On June 29, 2012, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (“CIC”) published Operational Bulletin 438 (“OB 438″), which provided guidance on the recently issued Ministerial Instructions that came into force on July 1, 2012.

OB 438 states that a temporary pause has been placed on new applications filed under the Federal Skilled Worker Program (“FSWP”), excluding applications received under the PhD eligibility stream and those with a qualifying offer of Arranged Employment (“AE”). The effective date of the temporary pause was July 1, 2012. As of that date, the only FSWP applications that will be accepted are those filed by:

1. Skilled workers with a valid offer of arranged employment.
2. International students enrolled in a PhD program at a provincially or territorially recognized private or public post-secondary educational institution in Canada who:
   • Have completed at least two years of study towards a PhD;
   • Are in good academic standing at the time they apply;
   • Are not recipients of an award requiring them to return to their home country to apply their knowledge and skills; OR

   International students who graduated from a PhD program at a provincially or territorially recognized private or public post-secondary educational institution in Canada who:

   • Graduated no more than 12 months before the date their application is received;
   • Did not receive an award which required them to return to their home country to apply their knowledge and skills (or did, but have satisfied the terms of the award).

A maximum of 1,000 applications from the PhD eligibility stream will be considered for processing each year. Applications will be considered in the order they are received.

The first cap year for the PhD stream began on November 5, 2011, and will end on October 31, 2012. Unless otherwise indicated in a future Ministerial Instruction, the cap will be automatically reset on November 1, 2012.

According to OB 438, a temporary pause has also been placed on new applications filed under the federal Immigrant Investor Program (“IIP”). Effective July 1, 2012, no new IIP applications will be accepted by CIC; there are no exceptions.

Overview

Effective April 25, 2012, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (“HRSDC”) has implemented its new Accelerated Labour Market Opinion (“A-LMO”) Initiative. The A-LMO initiative is intended to expedite the regular Labour Market Opinion (“LMO”) process for employers with an established track record of compliance.

An A-LMO application does not exempt employers from normal criteria applicable to a normal LMO application. HRSDC will still assess the A-LMO based on:

1. The genuineness of the job offer;
2. The wage offered; and
3. Whether the job offer is likely to fill a labour shortage.

However, A-LMO applications filed with HRSDC will be approved within ten business days, rather than after several weeks (or in some cases, months).

The A-LMO initiative applies only to higher skilled positions, which include positions within skill type 0 (management occupations), skill level A (occupations usually requiring university education), and skill level B (occupations usually requiring a college education or apprenticeship training) under the National Occupational Classification. However, Canadian employers hiring in the film and entertainment and agriculture sectors must still apply under the regular LMO process, even if they involve positions within skill type 0 or skill level A or B. In addition, the A-LMO is not being implemented in the Province of Quebec.

Employer Eligibility

In order to qualify to participate in the A-LMO Initiative, employers must:

1. Have been issued at least one positive LMO within the previous two years;
2. Have a clean compliance record with the Temporary Foreign Worker (“TFW”) Program within the previous two years;
3. Have agreed to all of the attestations included in the A-LMO application;
4. Not have been the subject of an investigation, infraction or a serious complaint, and
5. Not have any unresolved violations or contraventions under provincial laws governing employment and recruitment.

Eligible employers who participate in the A-LMO initiative are required to comply with all program requirements for higher skilled positions (i.e. Skill type 0, skill level A, and skill level B), including the following:

1. They must research and understand the prevailing wage for the proposed occupation in the area where the employee will work, using the information provided on the Working in Canada Website, and agree to pay a wage level at least equal to this amount. Under HRSDCs new wage structure, employers can pay wages that are up to 15% below the average wage in the area where the employment will occur, in the case of a high-skill occupation. However, employers must provide documentation that clearly demonstrates that the wage being paid to a temporary foreign worker is the same as that being paid to their Canadian employees in the same job and in the same location.
2. They must comply with same advertisement and recruitment requirements that apply to regular LMO applications, prior to offering the job to the TFW and submitting the A-LMO application.

Post-LMO Compliance Reviews

In connection with an A-LMO application, employers must consent to participate in a post-LMO compliance review. By consenting, employers allow HRSDC to perform a compliance audit of any positive LMO issued to the employer during the previous two years. During the review, employers must submit documentation to demonstrate compliance with the terms and conditions of the positive LMO or A-LMO letters and their annexes.

HRSDC has indicated that up to 20% of positive A-LMOs will be selected for a compliance review. These reviews will normally be based on random selection. However, cases may also be selected in response to information received subsequent to the issuance of an A-LMO. In addition, in cases where the employer files an A-LMO application offering to pay wages that are below the average wage in the area where the employment will occur (in accordance with HRSDCs new wage structure), that employer will likely be flagged for post-LMO compliance review.

According to HRDSC, in order demonstrate compliance during a post-LMO compliance review, employers may be required to submit the following documents:

1. Payroll information for the TFW and potentially for Canadian citizens and permanent residents;
2. Collective bargaining agreements;
3. Time sheets;
4. Job descriptions;
5. Copies of recruitment advertising;
6. Proof of no labour dispute;
7. Copies of the TFW’s work permit; and
8. Proof of registration with provincial/territorial workplace safety (where applicable).

