Evidence of meeting #24 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, could Mr. Komarnicki have e-mailed this to the clerk? We agreed that we were not going to entertain anything on Bill C-50. I think Mr. Komarnicki is completely out of order on this. He could have mailed it or given it to the clerk. He didn't have to make a grandstanding of it.
Conservative
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
I'm not asking for the motion to be debated, and I'm not asking that the motion be voted on, although that's another issue. These motions were filed--three of them--and I'm filing the fourth, which represents our point of view and what we're prepared to do. So it's a matter of filing--
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Andrew Telegdi
That's fine, Mr. Komarnicki, but you are wasting the committee's time and there is no need to do that. You can file it with the clerk as other people have done. They didn't get up in committee and take time from the witnesses.
Mr. McKeever, I'm sorry about that.
Derry McKeever Community Spokesperson, Friends of Farmworkers
Mr. Chair, thank you very much for your firm intervention in getting the committee moving again--I hope.
I just want to speak for a moment about Mr. Cadotte and myself. We are both retired from the manufacturing sector and have worked a little with some of the migrant workers in our community. As a matter of fact, we have worked on the line during the harvest pack at one of the major produce packing operations in Dresden, Ontario, for a number of years. We became aware of some of the issues on what was happening with migrant workers through experience, social interaction, and working beside them.
I want to let you know a couple of very important moments in my life. One of them was on a day off from our work in the harvest pack operations when we were able to bring some migrant workers into our homes for dinner. As a matter of fact, a member of the Rastafarian sect from Jamaica, a member of the Christian sect from Jamaica, and a first nations person from Canada sat down together in my home. It was a very proud moment for me to be able to bring the migrant workers into my house to meet my family and interact with Canadians, which is almost never done.
Another proud moment occurred on January 26 this year when 350 members of the Canadian auto workers stood up in front of a fish processing plant in Wheatley, Ontario, to say we thought the rights of migrant workers and foreign workers were very important and we were willing to fight for them.
Those two issues were of great significance in my life. I'm very happy that both of them occurred, and we are going to continue working with migrant workers.
Mr. Cadotte will carry on and give our presentation as Friends of Farmworkers.
Ronald Cadotte Vice-Chairperson, Friends of Farmworkers
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, and committee members, the Chatham-Kent, Ontario-based group, Friends of Farmworkers, is a local community-based coalition of like-minded individuals who see a need for community advocacy for temporary foreign workers. We are all volunteers, and we come from a variety of backgrounds. The Friends of Farmworkers group does not have ties to any other organization, but does, however, work with faith communities, social justice groups, worker advocates, and some cultural and community organizations.
We believe Canada needs these workers, and they should benefit from the same programs Canadian workers enjoy, including the right to permanent residence. Several of the members of the group have been working with agricultural workers for many years, forming a loose coalition after the death of a young married worker in Charing Cross, Ontario, at a mushroom processing and farming operation in 1979.
We have become more interested in the problems that face temporary foreign workers after the death of two workers in this classification at Peeters' Mushroom Farm near the town of Blenheim in Chatham-Kent in March and April of 2007. Phunsak Phathong and Ulai Buapatcha, both in their early 30s and in good physical condition, died at the same residence within 30 days of each other in 2007. Both of these workers were from Thailand and were part of the low-skilled temporary worker program. There was great difficulty in repatriation of the bodies of these workers because the employer did not feel responsible to assist in a meaningful way.
We began a dialogue with the local Thai community to express our concern about these two deaths, and in the course of making contact, we became aware of many problems that were facing foreign workers locally and across Canada, the extent of which we will try to assist you to understand in the next few minutes.
When we spoke to workers about issues they were facing, we were appalled at the lack of resources available to them. We saw the need for some type of arbitration process that could look at complaints and offer resolution, or at least some type of process that could offer solutions to existing conditions that foreign workers were asking us to change.
One of the issues locally has been housing of workers that does not meet Canadian standards and is, in our view, dangerous and unsafe. We believe that some housing options given to foreign workers could allow disastrous consequences if guidelines are not put in place. In the case of workers at a local fish processing plant in Wheatley, Ontario, up to 28 workers were, and some are still, living in a bunkhouse that clearly is not and was not intended to be used as housing units. The premises were set up as a retail outlet, then converted to an administration unit, and now are used to house the workers at this plant. The Thai community is doing what it can to assist these particular foreign workers, but it is a very tiny community without extensive resources.
