Thursday, February 26, 2015

Consolidated CETA Text

24. Trade And Labour

Chapter X+1: Trade and Labour

Article 1: Context and objectives

1. The Parties recognise the value of international co-operation and agreements on employment and labour affairs as a response of the international community to economic, employment and social challenges and opportunities resulting from globalisation. They recognize the contribution that international trade could make to full and productive employment and decent work for all and commit to consulting and co-operating as appropriate on trade-related labour and employment issues of mutual interest.
2. The Parties recognise the beneficial role that decent work, encompassing core labour standards, and high levels of labour protection, coupled with effective enforcement, can have on economic efficiency, innovation and productivity, including export performance, and they highlight the value of greater policy coherence in those areas. In this context, the Parties recognize the importance of social dialogue on labour matters among workers and employers, and their respective organizations, and governments, and commit to promotion of such dialogue in their territories.

Article 2: Right to regulate and levels of protection

Recognising the right of each Party to set its labour priorities, to establish its levels of labour protection and to adopt or modify its relevant laws and policies accordingly in a manner compatible with its international labour commitments, including those in this Chapter, each Party shall strive to continue to improve those laws and policies with the goal of providing high levels of labour protection.

Article 3: Multilateral labour standards and agreements

1. Each Party shall ensure that its labour law and practices embody and provide protection for the fundamental principles and rights at work, and reaffirm its commitment to respecting, promoting and realising such principles and rights in accordance with its obligations as member of the ILO and its commitments under the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 86th Session in 1998.
  • (a) freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;
  • (b) the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour;
  • (c) the effective abolition of child labour; and
  • (d) the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
2.  Each Party shall ensure that its labour law and practices promote the following objectives included in the Decent Work Agenda, and in accordance with the 2008 ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation, and other international commitments:
  • (a) health and safety at work, including the prevention of occupational injuries and illnesses and compensation in cases of such injuries or illnesses;
  • (b) establishment of acceptable minimum employment standards for wage earners, including those not covered by collective agreements; and,
  • (c) non-discrimination in respect of working conditions, including for migrant workers.
3. In connection with paragraph 2(a) of this article, each Party shall ensure that its labour law and practices embody and provide protection for working conditions that respect the health and safety of workers, including by formulating policies which promote basic principles aimed at preventing accidents and injuries arising out of or in the course of work, and aimed at developing a domestic preventative safety and health culture where the principle of prevention is accorded the highest priority. When preparing and implementing measures aimed at health protection and safety at work, each Party shall take account of relevant scientific and technical information and related international standards, guidelines or recommendations if they exist, particularly if such measures may affect trade or investment between the Parties.  The Parties acknowledge that where there are existing or potential hazards or conditions that could reasonably be expected to cause injury or illness to a person, the lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective protective measures.
4. Each Party reaffirms its commitment to effectively implement in its laws and practices, in its whole territory, the fundamental ILO Conventions that Canada and the Member States of the European Union have ratified respectively. The Parties will make continued and sustained efforts towards ratifying the fundamental ILO Conventions to the extent that they have not yet done so. The Parties will exchange information on their respective situation and advancements as regards to the ratification of the fundamental as well as priority and other ILO Conventions that are classified as up to date by the ILO.

Article 4: Upholding levels of protection

1. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to encourage trade or investment by lowering the levels of protection embodied in domestic labour law and standards.
2. A Party shall not waive or otherwise derogate from, or offer to waive or otherwise derogate from, its labour law, as an encouragement for trade or the establishment, acquisition, expansion or retention of an investment or an investor in its territory.
3. A Party shall not fail to effectively enforce its labour law, through a sustained or recurring course of action or inaction, as an encouragement for trade or investment.