Employers should retain all documents related to the A-LMO application and attestations, as well as any documents related to other positive LMOs, for up to six years. Failure to provide the requested documentation will disqualify the employer from future participation in the A-LMO Initiative.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

When non-compliance is determined, employers will have an opportunity to provide justification as well as to take corrective action, where applicable. HRSDC will work with the employer to implement the appropriate corrective action and may request proof to this effect in order for the employer to be deemed compliant. Employers found non-compliant with the A-LMO Initiative will be subject to several adverse consequences, which may include:

1. Ineligibility to utilize the A-LMO initiative in the future;
2. Revocation of other LMOs for which work permits have not yet been issued;
3. The sharing of HRSDC’s findings with its federal and provincial partners, for further investigation; and
4. Greater scrutiny in the review of any pending or subsequent LMO applications filed by that employer.

Submitting A-LMO Applications

Employers who want to hire TFWs using the A-LMO Initiative can apply online using HRSDC’s TFW Web Service, which is also used for regular LMO applications, or send in a paper application. However, the employer and any third party representative must first register by completing, signing, and then faxing/mailing the necessary registration forms to HRSDC before being permitted to file an A-LMO or LMO application online. This can make the online application process less convenient for both the employer and its third party representative.

On April 11, 2012, Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney announced changes to Canada’s Provincial Nominee Programs (“PNPs”). As of July 1, 2012, most PNP applicants for semi-skilled and low-skilled professions will have to undergo mandatory language testing of their listening, speaking, reading and writing abilities and meet a minimum standard across all four of these categories before they can qualify for a nomination certificate.

PNPs are established under Section 87(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (“IRPR”). A PNP is similar but distinct from the Quebec Skilled Worker Program, which is established under IRPR 86(1). Both the Quebec Skilled Worker Program and the PNPs offer the provinces an opportunity to select immigrants based on their specific needs.

Under a PNP, individuals nominated by the province, together with their spouse and dependent children, are eligible to apply for Canadian permanent residence through CIC under the Provincial Nominee Class. CIC will also give priority to processing permanent resident visa applications filed by provincial nominees. Given the considerable delays encountered by many Canadian permanent residence applicants, this priority processing makes immigration under a PNP program desirable.

Under the Provincial Nominee Class, each province establishes its own selection criteria. Applicants who wish to immigrate to a specific province as a provincial nominee, must first apply to the province where they wish to settle. The province will consider the application based on their immigration needs and the applicant’s intention to settle there. If the applicant is approved, he or she will be given a provincial nomination certificate, which may be used to support an application for permanent residence.

Although there has been a trend to require mandatory language testing for federal economic immigrants, PNP programs have not yet imposed mandatory language testing on all PNP applicants. However, Minister Kenney’s announcement makes clear that language testing will be imposed, at least on semi-skilled and low-skilled PNP applicants, commencing on July 1, 2012.

During the Government of Canada’s 2012 Budget Speech, the Minister of Finance announced that, in an effort to deal with the backlog of pending Federal Skilled Worker (“FSW”) cases, it would enact legislation to cancel all applications filed prior to February 27, 2008. This is proposed legislation only but it will be retroactive to March 29, 2012; as a result, it should be treated as though it were already in force.

Under proposed legislation, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (“CIC”) will close the files of FSW applicants who applied before February 27, 2008, and for whom an immigration officer has not already made a decision based on the applicable selection criteria by March 29, 2012. This proposed legislation is expected to affect about 280,000 applicants, including their dependants.

CIC will begin the process of returning the full amount of fees previously paid by these affected FSW applicants, which could amount to $130 Million. For those who have already passed the selection criteria stage as of March 29, 2012 (approximately 20,000 people), CIC will continue processing their applications.

Several Provincial Nominee Programs (“PNPs”) are currently reviewing the backlog of pending FSW applications to determine if any of them might be suitable for PNP nomination. For example, Opportunities Ontario has established a FSW Pilot Program (the “FSW Pilot”) to accommodate these potential nominees.

Under the Ontario FSW Pilot, FSW applicants who fall under one of the following five occupations will have an opportunity to apply for an Ontario nomination leading to permanent residence:

1. Computer Analysts and Consultants (NOC 2171);
2. Software Developers (NOC 2173);
3. Interactive Media Programmers and Developers (NOC 2174);
4. Financial and Investment Analysts (NOC 1112); and
5. Mathematicians (NOC 2161).

CIC began contacting FSW applicants in these occupations in February 2012, inviting them to participate in the FSW Pilot. Applicants who are invited to participate in the FSW Pilot must submit their applications to Opportunities Ontario by May 4, 2012.

Applicants who are not invited by a PNP to seek a provincial nomination certificate have effectively lost their ability to immigrate to Canada based on their pending FSW application. However, they can consider filing a new application under another permanent residence category, if they qualify.

