions, as an example, do clearly outline what wages are paid, but in many cases we're finding that—

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

So they are governed by the provincial government—

[Gil McGowan]

No, they are not, sir. No, they are not, and they're being ignored.

We've got employers who have promised in their LMOs to pay $24 an hour, and when the workers get here they're paid $12 or something. The problem is that there's no federal mechanism in place, there are no inspection officers, there are no compliance officers, who can actually go to the employer and do audits. There's no ombudsperson to make sure that what's said in the LMO is actually in practice on the ground. And that's just one example.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

That's a good point, an excellent point, and I'm glad you made it. You got it out.

Mr. St-Cyr.

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

Thank you very much.

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible--Editor]

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

You were over five minutes. What do you want?

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

You will have another turn for clarification. It's my turn now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay, I'll come back to you.

Mr. St-Cyr.

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

Thank you very much.

I'm very pleased that you all came today to this hearing, and unlike Mr. Karygiannis, I believe that you really want to protect workers. I know you want to protect foreign workers and you also want to protect Canadian workers.

I was reading your briefs. There were several briefs. There are six recommendations from the International Brotherhood, with several recommendations about protecting foreign workers. Had Mr. Karigiannis not been spending time playing “Brick Breaker” on his BlackBerry, he might have grasped your position more clearly. That's what they would have seen.

I would like to come back to what one of you mentioned.

Mr. McGowan, you noted that in the last years your program had changed in several aspects. You said the numbers had changed, and you also talked about the range of the program that was broadened. It has broadened in the last years, and you didn't have a lot of time to finish your brief. I was just wondering what the other changes were that happened recently in the program.

[Gil McGowan]

A major, and we think significant, change is the use to which the program is being put by employers. When this program was first established more than 40 years ago, it was clear that the temporary foreign worker program should only be used as a stopgap measure and as a tool of last resort for human resources.

But increasingly across the country, but especially here in Alberta, employers are looking at the temporary foreign worker program not as a stopgap measure, not as a tool of last resort, but as their first choice for finding workers for their projects. Just as an example, I had a recent conversation with a project manager--

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

I'll have to interrupt you because I want to get to the point. Were there any other changes you'd like to tell us about?

[Gil McGowan]

But there are all sorts of problems.

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

Almost all of you talked about the fact that the name of the employer was on the visa. You were saying that temporary worker visas were linked to a specific employer and the employer's name. No employers support this. Everyone says this should go. Do any of you know why? Can you tell us, when they created this policy, why that was the case? Why do we force foreign workers to have a name on their visa and to work only in a specific area? Do you know any philosophical reasons for that? I know this isn't an easy question to answer because you're all against this principle, but why do you think it exists?

[Gil McGowan]

Probably because of the way the program was initially organized, and also, frankly, it's an effort to control the workers. They want to know where they are.

That's speculation, but the practice and the result is that employers are able to exercise undue influence on the workers because they can't move from one employer to another, as Canadians can, if they're mistreated. The employer holds a very heavy hammer over their heads, and this lack of mobility is one of the big reasons why these workers are much more vulnerable in the workplace than Canadian workers.

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

Thank you.

Almost all of you mentioned the fact that recruiters are paid directly by temporary workers. I think this is illegal in Alberta. You said this should be forbidden everywhere and that this wasn't a good practice. How does this happen? What should we do? Can you give us any suggestions as to how we should deal with this when these transactions are happening in other countries?

[Gil McGowan]

With all due respect, these transactions are not always happening in other countries. They're often being charged here in Alberta or in other provinces; we just don't know about it. One of the big problems is that the brokers themselves are largely unregulated. As a result of the expansion of this program, we've created a very shady industry with very few rules.

One of the best ways to deal with the problem would be to impose stricter regulations and controls on the brokers themselves. We have rules, for example, for immigration brokers. We have no rules for employment brokers. As a very small first step, we should impose the same kinds of restrictions on temporary foreign worker brokers that we already impose on immigration brokers in the main-line immigration system.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Ms. Chow, maybe you can work your comments in. I have a strict timeline here, because I have a full hour of hearings yet to come and there are flight considerations and what have you.

Go ahead, Ms. Chow.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

So far I've heard three or four key recommendations. I totally agree that this temporary foreign workers program should be a stopgap, and if the people are good enough to work here, they're good enough to stay here, so we should bring them in as landed immigrants.

Putting that aside, if we are to have a program, it sounds as though you want the visas going to the trade and not to the employer; you want decent enforcement that includes a joint compliance team to do checks without announcements so that you know the standards are being enforced; you want the federal government to at least get a work plan from the provincial government to see the overall coordination. I'm hearing that you do not want labour market opinions to be given again to employers who have shown violations. I'm hearing that you want Canada to sign—and I'm not sure if this is the one—some kinds of conditions maybe with foreign countries, so that we can stop those recruiters who are unscrupulous right at the source, because right now it's buck-passing as to which country and which level of government is really responsible, right? You want advocacy centres that are jointly run by stakeholders and you folks and the government, with the funding coming perhaps from the employer or maybe from the feds and the province, so they are jointly funded; you want decent orientation programs in different languages especially. And you want the Canadian class to provide them the opportunity to stay here after two years, just as the live-in caregivers program does, right?

It's not just the top skills; it's A, B, C, D, and even those that are lower skills, so there is hope at the end of the tunnel.

Now, having said all that, I've heard the minister recently, even in the last few days, saying that Canada needs lots of workers, and that's why we're changing the rules here and there in different ways. We need to make the backlog a lot shorter, etc. How are the different unions--especially from the federation side, the UFCW, the electrical workers, and the associations--going to be able to persuade all the members of Parliament, from all parties, that these kinds of recommendations are critically important to making sure that Canadian working families have living wages and that we don't pit temporary foreign workers, a lot of them visible minorities, against the Canadian working families and therefore cause resentment that doesn't call for a very good, healthy, inclusive community?

I'm worried about the racial overtone that's in this conflict, and I can see it coming. So how are you going to be able to persuade us, the different MPs, that this is something that we really must put in place?