Article 5: Enforcement procedures, Administrative proceedings and review of administrative action

1. In connection with the obligations in Article 4, each Party shall promote compliance with and shall effectively enforce its labour law, including by:
  • a. in accordance with its international commitments, maintaining a system of labour inspection aimed at securing the enforcement of those legal provisions relating to working conditions and the protection of workers which are enforceable by labour inspectors;
  • b. ensuring that administrative and judicial proceedings are available to persons with a legally recognized interest in a particular matter under its domestic law, in order to permit effective action against infringements of its labour laws, including appropriate remedies for violations of such laws.
2. Each Party shall, within the framework of its legal system, ensure that the proceedings referred to in subparagraph 1 (b) are not unnecessarily complicated or prohibitively costly, do not entail unreasonable time limits or unwarranted delays, provide injunctive relief, where appropriate, and are fair and equitable, including by:
  • a. providing defendants with reasonable notice when a procedure is initiated, including a description of the nature of the proceeding and the basis of the claims;
  • b. affording the parties to the procedures a reasonable opportunity to support or defend their respective positions, including by presenting information or evidence, prior to any final decision;
  • c. providing that final decisions are made in writing and give reasons as appropriate to the case; and
  • d. allowing the parties to an administrative proceeding an opportunity for review of final administrative decisions within a reasonable time by a tribunal established by law, with appropriate guarantees of independence and impartiality of decision-makers.

Article 6: Public Information and Awareness

1. Each Party, as well as complying with Art X.01 of Transparency Chapter, shall encourage public debate with and among non-State actors as regards the development and definition of policies that may lead to the adoption by public authorities of labour law and standards.
2. Each Party shall promote public awareness of its labour law and standards, as well as enforcement and compliance procedures, including by ensuring the availability of information and by taking steps to further the knowledge and understanding of workers, employers and their representatives.

Article 7: Cooperative activities

1. The Parties commit to cooperate for the promotion of the objectives of this Chapter through actions such as:
  • - exchange of information on best practices on issues of common interest and on relevant events, activities, and initiatives organized in their respective territories;
  • - cooperation in international fora dealing with issues relevant for trade and labour and employment, including in particular the WTO and the ILO; - the international promotion of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and their effective application, and the ILO Decent Work Agenda;
  • - dialogue and information sharing on the labour provisions in the context of their respective trade agreements, and their implementation;
  • - exploring collaboration in initiatives vis-a-vis third countries;
  • - other forms of cooperation as the Parties may deem appropriate.
2. In identifying areas for cooperation, and in carrying out cooperative activities, the Parties will consider any views provided by representatives of workers, employers, and civil society.
3. The Parties may establish cooperative arrangements with the International Labour Organization and other competent international and regional organisations to draw on their expertise and resources to achieve the objectives of this Chapter.

Article 8: Institutional mechanisms

1. Each Party shall designate one office which shall serve as a Point of Contact with the other Party for the purposes of implementing this Chapter, including with regard to:
  • (a) cooperative programs and activities in accordance with Article 7;
  • (b) the receipt of submissions and communications under Article 9; and
  • (c) information to be provided to the other Party, the panels of experts and the public.
2. The [Name to be Determined] on Trade and Sustainable Development established under Chapter X [Trade and Sustainable Development] shall, through its regular meetings or dedicated sessions comprising participants responsible for matters covered under this Chapter discuss matters of common interest, oversee the implementation of this Chapter and review progress under it, including its operation and effectiveness, or address any other matter within the scope of this Chapter as they jointly decide. 
3. Each Party shall consult a domestic labour or sustainable development advisory group(s), or establish new ones when they do not exist, to provide views and advice on issues relating to this Chapter. Such groups may submit opinions and make recommendations on any matter related to this Chapter on their own initiative. The domestic advisory group(s) comprise(s) independent representative organisations of civil society in a balanced representation of employers, unions, labour and business organisations, as well as other relevant stakeholders as appropriate.
4. Each Party shall be open to receive and shall give due consideration to submissions from the public on matters related to this Chapter, including communications on implementation concerns; each Party shall inform its domestic advisory group(s) of such communications.
5. The Parties shall take into account the activities of the International Labour Organisation so as to promote greater cooperation and coherence between the work of the Parties and that Organisation.

Article 9: Government Consultations

1. A Party may request consultations with the other Party regarding any matter arising under this Chapter by delivering a written request to the contact point of the other Party. The request shall present the matter clearly, identifying the questions at issue and providing a brief summary of any claims under this Chapter. Consultations shall commence promptly after a Party delivers a request for consultations.
2. During consultations, each Party shall provide the other with sufficient information in its possession to allow a full examination of the matters raised, subject to any domestic legislation regarding confidential personal and commercial information.
3. Where relevant, subject to the agreement of both consulting Parties, they shall seek the information or views of any person, organisation or body that may contribute to the examination of the matter at issue, including the International Labour Organisation.
4. If a Party considers that the matter needs further discussion, that Party may request that [NAME] be convened to consider the matter by delivering a written request to the contact point of the other Party. The [NAME] shall convene promptly and endeavour to agree on a resolution of the matter. Where appropriate, it shall seek the advice of the Parties' domestic advisory group(s).
5. Any solutions or decisions on matters discussed under this Article shall be made publicly available.