On June 18, 2008, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act was amended to give the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the “Minister”) authority to issue instructions that would allow it to control the processing of applications. Pursuant to this authority, the Minister recently issued a fourth set of Ministerial Instructions (“MI-4″), which came into force on November 5, 2011.

According to MI-4, the Federal Skilled Worker (“FSW”) program will now have a new eligibility stream for international students pursuing doctoral (PhD) studies at Canadian institutions. This adds an additional 1,000 numbers to the current cap of 10,000, which are available to FSW applicants who do not have arranged employment.

General Eligibility Requirements

In order to be eligible to apply under this stream, the FSW application must be received by the Centralized Intake Office (“CIO”) in Sydney, Nova Scotia on or after November 5, 2011, and must meet either of the following two sets of criteria in order to be placed into processing:

1. Applications from international students who are currently enrolled in a doctoral (PhD) program, delivered by a provincially or territorially recognized private or public post-secondary educational institution located in Canada, and who have completed at least two years towards the completion of their PhD and who are in good academic standing and who are not recipients of a Government of Canada award requiring them to return to their home country to apply their knowledge and skills. OR
2. Applications from foreign nationals who have completed a doctoral (PhD) program from a provincially or territorially recognized private or public post-secondary educational institution located in Canada no more than twelve months prior to the date their application is received by the CIO in Sydney, Nova Scotia. Applicants must not have received a Government of Canada award that required them to return to their home country to apply their knowledge and skills; or if they were a recipient of such an award, they must have satisfied the terms of the award.

Applicants who are eligible for processing are still assessed under the other requirements of the FSW Program. Applicants must still meet minimal requirements and obtain the minimum pass mark in order to continue processing of their cases.

Annual Limits

A maximum of 1,000 new FSW applications from international students pursuing PhD studies or recently who obtained a PhD at a Canadian institution will be considered for processing each year. This cap will be calculated over and above any other FSW caps on application intake identified in earlier Ministerial Instructions. Under the earlier Ministerial Instructions, FSW applicants who do not have arranged employment in Canada are limited to a total cap of 10,000 a year and a sub-cap of 500 per year for each of 29 specific occupations.

For the purpose of calculating this particular cap, this year will begin on November 5, 2011 and end on October 31, 2012. Subsequent cap years will begin on November 1 and end on October 31, unless otherwise indicated in a future Ministerial Instruction. Applications will be considered in order of the date they are received.

FSW Applications Received before November 5, 2011

MI-4 does not apply to complete applications received prior to November 5, 2011. All FSW applications received by the CIO prior to that date will continue to be considered for processing under the previous Ministerial Instructions

FSW Applications Received on or after November 5, 2011

The MI-4 applies to applications received at the CIO on or after November 5, 2011. The CIO will assess complete applications received on or after this date against the Ministerial Instructions to determine whether applicants are eligible for processing.

The CIO will make a final eligibility determination and those determined to be eligible will be placed into processing. Applications that receive a negative eligibility determination will not be processed and will receive a full refund of the processing fee. In the case of a negative determination, the application and documentation submitted will not be returned.

On June 24, 2011, Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney announced that Canada would be adjusting its intake of applications from economic immigrants “to further reduce the backlog and improve wait times.” Effective July 1, 2011, the changes will affect new applicants to the Federal Skilled Worker (“FSW”) Program, the Federal Immigrant Investor Program, and the Federal Entrepreneur Program.

The previous Ministerial Instructions, which were published on June 26, 2010, stated that FSW applicants who did not have an offer of employment would not be accepted for processing unless they fell under one of the 29 occupations listed in the instructions. In addition, these applicants were subject to a total cap of 20,000 per year and a sub-cap of 1,000 per year for each of the 29 listed occupations.

As of July 1, 2011, FSW applicants who do not have an offer of employment in Canada will now be limited to a total cap of 10,000 a year and a sub-cap of 500 per year for each of 29 listed occupations. This represents a 50% reduction in both the total number of FSW applicants (who are permitted to apply without an offer of employment in Canada) and in the number that may apply in each of the 29 listed occupations each year.

Minister Kenney is also introducing an annual cap of 700 on new Federal Immigrant Investor applications. Although last year, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (“CIC”) made changes that raised the minimum net worth and investment requirements, Minister Kenny claims that it continues to receive applications in excess of what is required. The annual cap on new applications will supposedly allow for progress on backlog reduction while ensuring that CIC has a sufficient volume of new files to meet its commitments.

Minister Kenney is also introducing a temporary moratorium on new Federal Entrepreneur Program applications. According to the announcement, wait times for this program currently stretch to eight years in some visa offices; by ceasing to accept new applications as of July 1, 2011, CIC will supposedly prevent further processing delays.

The announcement states that the Federal Entrepreneur Program will undergo a review in the coming months to ensure that Canada is better able to attract and retain innovative entrepreneurs. However, in recent years, only a small number of applicants has applied under the Federal Entrepreneur Program. Although time will tell, it is quite possible that the Federal Entrepreneur Program will never be reinstated.

