Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 14th, 2008

[Carole Fiset]

Yes, but industrialized countries are currently bringing in labour from developing countries, such as live-in caregivers who come from the Philippines.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you, Madame Fiset.

Mr. St-Cyr.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for being here. I have a few questions to ask the people from the commission.

We talked about the detention of legal documents. Can you tell me whether that is legal? Can an employer require it? If not, how does it work? What kind of agreement can there be?

[Marc-André Dowd]

Based on our analysis, it's illegal, particularly under the Charter and the articles that I cited. However, the practice of some employers is to demand that they keep identity papers.

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

You consider it illegal to require it. In your opinion, if there is a private agreement, it would be legal in the present context.

[Marc-André Dowd]

Absolutely, that is to say that, if a worker says that it suits him that his employer retains his passport or his identity cards, that's his personal choice, and there's no problem. However, that's not how it's presented, because it's a requirement in some cases.

In our community consultation with the organizations, we suggested that the employer instead retain a copy of the identity paper and that the employee keep the original at all times. If he needs his passport—

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

You say it is prohibited to require it, and you discourage the idea of the employer retaining it. You prefer the employer to keep a copy.

[Marc-André Dowd]

That's correct.

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

A number of groups that have come before us reported a lot of situations of abuse. For example, in my riding, some groups told me about them and you've reported that to us as well.

How is it that this situation persists in an advanced society like ours? Who monitors the situation? Is it you? The labour inspectors in Quebec City or the Commission des normes du travail? People describe an extremely difficult situation to us and many cases of abuse. How is it that this situation continues?

[Marc-André Dowd]

There are a number of answers. First of all, this is a legally complex situation of shared responsibilities between the federal and provincial governments. You've also had occasion to hear about that.

A number of players have responsibilities. Our commission has responsibility in this area, and we have been working actively on this file for three years. We've obtained a judgment against an agricultural business that had established completely segregational working conditions between two classes of workers. We're in contact with the organizations.

We talked about agricultural workers, but that's not yet true in the case of domestic workers, who are extremely vulnerable. When you're extremely vulnerable, you don't complain, you endure conditions because you want to keep your job and because you don't want to be sent back to your country. We believe that worker vulnerability is definitely an important point that prevents people from reporting situations.

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

Shouldn't we change our approach? Our system, for citizens in general, is quite passive, because we don't interfere in relations between individuals as long as they don't complain. Since that doesn't work, should we think about introducing some kind of organization, for example? At one point, you talked about an independent body in the event of disputes. Shouldn't we be more proactive and go and see whether the working conditions and rights of individuals are respected, rather than wait for a complaint?

It seems to me that it's been shown that the passive system doesn't work.

[Carole Fiset]

It's probably for that reason, in the absence of submissions or neutral bodies to refer to, that five applications for union accreditation were made in 2006-2007.

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

You talked about Quebec and federal jurisdictions in this matter. When people arrive in Quebec, they essentially have relations with the Government of Quebec. The Quebec government is responsible for working conditions, manpower training and all civil exchanges.

Wouldn't it be simpler and more effective if immigration programs, like those for temporary workers, were the direct responsibility of the Quebec government? Wouldn't there be better accountability? We wouldn't have this kind of situation that the organizations have described to us: they go to see the federal government, which says that that comes under labour standards and that they must therefore deal with the Quebec government, which in turn says that it's an immigration matter and that's the federal government's responsibility, and so on.

In any case, that will happen at the Quebec level once they're here. Shouldn't that be Quebec's responsibility?

[Marc-André Dowd]

We would at least be able to clarify the legal situation for everyone. From the commission's perspective, one thing is certain: when a person—and I mean a person, not necessarily a citizen—is on Quebec soil, Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms applies to that person, and he or she may, at all times, contact the commission, for example. That's what some have done, which explains our involvement in this matter.

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

Neither the commission nor any Quebec government entity can monitor people who have a temporary work permit, since Ottawa has the list of visas issued and no exchange is done.

[Carole Fiset]

I know that our department of immigration and cultural communities do a certain amount of monitoring, particularly in the case of live-in caregivers. Year after year, it conducts about 20 investigations a month. Officials go and check with employers to see how things are going, and so on, but that's a grain of sand.

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

Are these investigations conducted after complaints have been filed, or are they done spontaneously? Are these random checks?