Article 10: Panel of Experts

1. For any matter that has not been satisfactorily addressed through government consultations, a Party may, 90 days after the delivery of a request for consultations under Article 9.1, request that a Panel of Experts be convened to examine that matter, by delivering a written request to the contact point of the other Party.
2. Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, the Parties shall apply the Rules of Procedure and Code of Conduct set out in Annex I and II of the Chapter on Dispute Settlement, unless the Parties agree otherwise.
3. The Panel of Experts shall be composed of three panellists.
4. The [NAME] shall, at its first meeting after the entry into force of this Agreement, establish a list of at least 9 individuals chosen on the basis of objectivity, reliability and sound judgment who are willing and able to serve as experts in Panel procedures. Each Party shall propose three individuals to serve as experts. The Parties shall also select three individuals who are not nationals of either Party and who shall act as chairperson to the Panel of experts. The [NAME] will ensure that the list is always maintained at this level.
5. The experts proposed as panellists shall comprise individuals with specialised knowledge or expertise in labour law, other issues addressed in this Chapter, or the resolution of disputes arising under international agreements. They shall be independent, serve in their individual capacities and not take instructions from any organisation or government with regard to issues related to the matter at stake, or be affiliated with the government of any Party, and shall comply with [the Code of Conduct].
6. The Parties shall consult with a view to reaching an agreement on the composition of the Panel of Experts within 10 working days of the date of the receipt by the responding Party of the request for the establishment of a Panel of Experts.  Due attention shall be paid to ensuring that proposed Panellists meet the requirements set out in paragraph (5) of this article and have the expertise appropriate to the particular matter.
7. In the event that the Parties are unable to agree on the composition of the Panel of Experts within the time frame laid down in paragraph 4, the selection procedure set forth in Article 14.7(3), (4),(5), (6) and (7) of Chapter 14 (Dispute Settlement) shall be applicable in respect of the list established in paragraph (7).
8. Unless the Parties agree otherwise, within five working days of the date of the selection of the panellists, the terms of reference of the Panel of Experts shall be:
"to examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the Trade and Labour chapter, the matter referred to in the request for the establishment of the Panel of Experts, and to issue a report, in accordance with Article 12 (Panel of Experts) of Chapter ... (Trade and Labour), making recommendations for the resolution of the matter"
9. In matters related to the respect of multilateral agreements as set out in Article 3, the Panel should seek information from the International Labour Organisation, such as pertinent available interpretative guidance, findings or decisions adopted by this body. Footnote 1
10.The Panel may request and receive written submissions or any other information from organisations, institutions, and persons with relevant information or specialised knowledge.
11. The Panel of Experts shall issue to the Parties an interim and a final report setting out the findings of facts, its determinations as to whether the responding Party has conformed with its obligations under this chapter and the rationale behind any findings, determinations and recommendations that it makes. The Panel of Experts shall submit to the Parties the interim report within 120 days after the last panellist is selected, or as otherwise decided by the Parties. The Parties may provide comments to the Panel on the interim report within 45 days of its presentation. After considering any such comments, the Panel of Experts may reconsider its report or make any further examination it considers appropriate. The Panel of Experts shall submit the final report to the Parties within 60 days of the submission of the interim report. Each Party shall make the final report publicly available within 30 days of its issuance.
12. If in the final report the Panel determines that there has been non-conformity, the Parties shall engage in discussions and shall endeavour, within three months from the submission of the final report and taking into account that report, to identify appropriate measures or, where appropriate, to decide upon a mutually satisfactory action plan. The Party concerned shall inform in a timely manner its advisory groups and the other Party of its decisions on any actions or measures to be implemented. Furthermore, the requesting Party shall inform in a timely manner its advisory groups and the other Party of any other action or measure it may decide to take, as a follow-up to the report, to encourage the resolution of the matter in a manner consistent with this Agreement. The follow-up to the report and the recommendations of the Panel of Experts shall be monitored by the NAME. The advisory bodies and the Civil Society Forum may submit observations to the NAME in this regard.
13. If the Parties reach a mutually agreed solution to a matter during the time that a Panel of Experts has been established, they shall notify the [NAME] and the Panel of Experts of any such solution. Upon notification, the panel procedure shall be terminated.