The official news release appears here.

During the recent Canadian Bar Association Citizenship and Immigration Conference in Gatineau, Quebec, representatives of the Central Intake Office (“CIO”) in Sydney, Nova Scotia, provided some helpful insight into its processing of Federal Skilled Worker (“FSW”) applications. The CIO screens all FSW applications in order to verify that submitted applications satisfy the Ministerial Instructions, which currently restrict who can apply under the FSW class.

The current Ministerial Instructions prohibit the acceptance of a FSW unless: (a) the applicant has Arranged Employment, or (b) the applicant has work experience in one of the 29 designated occupations within the last ten years. An applicant who does not have Arranged Employment is limited by a total quota of 20,000 FSW applications per year; each designated occupation itself is limited to 1,000 applications per year.

The quotas on the 29 designated occupations will be reset as of July 1, 2011. Of course, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism can theoretically amend the list of occupations at any time, although there is no immediate indication that the list of designated occupations will be revised.

The CIO has confirmed that it renders a final decision regarding the eligibility of the applicant under the Ministerial Instructions. As this is a decision rather than a mere opinion, these determinations are considered “locked in.”

For example, if the CIO makes a determination that the applicant is eligible to file a FSW application based on Arranged Employment (because they are working in Canada on a valid work permit and have an indeterminate job offer), this eligibility will continue even if the person loses their job before the completion of their permanent residence case. The Canadian Embassy or Consulate will not re-visit the decision with respect to eligibility under the Ministerial Instructions.

Unfortunately, selection points for Arranged Employment are not considered “locked in.” As a result, the Canadian Embassy or Consulate will still deny an application if the applicant loses their job and no longer has at least 67 selection points due to the loss of his or her Arranged Employment selection points. Of course, if the applicant continues to have at least 67 points even after losing their Arranged Employment points, the application can still be approved.

The CIO has also stated that, if an applicant provides evidence that he or she is eligible based on both the Designated Occupations list and Arranged Employment, it will choose to make the determination based on Arranged Employment. The rationale for this policy is to conserve numbers available under the annual quotas. However, if the CIO concludes that the applicant is not eligible based on Arranged Employment, it will then consider his or her eligibility based on the Designated Occupation list.

I previously reported that, on August 4, 2010, the governor-general-in-council published amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (“IRPR”), which were expected to adversely affect many temporary foreign workers (“TFWs”). These regulatory amendments became effective on April 1, 2011.

Just before April 1, 2011, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (“HRSDC”) announced new forms and guidelines designed to address these regulatory amendments. I discussed these new HRSDC forms and guidelines here.

On April 1, 2011, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (“CIC”) finally issued Operational Bulletin 275-C, which provides operational instructions to both CIC and the Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA”) in relation to the recent regulatory amendments to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (“TFWP”). A summary of this operational bulletin appears below.

Employer Ineligibility List

Before beginning to assess an LMO-exempt work permit application, CIC and CBSA officers must verify that the employer named in the offer of employment is eligible to participate in the TFWP. Under the new TFW Regulations, an employer can be found to be ineligible to participate in the TFWP for a period of two years if it is determined that they have failed, without reasonable justification, to provide substantially the same (“STS”) wages, working conditions or employment in an occupation to any foreign national who has worked for them during the prescribed period. The prescribed period begins two years from the date that the request for an opinion or the application for the work permit was received.

Officers must always check the CIC TFWP Employer Ineligibility website as the first step in processing the application. If the employer is not listed on the website, the officer can continue with the processing. If the employer is listed on the website, the officer will refuse the work permit and make an appropriate note in the remarks (i.e. “Employer currently listed on Ineligibility list; work permit refused.”)

Genuineness and STS Assessments

STS Assessment

If the employer has hired TFWs in the past, officers must also perform an STS assessment to determine whether it has, during the past two years, provided substantially the same wages, working conditions and employment in an occupation as those items set out in the offer of employment to the TFW. In general, a negative STS decision is intended to make an employer ineligible in situations where it has been determined that there has been a difference in wages, working conditions or the occupation from an original job offer made by that employer to foreign nationals and for which there is no reasonable justification. A negative assessment of the STS requirement can result in a work permit refusal as well as the employer’s ineligibility to access the TFWP for a period of two years.

Since a negative STS determination makes an employer ineligible to hire TFWs for a period of two years, and this information will be made public on the CIC website, it is important that officers assess cases of possible negative STS carefully, and take into account the significance of the differences in wages, working conditions or occupation. More specifically, a negative STS assessment should reflect situations where the differences relating to wages, working conditions or occupation that were provided to a foreign national as compared to those in the job offer are considered detrimental or disadvantageous to the foreign national and/or would compromise program integrity.

Depending upon the circumstance, STS compliance is assessed by HRSDC, CIC or CBSA. If there is a negative STS assessment by HRSDC, the information is forwarded to CIC for review and decision concerning adding the employer to the Ineligibility List should an application for a work permit be submitted.