[Carole Fiset]

They're done randomly. Indeed, there should be a body that provides direct services to these workers. If we rely solely on the contract binding the seasonal agricultural workers to their employer and if, for example, the employer doesn't act on a request for the worker's health insurance card, how can the worker obtain care? With whom can he go to medical centres to receive care?

Last summer, for example, the commission decided, on its own initiative, to investigate the situation of a seasonal agricultural worker who was having problems obtaining his health insurance card and getting care. Neither the consulate, the employer, nor the other bodies were responsible. Nothing in the employment contract states who is responsible for driving the worker and having him cared for if he has a health problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Mr. Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Doyle.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for being with us today. I've carefully followed your remarks. My Conservative colleagues who are permanent members of this committee aren't with me today, but they will be getting a summary. Most are in the House and they will rejoin the committee for its tour in eastern Canada.

Mr. Boudreau, you clearly described a serious trend that we find here in Quebec. I think that temporary and immigrant workers are here to stay and that there will be more and more of them. I also liked your remarks on educated immigration. It's as though we had, I wouldn't say two classes of immigrants... We must explore that side further. It's not because you don't have a bachelor's degree or a master's degree that you can't be a full-fledged citizen and contribute to society.

Do you want to make a comment immediately?

[Yvon Boudreau]

It's true that people who are better trained and more educated are theoretically supposed to be more flexible in the labour market. If they lose their jobs, they can adjust to new conditions and get a new job. Theoretically, it's true, but, in real life, it's not completely true. That has to be highly qualified.

First, workers—let's forget the question of credentialing and the right to practise—who have high-level training also have greater aspirations, and often the host society, for good reasons and not so good reasons, is unable to offer conditions of practice so that their talent is fully used.

Second, we forget that many workers with a more technical profile are also highly flexible people in the labour market. Trades people have always earned a very good living. There has been a shortage of bakers in Quebec for years. If we brought in 200, 300 or 400 bakers a year, they wouldn't go unemployed. You have to be suspicious of certain theoretical concepts.

Honestly, our education system places considerable value on university training in certain respects, to the detriment of technical training and training in the trades. In an economy, we need more mechanics than economists. Nearly 25% of jobs, a maximum of 30%, rely on university skills. So there's no point in arranging for 50% of the immigrants we take in to consist of university graduates.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Yes, I see. We also have to take into account the area of jurisdiction, when we select the people we take in.

You heard the previous testimony, which described a certain problem concerning rights and freedoms. My colleague opposite says that's never been tested. I would like to hear your comments on that. What recommendations would you like to find in the standing committee's report?

[Marc-André Dowd]

We briefly addressed the issue of residence obligation, for both agriculture workers and live-in caregivers. We also recommend that the work permit be open, that it not be limited to a single employer. That was also addressed by Ms. Depatie-Pelletier. We entirely support that recommendation. That measure would prevent people who arrive here from winding up in a situation of great vulnerability.

We criticized the practice of certain agencies of bringing in a surplus of live-in caregivers. These individuals wind up here without being able to be placed immediately with an employer. They are then in a situation of utter vulnerability. We think these two elements are very important.

Do you want to add something, Carole?

[Carole Fiset]

Since the permit is closed, that is to say restricted to a single employer, live-in caregivers are highly vulnerable. Between two employers, they wind up at the mercy of clandestine work, with all that can entail. There are also types of recourse to which they do not have access as a result of their illegal situation, such as recourse before the Canadian Human Rights Commission. However, they can contact Quebec's Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse. We can take them in if they are subjected to sexual harassment or racism.

In addition, these are Class B and C workers. They thus hold diplomas equivalent to our college or university diplomas. We know that approximately 60% of them have received college and university-level training. However, as a result of their status, they are considered as Level D; it's as though they were unskilled. Consequently, they are subject to the residence obligation and to a permit restricted to one employer. In our opinion, this may possibly violate the right to equality because they are women.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

The Canadian Charter of Rights of Freedoms has been around for a long time. There seemed to be some consensus in the community on the points that you raised earlier. We talked about evidence gathered by university researchers, community groups, NGOs and unions.

How is it that this situation continues? There are some cases. You referred to the specific case of an agricultural worker, but I'm thinking, among other things, of live-in caregivers.