We have also been aware of landlords locally who have had less than favourable experiences with this classification of worker. In one case, because the landlord believed that the 16 women living in a two-bedroom apartment unit would be living in his unit for much longer than the crop season, he actually held the remaining women after the season was over, confined to his housing unit, as a method to ensure payment of rent. It required some negotiations and diplomatic efforts to ensure that the workers were released and allowed to move on to more suitable living accommodations close to the next employer.
These are just two of the local problems encountered as we assist foreign workers with working problems.
We also have concerns where there is potential for abuse of foreign workers, including the issue of wages. Specifically, we have information that wages in some places differ substantially for offshore workers compared to wages for the same work done by local workers. We know, for instance, that some employers refuse to pay overtime for work above the normal work week and that hours of work can be much lower than the hours promised in contracts.
We are unsure how safety information on the job is explained to workers unable to understand English. We know that some local folks are teaching English as a second language at workplaces, but we feel the government should allow paid time for workers to learn the language skills.
It is our belief that no worker should be held in economic slavery by agents or third-party workplace organizations, including areas of visa renewal and passport restrictions. Although we have many contacts with workers in the area, they come from the Latino and Caribbean countries. We know that in Chatham-Kent-Essex they have advocates to ensure that cultural and linguistic differences can be overcome.
The many workers covered by the seasonal workers agricultural program with the Latino and Caribbean countries know that they have a framework that will address worker concerns and differences. We believe the seasonal agricultural workers program parameters should be upgraded to allow more worker recognition in decision-making, and there is a definite need for these types of bilateral and multilateral agreements with governments from emerging foreign nations.
The solution is to review existing agreements to agree to a foreign worker bill of rights. This bill of rights should allow every worker in Canada the same rights as Canadian workers. We believe that if a foreign worker pays taxes and mandatory deductions to CPP, EI, and WSIB, they should have the same rights and responsibilities. Canada's reputation globally should be sullied by its disgraceful treatment of foreign workers.
Thank you.
Liberal
Sue Wilson Director, Office of Systemic Justice, Federation of Sisters of St. Joseph of Canada
Thank you.
I'm here representing the Federation of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Canada.
In my work at the systemic justice office I've come in contact with a number of migrant workers from both Thailand and Indonesia who have been badly exploited in Canada. These workers came to southern Ontario under the temporary foreign worker program. While some of the workers we've talked to had satisfactory work placements, a disturbing number did not. The differences in their experiences are significant enough to suggest that there are two very different streams of migrant workers coming to Canada from Thailand and Indonesia.
All the workers we talked to were victims of fraud in either Thailand or Indonesia. They had to pay about $10,000 Canadian to the recruitment agency in order to get a job placement. They took out loans to pay this, some paying up to 60% interest. They were all told they would make such good money in Canada that they could pay off the loan within a few months. They were not told about the deductions the agent in Canada would take from their pay, including the cost of shelter, food, and transportation.
However, I refer to two streams of workers. While some of these workers received legitimate job placements—and by that I mean they were taken to the place of employment on their contract when they came to Canada—others never had a legitimate contract with an employer in Canada, although they thought they did. This second stream of workers, as far as I can tell, seems to be extra workers who were recruited by the agency on behalf of a Canadian agent. They found themselves in situations of extreme exploitation in Canada because there were never legitimate job placements for them; the contracting agent in Canada put them in an illegal situation right from the start.
In our work at the systemic justice office, we've accompanied survivors of human trafficking as they've applied for TRPs as trafficked persons. As a result of this experience, we've learned a great deal about human trafficking in Canada. As we listen to the stories of the migrant workers from Thailand and Indonesia who fall into this second stream of extra workers, we realize that according to the UN definition of trafficking there were significant elements of trafficking in their stories.
First and foremost, there seems to be a direct link between the fraud and misrepresentation of salary and working conditions that takes place in Thailand or Indonesia by the recruitment agency and the fraud that takes place in Canada by the contracting agent who takes them to a place of work that is not on their contract, tells them after a while that they're illegal, and, when they ask to get a legal work permit, demands up to $1,000 but never delivers this new work permit. We know of this direct link between the fraud taking place in the country of origin and the fraud in Canada because workers talk about seeing the Canadian agent at the agency in Thailand. Indeed, they think of this agent as their employer.
The UN definition of trafficking also refers to elements of control and coercion. Primarily these workers are controlled by the huge debt they owe in their country of origin. They know their family will suffer greatly if they don't pay off this debt. They're also controlled by their lack of English and their unfamiliarity with Canada's labour laws. In addition, some workers were controlled by having their passport taken away. Others had their contract taken away as soon as they left the airport. Many were told not to leave the farm or they'd be deported, since they were here illegally, even though it was the agent who put them in this illegal situation.