Under R183 (1)(b.1), a foreign national may not accept a job offer to work for an employer who is named on the ineligibility list and remain in legal status in Canada. This applies to new contracts and extensions of existing contracts. A foreign national may, however, continue to work for an employer who has been found ineligible until the end of the contract term if the ineligibility determination occurs subsequent to the start of employment, provided they have authorization to work. If one of these existing employees departs Canada and then reenters Canada on the same work permit to continue working for the same employer under the same contract or agreement, they are not in breach of any conditions or otherwise inadmissible.

For the STS assessment, until CIC and CBSA have the ability to search an employer database for information on an employer’s past history of employing TFWs and the related job offers, the STS assessments will consist mainly of checking the TFWP Employer Ineligibility website and the list of employers who have a negative opinion based on an STS assessment done by HRSDC. Initially, it is expected to be rare that a comprehensive STS assessment involving verification of proof of wages documents, or of complaints related to working conditions, will be done unless information indicating non-compliance with past offers on the part of the employer becomes available to the officer during the work permit processing for the foreign national, and the officer submits a request for a more rigorous STS assessment to be conducted. Commencing April 1, 2011, Operational Management and Coordination Branch (“OMC”) of National Headquarters (“NHQ”) will review any requests for full STS assessments.

HRSDC Genuineness Assessment for LMO-Based Cases

For LMO-based applications and extensions, HRSDC will assess the employer’s past record and the genuineness of the job offer and will provide details of this to CIC and CBSA. HRSDC will use information provided in the employer application, and as required will verify information. Officers can continue to view details of the HRSDC opinion using existing system functionality. Reports of negative genuineness and STS assessments will be sent from HRSDC to NHQ and, until an employer database can be developed, will be manually shared with officers.

A negative assessment of the job offer/employer will result in a negative opinion from HRSDC, and could result in refusal of the associated work permit application. Where the refusal is based on a negative STS determination, it could also lead to placement of the employer on the ineligibility website.

This relieves HRSDC from the obligation to provide any opinion to such an employer for 2 years. However, this does not prohibit an LMO-exempt work permit application, where that employer is identified in the job offer, from being received by CIC or CBSA. Future system enhancements are expected to allow CIC or CBSA officers to view past HRSDC, CIC and CBSA assessments of employers (matched by a common Employer ID).

CIC and CBSA Genuineness Assessment LMO-Exempt, Employer-Specific Occupations

For LMO-based job offers, HRSDC will have already assessed employer STS and genuineness, consistency of the job offer with federal/provincial/territorial laws and labour market impact. Therefore, if the officer is satisfied with the opinion, he/she can continue with processing the work permit and the assessment of the worker. However, in a case where an LMO is not required, CIC/CBSA officers are required to assess employers and the job offer against the applicable criteria.

The four factors of employer genuineness that must be assessed are as follows:

1. Job offer was made by an employer who is “actively engaged” in the business: Should an employer’s information raise concerns with respect to an employer’s active engagement in their business, or if the officer is aware that this employer is new to the TFWP, the officer may request the information listed in the new Employer Declaration or consider an internet search and/or conducting a comprehensive assessment by requesting the employer’s T4 Summary of Remuneration paid and/or other relevant business documents. If the employer is unknown to the officer, or is a start-up company, the officer may request the employer provide a copy of their business contract (for their work in Canada). Officers can also consider requesting an attestation by a lawyer, notary public or chartered accountant substantiating that they are actively engaged in the operation of their business in Canada. The refusal of an employer to supply information to satisfy this assessment will result in a refusal to issue the work permit.
2. Job offer is consistent with the reasonable employment needs of the employer: Officers must be satisfied that the offer of employment is reasonable in relation to the type of business the employer is engaged in. Should the program officer have questions with regards to this genuineness factor, he/she could either write or call the employer requesting more information. The employer must be able to satisfactorily explain the role the TFW(s) will play in their business and that it is a reasonable employment need, both in terms of occupation and business-wise. The refusal of an employer to supply information to satisfy this assessment will result in a refusal to issue the work permit.
3. Employer is reasonably able to fulfill the terms of the job offer: Whether the employer is a well-known frequent participant of the TFWP can be used to determine whether additional documentation will be required to render an opinion on this factor. If the employer is unknown to the officer, additional documentation could be requested, if not already provided, such as: (i) T4 Summary of Remuneration paid, (ii) T2 schedule 100/125 (if employer is a corporation), T2125/equivalent financial statement (if sole proprietorship or partnership), (iii) Workers’ compensation clearance letter. Foreign employers may be requested to provide: (i) business contracts, or (ii) business documents similar to those requested for business visitors, entrepreneurs or other business category applicants in the host country. If the officer is otherwise satisfied with the assessment, but media sources reveal information that would lead the officer to doubt the employer’s ability to fulfill the terms of the job offer; or if the employer is, or has been, the subject of a serious complaint, infraction or investigation, the officer should contact OMC. The failure of an employer to satisfy this assessment will result in a refusal to issue the work permit.
4. Employer or their authorized recruiter has shown past compliance with federal/provincial/territorial laws that regulate employment or recruitment in the province where the foreign national will be working: For the purpose of this assessment, federal and provincial laws are defined as laws related to the regulation of employer consultants and/or recruiters (“ERs”), as well as the employment of TFWs, Canadians and Permanent Residents. Violations by ERs and/or third parties reported by federal and/or provincial government department or ministries could be considered whether the violations involved Canadians, Permanent Residents or TFWs. CIC is working with provinces and territories to establish a process by which we can determine which convictions should be a basis for a work permit refusal, but this work has not yet been completed. In the meantime, officers can and should consider information they might have regarding employer non-compliance with federal or provincial laws, but additional inquiries would be required to support a refusal on the basis of R200(5)(d). Please note the following:
   • If a recruiter, who is working for the employer, is not licensed in a province that requires by law, that TFW recruiters/employment agencies must be licensed (i.e. Manitoba’s Worker Recruitment and Protection Act and Alberta’s Fair Trade Act), by the province, a work permit can be refused.
   • If, during the processing of a work permit application, it becomes known that the TFW paid recruitment fees, contrary to provincial legislation (i.e. Alberta and Manitoba) this would NOT necessarily result in a work permit refusal under R200(5)(d) since the employer or recruiter may not yet have been found guilty by the province. Details should be forwarded to OMC for transmission to the province for investigation. It is important to note that under the requirements of the Low Skilled Pilot and the LCP, workers cannot be charged any recruitment fees (i.e. fees for finding the foreign national a job, not fees related to applying for a work permit). In these cases a work permit could be refused under another genuineness factor.