Article 11: Dispute Resolution

1. For any matter arising under this Chapter where there is disagreement between the Parties, the Parties shall only have recourse to the rules and procedures provided for in this chapter.
2. The Parties shall make every attempt to arrive at a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter. At any time, the Parties may have recourse to good offices, conciliation, or mediation to resolve that matter.
3. It is understood that the obligations included under this chapter are binding, and enforceable through the procedures for the resolution of disputes provided for in Art. 10 [Panel of experts] of this chapter. Within this context, the Parties will discuss, through the meetings of the [NAME] on Trade and Sustainable Development, the effectiveness of the implementation of the chapter, domestic policy developments in both Parties, developments in international agreements, and views presented by stakeholders, as well as possible reviews of the procedures for the resolution of disputes provided for in Art. 10 [Panel of experts] of this chapter.
4. In case of disagreement, a Party may request consultations according to the procedures established in Art. 9 [Government consultations] in order to review the provisions for the resolution of disputes provided for in Art. 10 [Panel of experts] of this chapter, with a view to reach a mutually agreed position on the matter.

5. The [NAME] may decide to modify the relevant provisions of this chapter, in accordance with the amendment procedures established in Chapter ..., Article ... [CETA amendment procedure]. ]

COMMENT
"CETA

Canada Europe Trade Agreement

 European workers in Canada


Pretty soon, Canada and Europe will ratify their CETA trade agreement.

When they do, it’s a whole new ball game for European workers, including undocumented trades workers, in Canada. 

Attached please find the CETA Text covering TRADE AND LABOUR.


In summary, CETA obliges the Parties to:

·         Cooperate, dialogue, exchange information and, if necessary, dispute on the below matters:

a)   Non discrimination in respect of working conditions, including for migrant workers … Article 3 Para 2 (c)  

b)   Eliminate discrimination in respect of employment and occupation … Article 3 Para 1 (d)

c)    Inappropriate to lower production costs by lowering the levels of protection embodied in labour standards … Article 4 Para I

d)   Party cannot fail to effectively enforce its labour law through a sustained or recurring course of action or inaction as an encouragement to lower costs … Article 4 Para 3

e)    Parties must protect workers rights through job site inspections... Article 5 Para 1 Para a&b

f)     Parties must not deny workers access to the legal system by setting up administrative procedures designed to delay or add cost …Article 5 (2)


Even before CETA is ratified, we will be raising CETA’s above obligations to our clients.

We will focus on:


·       Canada’s financial exploitation of European workers

·       Canada’s policy and legal process barriers designed to keep European  workers undocumented

·       Canada’s refusal to enforce local labour laws in order to drive European workers underground

·       Canada’s exploiting European workers in order to lower costs

·       Canada’s and Europe’s refusing to cooperate, dialogue, exchange information and, if necessary, dispute on the above matters"

Richard Boraks, 26 February 2015
COMMENT

"The Language Exam

I made a big mistake on the language exam issue.

Rather than talk about the problem, I should have simply posted the exam itself.

Here it is.

I wonder how many Canadians, and not just construction workers, would fail the exam.

So the real question is:

What inspired public policy makers to come up with this exam as the fey controlling factor in deciding which employer can retain his successfully integrated trades workers?

The folks in Ottawa are not stupid…. So what is the motivation?"

Richard Boraks, 26 February 2015 

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Source:http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/02/10/learning-english-is-tough-but-worth-the-struggle-mallick.html

COMMENT

Richard Boraks BA, LLB
Barrister & Solicitor
55 Brown’s Line, Etobicoke Ontario   M8W 3S2
Tel: 416-588-8707 Fax: 416-588-8785
Email: boraks@workercanada.com

Hello Ms Mallick

Re: February 10 opinion: Language & Immigrants … Substance vs. Process

Allow me to declare both a commendation and a conflict.

Although a conservative, I nevertheless commend your passion and clarity. For years, your work has entrenched disagreement but acknowledged respect and forced reflection.