Finally, there are many elements of labour exploitation, which for the sake of time I won't get into now, but I would be most willing to talk about in the question period.
So with fraud, misrepresentation, control, coercion, exploitation, and organized criminal activity, there are many elements of trafficking in these stories. However, none of these workers will come forward to apply for a temporary resident permit as a trafficked person because they don't feel protected by the process.
For starters, the burden of proof that's required by CIC to show that they were controlled by an agent is too high. Both CIC and the RCMP look for indicators of physical harm, threats of physical harm, or having been locked in rooms.
What these stories show is that agents can control migrant workers in many different ways. Migrant workers are controlled by huge debts, by lack of English, and by the fear that they are illegal and will be arrested and deported, leaving them with no way to pay off their debt. This burden of proof is so high because the government's priority is the prosecution of traffickers, and this high standard of control is required by the criminal courts.
Liberal
Director, Office of Systemic Justice, Federation of Sisters of St. Joseph of Canada
In our view, the focus should be on the protection of the human rights of workers. We should sign the convention for the protection of migrant workers rights. The temporary resident permit should have a humanitarian and compassionate ground. And there should be changes to the temporary foreign worker program to get rid of private recruiting agencies in the country of origin as well as agents in Canada, to have open work permits to allow workers to change employers within their field of work, and to create an advocacy office for migrant workers.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Andrew Telegdi
Thank you very much.
Next we will go to the Diocese of London, Marie Carter.
Marie Carter Specialist, Migrant Workers Ministry, Diocese of London
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the panel.
I'd just like to give you a bit of context before we start. The Diocese of London has been involved in the work of temporary foreign workers through the seasonal agricultural workers program for at least 30 years, with parish-based programs that range anywhere from simple welcoming actions, to bringing these individuals into the life of the parish, to bicycle safety programs, to people working on basic rights issues with the workers. We formalized that outreach three years ago with a migrant workers ministry committee, and in September of last year we presented our written brief to this committee. Since that time, we've continued with the work, and I would say, concerning what we've written in the paper we have for you, we've seen some more severe cases since that time. So we are recommitted to the idea that the temporary low-skilled workers program is really deserving of the attention of our diocese in particular.
The temporary low-skilled workers program in particular is much more severe than anything we've seen previously in the 30 years of work with the seasonal agricultural workers program.
I'd also like to give as context the fact that our diocese covers some of the best agricultural land in Canada. It has one of the largest greenhouse industries in the country, so certainly, we'd see one of the highest concentrations of agricultural workers in the greenhouse industry within our boundaries and also in many field crops.
Since March 2007, we've become involved in supporting the work of Gerry and Lek VanKoeverden, who, I am pleased to say, were able to come here today. They are volunteers who give sacrificially of their time and resources to do outreach to Thai migrants in our area. They are both former directors of CUSO in Southeast Asia. We're very pleased to have people who have both linguistic skills and tremendous backgrounds to be able to speak directly with workers and who really, truly understand their concerns. We're also pleased to have Gerry and Lek on our committee because they are also farmers, so we know that we can bring a balanced approach to this. We don't see this as the church and workers against farmers or anything of that nature. We really see a need to bring a balanced, community approach to this problem, and as such, we see that within the temporary low-skilled workers program there are many problems for both farmer and worker.
I will turn it over to Gerry and Lek to tell you a few of the incidents they have been working on for the last two years in this area. They're the best people to speak to the rest of our presentation.
Gerry VanKoeverden Volunteer (migrant outreach), Diocese of London
Hello everybody.
Basically, my wife Lek and I have been working with Thai migrant workers since January, when we discovered there were Thais in the area. It turned out they had been in the area for four or five years, but migrant workers lie so low under the radar that you don't notice they're there. We first found out about them from a neighbour who had seven of them, and we basically helped out, with him, in terms of communication, because there were a certain number of communication problems. Out of that we started teaching English. We have several classes once a week in Leamington, Blenheim, and Dresden, and through that we've learned about all the different problems they've come out with.
Everything I've heard reflects what Sister Sue has mentioned about their history in Thailand--the indebtedness. They come here as debt slaves. That's what people from Asia come here as when they come as workers with the low-skilled workers service program.