   The refusal of an employer to supply information to satisfy this assessment can also result in a refusal to issue the work permit..

For work permit extension requests, the same genuineness factors apply. If the employment offer is found to be non-genuine under any one of the four genuineness factors, the officer is to refuse the work permit.

Live-in-Caregiver Program (“LCP”)

LCP opinion requests received on or after April 1, 2011 will be assessed by HRSDC against the new LCP-specific assessment factors in accordance with the regulations which came into force on that date. The new LCP-specific assessment factors will not apply to LCP opinion requests received by HRSDC prior to April 1, 2011.

In addition to the new requirements associated with genuineness, STS, and consistency with federal-provincial/territorial agreements, failure to meet one or more of the 3 new LCP factors can also result in a negative opinion or a refusal to issue the work permit to an LCP applicant. The three new LCP-specific factors assessed by HRSDC as part of their opinion processing are as follows:

1. The foreign national will reside in a private household in Canada and provide childcare, senior home support care or care of a disabled person in that household without supervision;
2. The employer will provide adequate furnished and private accommodations in the household; and
3. The employer has sufficient financial resources to pay the caregiver the wages offered.

In addition to assessing the three factors noted above, HRSDC will review the proposed employment contract signed by the employer and prospective caregiver to ensure the terms of the contract meet LCP requirements. In assessing the prospective caregiver’s LCP work permit application, visa officers are also expected to review the contract that has been signed by the employer and caregiver, to ensure that the terms of the contract meet LCP requirements.

The signed employment contract provided in support of the prospective caregiver’s work permit application should be consistent with the employment contract provided to HRSDC by the employer in support of their LMO application. However, it may be necessary for the employer and prospective caregiver to renegotiate some aspects of the employment contract.

If the contract is revised after being approved by HRSDC as part of the employer’s LMO application, any changes to the contract must be clearly identified and explained in the version provided to the visa office as part of the prospective caregiver’s work permit application. Any revised employment contract must bear the signatures of both the employer and prospective caregiver. If the revised contract has hand written changes, the original wording must remain legible, be struck out and the signatures of both parties must appear next to any change, indicating mutual agreement.

Visa officers should also assess the genuineness of the job offer and LCP-specific factors, and must satisfy themselves that all LCP requirements are met in making a determination to issue a work permit under the LCP. Officers should avoid duplicating the upfront assessment of employer genuineness and LCP-specific factors undertaken by HRSDC and should generally base their decision on HRSDC’s assessment. However, as a general guideline, officers are encouraged to re-assess these factors if they have reasonable grounds to consider that these elements are not being met or there may be a question as to whether these elements continue to be met.

For instance, visa officers may decide to re-assess and confirm the employer’s financial capacity to honour the terms of the employment contract if a significant amount of time has elapsed since HRSDC’s initial assessment at the time the work permit application is being assessed at the visa office. Similarly, re-assessment of the LCP-specific factors may be warranted as the result of information obtained through an interview of the prospective caregiver in the course of processing the work permit application (e.g. the caregiver’s understanding of the job duties, working conditions, wages, etc. are inconsistent with the information in the contract).

The level of assessment to be done by a CBSA officer or an officer at CPC-V also depends on the extent to which they are satisfied by previous assessments of the three LCP-specific factors done by HRSDC and/or the visa office. POE and inland officers need to be aware of the new changes, but will generally continue status quo processing of live-in caregivers. Only if during the POE exam, or during assessment of a LCP work permit application at CPC-V, evidence suggests these elements are not being met, would a CBSA or CPC-V officer likely consider it necessary to further explore and re-assess these LCP-specific provisions.