The conflict: I act for the European trades immigrants that Nicholas Keung interviewed. 

I apologize to all concerned if I failed to confirm that the issue is not the workers’ language ability.  

They can all read plans and contracts. They have passed Ontario trades safety exams. They have gone through a 12 week Ontario trades school language assessment process. They have all become successfully financially established in Canada. Many are also successfully self employed. Some employ Canadians. They all work, in English, for demanding, successful GTA trades employers and customers.

The issue is not language. The issue is process. The issue is that Ottawa changed the rules of the game, after these guys came to Canada. After 148 years Ottawa woke up one morning and decided that proven success in English means nothing. Language assessments by Ontario’s best teachers mean nothing. Customer references mean nothing. Six figure bank accounts mean nothing. Taxes mean nothing.  

Ottawa’s, but not Ontario’s, single deciding factor is a three hour exam written in a formal college setting. The problem is not language assessment. The problem is the format. What makes a good carpenter does not necessarily make a good 3 hour exam writer.  

At the end of the day, the choice is simple… Do you want your renovations done by:

  • Someone who did a great job on your English speaking neighbor’s kitchen or
  • By some guy who has never set foot in Canada , may not know what pine or oak looks like, but feels comfortable writing a “do or die” exam in a college under the eagle eyed supervision of a small army of monitors

Once again, my apologies if I got it wrong.


Regards,
  

Richard Boraks 

REPORTAGEM: Emigrantes que processaram Governo canadiano temem deportação


Toronto, Canadá, 17 fev (Lusa) - Os emigrantes portugueses que processaram judicialmente o Governo federal canadiano depois de terem chumbado no teste para obter a residência permanente começam a ficar desesperados e temem ser deportados, estando já alguns sem documentos válidos.

Juvenal Cabral, de 49 anos, natural de São Miguel (Açores), está há sete anos no Canadá, viu o seu quarto contrato cessar a 21 de dezembro de 2014.

O carpinteiro de profissão candidatou-se ao estatuto de residente permanente no país, mas chumbou no teste linguístico de inglês escrito, uma obrigatoriedade para aquele estatuto.
No entanto, vai aguardar pela decisão do tribunal federal, na sequência de um processo judicial contra o Governo interposto por cerca de 150 trabalhadores da construção civil, a maioria portugueses, que alegaram discriminação.

O emigrante explicou que a principal razão de emigrar foi dar um futuro melhor à filha, de 19 anos.

"Tenho 49 anos e não 25. Tenho que decidir a minha vida. Se regressar a Portugal tenho lá casa, mas vou ter que arranjar trabalho para mim e para a minha esposa. Se não o conseguir, vou perder a casa, pois ainda a estou a pagar. A vida infelizmente é assim. O Governo tem que decidir, sim ou não. Já não sou nenhuma criança, tenho que decidir a minha vida", lamentou.

Sobre a diferença entre ser residente permanente ou não, o emigrante referiu que se tivesse esse estatuto a filha só pagaria sete mil dólares (cinco mil euros) por ano na universidade, enquanto atualmente lhe pedem 22 mil dólares (15,53 mil euros), verba que não pode pagar porque também não tem acesso a créditos bancários.

Outro dos envolvidos no processo judicial contra o Governo federal é o empresário Lino Vitório, de 55 anos, natural da Lourinhã, há 36 anos no Canadá e proprietário de uma empresa com 80 empregados, a maioria portugueses.

"Preciso de trabalhadores especializados e não está certo mandá-los embora, quando necessitamos deles. Temos de fazer tudo para os conseguir manter aqui a trabalhar. Há falta de pessoas especializadas como pedreiros, serventes, encarregados, operadores de empilhadores, com experiência", afirmou.

Emigrantes provenientes de Itália, Portugal e Polónia têm trabalhado no Canadá com vistos de trabalho há pelo menos dois anos. Segundo o programa Federal Skilled Trades (FST), para se tornarem residentes permanentes têm de passar num teste linguístico de inglês bastante exigente.

Richard Boracks, advogado especializado em imigração, um dos responsáveis pela ação em tribunal contra Otava, justificou que os trabalhadores têm certificações de escolas governamentais do Ontário de que o seu inglês é bom, mas Otava exige um teste linguístico.