So we've been trying to help them out through teaching English, and also by having them have some understanding of their rights, which is very difficult to get across. We're also working, for instance, in rescuing workers. There were two groups of workers who came here last September: one group of 35 women in Chatham and another 100 in Toronto. They are people who come here and then within several weeks, within two or three weeks, all the work is done. So you have people here who pay $10,000 to come overseas and within a week or two all their work is finished; they have no work. Their employer does not have work for them. So what are these people going to do? Who do you go to? Do you call up HRSDC? What can they do? They have no mandate to go into the field anyway, so they cannot go into the field and try to help sort things out.
So basically we help to make connections between certain employers who do need people, who have LMOs with HRSDC. They have need of people and they can then transfer these people onto their LMO. So this is not a very complicated thing, but we've managed to help 49 people this way, people from Toronto and Chatham who have gotten lost in the system. There are still large numbers out there who are working in sweatshops, underground places, different kinds of places. I have names, but I don't think I should mention them here, where basically they're working for cash money. They have no health coverage. They have no protection from the law. They are basically working in sweatshops. I would say half of the Thai migrant workers here in Ontario are already illegal.
It's very difficult to help these people, so all we can do is provide some English training for them. In one case we provided mattresses for them because they had no mattresses to sleep on in their house, and also we've been able to give very limited medical aid to a few of these people. For the great majority of people we can't really do too much. They get people who come to them, agents who will promise that they will get them refugee status. And they will quote them. They will say, “For $1,500, I will get you a year of refugee status. For $3,000, I'll get you two years of refugee status.” Of course, it's all hokey, but these are the kinds of things to which these desperate people are subjected, and in fact, labour agents who use them illegally also often force them to apply for refugee status as part of the deal for their staying on with them.
Our biggest thrust is to try to find a solution and to try to build a better model for this system. With seven greenhouse employers in Leamington, basically once they've gotten to understand the problems with having a labour contractor and going through a labour contractor, they have come around to the fact that they have to be able to handle their own paperwork, to be able to deal directly with their workers, to be able to deal directly with HRSDC, and to be able to get some stability in the program.
With these several employers, for instance, we had a meeting a few weeks ago, again to work on their different problems and to work through the paperwork to try to successfully make this program work.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Andrew Telegdi
Could you just wrap it up? We're running over time on this. We'll get back to you with questions.
Specialist, Migrant Workers Ministry, Diocese of London
One of our main points in all our approaches is that third-party contractors, who are really not supposed to be part of this program, should no longer be allowed to operate. There should be better ways for the government to control illegal activity in the program. If that can't be controlled, I think we need a moratorium on the temporary low-skilled workers program, and we need to be looking at better models. The SAWP program, for all its faults, is at least much more accountable to governments and provides much more protection for both farmer and worker.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Andrew Telegdi
Thank you very much.
In the first round, we're going to go to Mr. Karygiannis. You have five minutes.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the committee.
Mr. Chair, I can't help but look at this thing the parliamentary secretary gave to us, and I would like to read it.
Liberal
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Well, Mr. Chair, it's my five minutes, and I would like to spend it the way I want.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Andrew Telegdi
No. That would be out of order, and I would not want to rule my colleague from the same party out of order. We can debate that later on, once we complete this business. We've had people come forward to us to make presentations, so we're going to do justice to it and--
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
My only concern, Mr. Chair, is that there's going to be a press release going out tomorrow from the parliamentary secretary stating--me, too, I'm going to have this--that we will report the findings to the House by May 7. That's an insult to this committee. This is an insult to what we're doing here.
Anyway, Mr. Chair, enough said on that. I will ask a couple of questions, and I thank you.
Whoever wants to can take this question.
Among the people who employ the foreign workers we bring every year from different countries to be here with us, there are people who are abusive and people who are not abusive. In the work you've done in the field, would you say that most of the farmers who bring in these foreign workers on a yearly basis actually take care of them, or do you find that the great majority of the farmers are abusing the foreign workers?
Volunteer (migrant outreach), Diocese of London
Very much the majority of growers take care of the workers. There's no question about that. The abuses I think are on the minor side. There are some severe abuses, but in general, the workers are fairly well taken care of. I don't think that's an issue. The main issue is actually the coordination of this effort and allowing for third parties, who are then milking both the workers, whose language they speak, and the growers.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Staying on the question, what percentage would you say are abusive employers? If we have a hundred employers bringing people in, is it 2%, is it 5%, is it 10%, is it 20%, or is it 30%?
Specialist, Migrant Workers Ministry, Diocese of London
Mr. Karygiannis, to understand the question, I think I'd like to answer your question with a question. I would ask you what percentage of people being exploited would be acceptable.