For the LCP, HRSDC is responsible for conducting the STS assessment in order to provide an opinion as to whether, over the past two years, employers who are applying for an LCP opinion and who have hired TFWs in the past provided the wages, working conditions and employment in an occupation that were substantially the same as those items set out in the offer of employment to the foreign national.

Consistency with Federal-Provincial/Territorial Agreements

Using the authority found in R204(c), CIC and Provinces/Territories (“PTs”) have developed Annexes that deal with the entry of temporary foreign workers to respond to Provincial/Territorial labour needs. The Annexes support federal-provincial/territorial cooperation through various means, including some provincial/territorial directed LMO exemptions, and pilot projects.

HRSDC will assess the employer for all LMO-required job offers, which will include ensuring consistency with the terms of any federal-provincial/territorial TFW Annex agreement in place that apply to the employers of foreign nationals. Employers will be advised if the job for which they are seeking to hire a TFW falls under a pilot program under a federal-provincial/territorial agreement where they would be exempt from the requirement to obtain an LMO. HRSDC will also advise employers of any applicable obligations under a federal-provincial/territorial agreement, for example, where a Workplace and Orientation Plan for TFWs is required.

CIC and CBSA officers will verify that the foreign national meets the eligibility requirements outlined under these pilots or programs. Failure to meet these criteria can result in a work permit refusal.

As per TFW Annexes currently in place, a province can allow an employer to select TFWs to work temporarily in their province outside of the Provincial Nominee Program. If information becomes available to an officer subsequent to the province’s verification that leads the officer to question the genuineness of the employment offer, or suggests the employer has not met the STS test the officer may refuse the issuance of the work permit based on the genuineness or STS factors of the new TFW regulations. The officer may also refuse the work permit application for any other breach of the applicable regulations.

Cumulative Duration Limit

The new regulations impose a four-year cumulative duration limit on most TFWs. The accumulation of time time worked toward this four-year limit began on April 1, 2011; prior periods of work will not count towards the four-year calculation. This means that refusals of work permits as a result of this prohibition will potentially begin April 1st, 2015.

Work permits may be issued prior to 2015 for a shorter duration than requested by the employer in cases where the foreign national will soon reach the maximum time worked in Canada. Additionally, work permits may be refused if the foreign national is close to reaching their maximum time worked and the officer is not satisfied that the foreign national will return home if a work permit were to be issued for a short duration (i.e. one month).

All work in Canada counts towards the four-year total, including work done while under implied status, unless the work was performed during a period in which the foreign national was authorized to study full-time in Canada. Once a foreign national has accumulated four years of work (Definition R2), this regulation authorizes an officer to refuse to issue the foreign national another work permit. A TFW who spends four consecutive years either: (a) outside of Canada, or (b) in Canada but provides evidence of not working, can start accumulating another four years of work.

If the foreign national is seeking to enter Canada to do work that does not require a work permit (i.e. R186) there is no basis to refuse entry. Similarly, if a foreign national is intending to work in an occupation that is included in the exceptions to work permit refusals based on cumulative duration, the work permit would not be refused on this basis.

The following categories of work permits are considered exceptions to the four-year cumulative duration limit:

1. Foreign nationals seeking to work in managerial (NOC O) and professional (NOC A) occupations;
2. Foreign nationals seeking to work in Canada who fall under one of the exceptions in Annex B [International agreements (R204), Canadian interests (R205), Self-support (R206), Permanent Residence Applicants in Canada (R207), and Humanitarian reasons (R208)];
3. With regard to spouses and dependants of TFWs who are LMO-exempt, only spouses and dependents of TFWs in managerial (NOC 0) and professional (NOC A) occupations would not be refused a work permit based on the cumulative duration provisions; and
4. Permanent Residence Applicants: Foreign nationals who have applied for permanent residence (PR) and who have received a positive assessment in the PR category for which they have applied as follows:
   • A Certificat de sélection du Québec (“CSQ”) if applying as a Quebec Skilled Worker;
   • A Provincial Nominee Program (“PNP”) certificate if applying as a provincial nominee;
   • An approval in principle letter if applying under the Live-in Caregiver Class;
   • A positive selection decision if applying under the Federal Skilled Worker Class;
   • A positive selection decision if applying under the Canadian Experience Class.

All other groups (i.e. workers in NOC B, C, and D level occupations) would be subject to the cumulative duration limit of four years.

With regard to the accounting of work periods for the purpose of cumulative duration, the approach envisioned is that the duration of the TFW’s work permit would generally indicate the actual period of work for the calculation of cumulative duration. The calculation would take into account periods not actually worked, if the TFW can satisfy a CIC officer, using appropriate documentation, that there were breaks in work due to legitimate reasons (such as extended sick-leave, maternity leave, absence from Canada, etc.). The foreign national is also expected to advise of any periods of work while not on a work permit (R186).

A TFW’s work permit will be deemed to equate with his/her period of employment, unless there is evidence of a gap that clearly should not be counted towards the 4-years’ cumulative duration pursuant to 200(3)(g). A TFW will be considered to be working during any period of employment for the purposes of the cumulative duration calculation, even while not on a WP, unless the work was performed when the foreign national was a full-time student.

In some cases a TFW will work in Canada for a period of time, leave the country or change status so as not to be working in Canada, then begin additional periods of work. These periods of work need to be added together to determine whether the TFW has attained the four years’ cumulative duration.

If a TFW wants to demonstrate that some of his/her work permit was not used to work in Canada, the TFW will need to provide evidence to the officer that this was the case. A TFW’s work permit in combination with the evidence provided by the TFW as to actual periods not worked during the validity period of a WP or worked but not on a WP, where applicable, will be deemed to constitute the period of time worked in Canada. Eligible gaps in employment could include the following:

1. Periods of time spent outside of Canada;
2. Periods of medical leave spent in Canada, if this period is not covered by the employment contract/agreement; and
3. Maternity/paternity leave spent in Canada.

The following is a non-exhaustive list of documents that might establish eligible gaps in employment:

1. Passport entry and exit stamps.
2. Official documents indicating that the employment started and/or ended on certain dates; for example, a Records of Employment submitted by employers to Service Canada or proof of receipt of severance pay.
3. Letter from a foreign educational institution stating that the TFW was attending their institution for a period of time during the work permit authorization.
4. Travel receipts including ticket and boarding passes demonstrating that the TFW was out of the country for a period of time during the work permit authorization, other than a period of paid leave (e.g. sick leave, vacation leave) from their employment; compare with information regarding period of employment to see whether leave was covered by contract terms.
5. Proof of receipt of maternity/parental benefits.
6. Letter from physician confirming TFW was on medical leave for a certain period of time; compare with information regarding period of employment to see whether leave was covered by contract terms.
7. In Alberta, if a foreign national did not complete the full duration of a work permit due to poor working conditions, a letter can be provided by the TFW Advisory Office.
8. For TFWs working under a Group of Employers (“GOE”) agreement, there may be short periods of no work between projects, and a letter from the GOE Administrator can be accepted.

When processing an LMO request, HRSDC will not verify the accumulated time worked in Canada for any foreign nationals named in the LMO. If the opinion is still valid, and the TFW named on the LMO has been refused a work permit due to reaching the maximum time allowed to work in Canada, the employer can submit a request to HRSDC under the same system file number to select another TFW for the LMO.

On February 13, 2011, Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism announced that, in 2010, Canada welcomed the highest number of legal immigrants in more than 50 years (280,636 permanent residents). A day later, New Democrat immigration critic Olivia Chow stated during a press conference that information obtained under an Access to Information Act request revealed that the federal government intends to further reduce the immigration targets for parents and grandparents from 15,300 in 2010 to 11,000.

According to Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s website, it is currently taking 41 months for the sponsor to be assessed in the case of parents and grandparents. Assessment of sponsors is the first stage in family sponsorships. After that, it can take between 12 and 45 months to complete the permanent residence process, depending on the country. With these proposed reductions, the wait time will become even longer.

In defending the Canadian Government’s decision, Minister Kenney stated that there are trade-offs and the Canadian Government is focused on the priorities of Canadians, which are economic growth and prosperity. He also said that Canada needs more newcomers working and paying taxes and contributing to our health care system and this is the focus of Canada’s immigration system. Kenney also stated that spouses and children of Canadian citizens and permanent residents continue to be the priority in the case of family sponsorships and that parents and grandparents can still come to Canada for visits while their cases are pending.

Critics have responded by saying that restricting the number of parents and grandparents who can come to Canada to join family members here may deter those same skilled immigrants that the Canadian Government is trying to attract. According to Liberal Foreign Affairs critic Bob Rae, many of the skilled immigrants that Canada wants to attract come because they believe they can sponsor their relatives; if they can’t do it, it is going to affect their choice of country. New Democrat immigration critic Olivia Chow also criticized the Conservative position, saying that parents and grandparents do not drain the system. Liberal MP Joe Volpe, a former immigration minister, also criticized the Conservative position. According to him, the Conservatives tell families to be responsible for their own child care when parents go to work, but this ignores the fact that new Canadians entering the workforce often rely on parents and grandparents for child care and help around the home.

It seems self-evident that many new immigrants rely on their extended families, in particular parents and grandparents. The current delay in processing family sponsorships for these family members likely discourages at least some immigrants from choosing Canada over other countries. The additional wait time that will inevitably result from the reduced immigration targets for these extended family members will only make it worse.

It remains to be seen what effect this will have on the foreign recruitment of skilled workers in future years.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada has announced that, effective December 23, 2010, if you are submitting a language test with your application, the results are now valid for 2 years from the time you took the test, instead of 1 year. This change applies to Federal Skilled Worker, Canadian Experience Class and Business Class Immigrants (which includes Investor, Entrepreneur, and Self-Employed categories).