"Esse exame é escrito, de leitura, falado e escutado, do nível 5, para um trabalhador da construção, restauração e mecânicos. Se o trabalhador passar esse exame, torna-se emigrante. Mais tarde, se pretender tornar-se cidadão canadiano, aí o exame é apenas escrito e falado no nível 4. Não faz sentido", disse.

Juvenal Silva disse que o pouco inglês que sabe aprendeu no Canadá, tendo reprovado apenas no teste escrito.

Também o empresário Lino Vitório não vê por que se tem de saber falar inglês para o pedido de residência permanente, referindo que na construção civil “é preciso saber trabalhar com as mãos e com a cabeça, e não falar” e que, por isso, “o inglês não é o mais importante".
O advogado também criticou a tentativa do Governo federal que o tribunal avalie a ação judicial em privado (lei N.º 369), sem a presença de advogados e sem audiência.
"É inconstitucional e irracional o que eles estão a fazer. Terão eleições (federais) em outubro e não querem que este assunto venha a público até lá. Querem-nos destruir financeiramente, mas vamos lutar”, disse.

O advogado também mencionou que já interpelaram o tribunal para que "proteja os trabalhadores", para que não sejam "deportados e detidos" enquanto aguardam pela decisão.

Cerca de 30 mil autorizações de trabalho temporárias nos comércios são emitidas para os candidatos da Irlanda, Inglaterra e de França, enquanto um "miserável e desproporcional número de vistos e autorizações de trabalho foram emitidos para os emigrantes de países que não têm como língua principal a inglesa", alegaram.

Source:
SEYM // VM
Lusa/Fim 
Sergio Mourato
Journalist
Source:http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/16/zunera-ishaq-the-woman-who-fought-to-wear-a-niqab-during-her-citizenship-ceremony/

"Zunera Ishaq and “shared cultural values”


I don’t question Zunera Ishaq’s loyalty to Her Majesty.

Like our Queen, Zunera Ishaq is one tough lady. She won’t be pushed around.  

Every family has at least one Zunera Ishaq.

She shovels snow. She probably yells at her husband and screams at the kids. She probably struggles in gridlock and pays parking tickets. She pays taxes. She probably worries about paying the bills. She’s probably tired when she goes to bed. She gets up in the morning and starts all over again.
 
She has the faith, hope and commitment that built this country.

She also plays by the rules of the game …Jason Kenney and Chris Alexander never placed fashion restrictions on Zunera Ishaq when they issued her immigrant visa. 

So here we go again.

First, Ottawa issued work permits to English, Irish & French on the basis of “shared cultural values”.

Then, Ottawa handed over immigrant visas to trades workers selected by the Irish and English governments. Again on the basis of “shared cultural values”.

 Then, Ottawa set up the economic immigrant Express Entry program which makes the “shared cultural value” of language the primary standard for all economic immigrants.

Kenney and Alexander have now entered the bigoted world of issuing citizenship certificate based on “shared cultural values”.

What I find irrational in all this that the Conservative Party , of which I have been a member since 1967, is prepared to write off the entire GTA for another generation.

The core understanding in Toronto is simple… no matter how we may feel from time to time, we accept the overriding need to treat our neighbors in the manner that we would like to be treated. We have no choice: My daughter may marry your son.  

My neighbors are invested in Zunera Ishaq’s values and story. Torontonians don’t see niquabs or turbans or crosses or tattoos or whatever. They deal with customers, service providers, courtesy, neighbors and potential in laws. 

What Kenney and Alexander are doing in the GTA is beyond being politically irrational. It is socially dangerous. Even the good people of Brooks Alberta and Fort Mac Murray will not be amused.    

Social disruption is not defined by what it wears but by what it does.

Soldiers wearing cultural head/face gear have defended Her Majesty for centuries.  


