View Single Post
  #12  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2018, 11:13 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is online now
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain View Post
Also, SignalHill, restricting mobility to immigrants until they become citizens is contrary to the charter of right and freedoms, and also seems cruel and heavy-handed. We'd have to revise the constitution to strip that right from people.
This is true for people who have permanent residency or citizenship but it's not true in general for immigration. Many work visas are tied to an employer. There are no mobility restrictions per se but in practice people have to show up for their job which is in a specific place or they'll lose their job, lose their visa, and "get kicked out" (leave or be deported, like anyone who overstays or doesn't have permission to be here; presumably the same as for those who fail the hypothetical language test).

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with programs like this, but they often exploit the workers who participate in them (due to their very nature; once your status in a country depends on your employer they can hold you ransom if they want) and they distort our labour market.

Frankly a lot of the TFW policies are just harebrained or corrupt. For example some people complained about TFWs getting paid more than Canadians so it is now permissible to hire TFWs at 85% of the prevailing wage for their job, whatever that means. I take it that many of the people behind these rules either have a skin in the game or never really understood Econ 101. Then again, there is no easy answer to how much labour mobility is the right amount in a world with hundreds of countries that all have complicated trade rules.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote