Every year, thousands of migrant workers arrive in Canada to grow, process and prepare our foods. Yet, in July 2024, a United Nations report referred to Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) as a “breeding ground for contemporary slavery”.
New research from Dalhousie University supports findings from this report. The Master’s research of Alyssa Weeks, one of the authors of this article, demonstrates that stakeholders in the Maritime provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island have significant concerns about the TFWP. They call for comprehensive reforms to better protect migrant workers from abuse and exploitation.
Researchers have long criticised Canada’s TFWP, especially because migrants’ jobs are tied to employers through closed work permits.
What this means in practice is that migrants are often afraid to speak out against abuse and exploitation because it could mean not only losing their jobs, but also being deported. A recent lawsuit by two temporary foreign workers illustrates this, alleging their lost wages and wrongful termination from a New Brunswick lobster plant.
To address some of these concerns, Canada introduced the Open Work Permit for Vulnerable Workers in 2019. This policy allows immigration officers to grant open work permits to at-risk migrant workers in abusive situations. The permits are valid for up to 12 months and are exempt from the government’s Labour Market Impact Assessment process.
Major shortcomings
Despite the intentions of this programme, our research reveals significant shortcomings.
Drawing from secondary literature, policy analysis and interviews with migration experts across the Maritimes, our findings suggest the open permit policy is an inadequate solution when it comes to removing migrant workers from abusive situations. Instead, it serves as a temporary fix that often forces workers back into precarious and abusive situations.
Maritime stakeholders – including migrant support workers, academic experts of migration studies and an international consulate officer – underscore systemic issues with the open permit for migrant workers.
To begin with, the application itself is cumbersome and very difficult for migrants to complete on their own. Technological and functional issues complicate the application, including incompatibility with mobile devices, upload restrictions and limited language options. Processing times are also inconsistent, with some migrant workers receiving a response within days, while others wait months.
Poor government oversight and enforcement exacerbate migrant vulnerability. Open work permits for vulnerable worker applications are meant to be confidential. But in smaller communities, multiple stakeholders detailed instances where government workers personally contacted employers to disclose that one of their employees had applied for the permit.
To make matters worse, government inspections are often announced in advance, which allows employers to temporarily adjust living and working conditions and ensure that workers are absent during inspections, preventing them from speaking out.
While a successful open work permit application can help migrant workers leave abusive workplaces, they often become stigmatised because these permits are different from general open work permits. The migrants who apply for them can be perceived as “troublemakers” or “whistle-blowers”, which can make it difficult to find a new job. As a result, many migrant workers choose to endure employer abuse rather than apply for an open work permit.
The July 2024 United Nations report cites similar concerns with the program, highlighting that it “does not offer an effective solution” and that migrants “must remain in a precarious situation until they receive a positive decision,” subjecting them to further risks of abuse.
The UN report also points to the stigma associated with the open work permits, as well as bureaucratic hurdles, including the high amount of detailed evidence required that can be difficult for migrant workers to collect.
Reforms necessary
Effective September 26, 2024, the government of Canada will enforce a series of reforms “to weed out TFW program misuse and fraud”. Yet, none of these reforms will address the shortcomings of the open work permit for vulnerable migrant workers.
There are several practical ways the open permit could be improved immediately, beginning with:
Overhauling the application portal to make it more accessible to migrant workers;
Making the application available in multiple languages, including Spanish and Tagolog;
Guaranteeing faster processing times to protect migrant workers from further abuse and;
Expanding the permit’s eligibility criteria to include all forms of abuse and mistreatment.
Stakeholders would also like to see greater sanctions for employers found guilty of abuse and exploitation. At present, employers are rarely punished or receive only minor penalties.
More inspectors to monitor employers and workplace conditions would help protect migrant workers, especially in remote and rural workplaces in the Maritimes. Inspectors, immigration officers and government officials must also be held accountable for ensuring the privacy and anonymity of complainants.
Holding employers to account
Data transparency would help hold the government and employers accountable. Canada should disclose and publish statistics on the number of open work permit applicants by stream, types of mistreatment and abuse reported and the number of applications approved.
Without the assistance of migrant support workers across the Maritimes, many migrant workers would be unable to navigate the permit application, let alone attain a favourable outcome.
Migrant aid organisations put in Herculean efforts to support migrants, despite limited funding and resources. More government funding would allow organisations to hire lawyers, translators and staff to assist with applications.
Finally, many experts support abolishing closed work permits altogether and expanding rights for migrant workers by providing a clear pathway to permanent residency upon arrival in Canada.
Kate Swanson is Professor in International Development Studies and Canada Research Chair, Dalhousie University.
Alyssa Weeks is Research Assistant, International Development Studies, Dalhousie University.
Elizabeth Fitting is Professor, Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Dalhousie University.
This article was first published on The Conversation.