Kenney and Alexander are pandering, not leading or defending. "
Richard Boraks, 25 February 2015

Wednesday, February 18, 2015










"Mit Canada's Citizenship and Integration Minister Chris Alexander über die Einwanderungsländer DEU und CAN in Toronto "
Embedded image permalink
Source:https://twitter.com/ThomasOppermann/status/565717301354565632?s=17

"Visit by German politician underlines German interest in Canada's immigration system

Feb 11, 2015
Thomas Oppermann, Chairman of the Parliamentary Group of the SPD, the Social Democratic Party of Germany (currently governing at the federal level in a so-called grand coalition), is on visit to Canada from February 11 to 13. His visit represents a fact-finding mission on Canada's skilled worker program, mainly Citizenship and Immigration Canada's new Express Entry system. Other topics of interest include the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the EU. 
During his visit to Toronto and Ottawa, he is meeting with high-ranking officials from the Canadian government, think tanks, and NGOs such as MP Chris Alexander, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada; Steve Verheul, Chief Trade Negotiator CETA, Department for Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD); MP Paul Dewar, Foreign Affairs Critic of the Official Opposition; Ambassador of Germany to Canada Werner Wnendt; Nathan Cato, Director of Policy, Citizenship and Immigration Canada; and Diana MacKay, Conference Board of Canada. 
Mr. Oppermann is also scheduled to meet with award-winning British-Canadian journalist, author, and columnist for The Globe and Mail Doug Saunders. He is the author of the book Arrival City (2011), in which he visited 20 locations on five continents to study the effects of the final wave of rural-urban migration on the cities of the world, and which was awarded the title "Best book on public affairs in Canada" by the Donner Prize."
Source:http://www.kanada.diplo.de/Vertretung/kanada/en/__pr/2015/oppermann-presse.html


Source: Newspaper Corriere Canadese, 2015 Feb 17

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Portugueses processam Governo canadiano por discriminação

Imigrantes queixam-se que o Estado canadiano está a dar prioridade a trabalhadores provenientes de Inglaterra, Irlanda e de França

Por: Redação / MM    |   hoje às 10:05
Cerca de 150 imigrantes que trabalham da construção civil, a maioria portugueses, processaram o governo federal canadiano por alegada discriminação, disse à Lusa um advogado ligado ao processo.

«Começámos o processo judicial a 26 de novembro de 2014, é contra o Governo em Otava, porque ele está a dar prioridade a imigrantes provenientes de Inglaterra, Irlanda e de França, principalmente de Inglaterra e da Irlanda. Está a tornar impossível que os trabalhadores nas áreas da construção, da restauração, e aos mecânicos, provenientes de Portugal, Itália e Polónia, possam ficar no Canadá com a residência permanente», afirmou Richard Boraks, advogado especializado em assuntos de imigração.

Richard Boraks, que está a trabalhar em conjunto com Rocco Galati, o advogado responsável pela acusação no processo judicial nos tribunais federais canadianos, reconheceu que é impossível aos imigrantes candidatarem-se ao estatuto de residência permanente, pois o Governo federal «fechou a porta, trancou as janelas, bloqueou a cave e meteu cimento no telhado».

Imigrantes provenientes de Itália, Portugal e Polónia têm laborado no Canadá com vistos de trabalho há pelo menos dois anos. Segundo o programa Federal Skilled Trades (FST), para se tornarem residentes permanentes têm de passar num teste linguístico de inglês bastante exigente.
«A lei diz que o Governo deve olhar para os seus processos, mas as autoridades recusam-se a fazer isso. O exame é terrível, mas também posso dizer que é lixo, não é feito para pessoas que falam o inglês simples, mas sim para pessoas da Commonwealth (comunidade maioritariamente composta por nações do antigo império britânico). É inaceitável», considerou o advogado.

Richard Boraks considerou que o Governo «deve seguir a lei» em que o inglês aparece como segunda prioridade, pois em primeiro lugar estão as «taxas e o trabalho».
«No passado, a lei era muito boa, tornava possível que qualquer trabalhador português pudesse efetuar o requerimento (de residente permanente), mas o Governo não quer utilizar essa lei. Eles estão a dizer que não querem saber o dinheiro que tens, se és bom trabalhador, há quanto tempo estás a trabalhar no Canadá, primeiro tens de passar no exame linguístico. A lei não diz isso, mas é o que o Governo está a fazer», justificou.

O processo judicial dos trabalhadores vem numa altura em que o Governo federal lançou uma campanha comercial para promover as suas novas vagas com o intuito de satisfazer as necessidades laborais de um milhão de trabalhadores especializados em comércio para 2020.

O programa entrou em funcionamento em 2013, atraindo no primeiro ano cerca de três mil potenciais candidatos, mas apenas 296 foram convidados a fazer o requerimento de candidatura, e foi concedido o estatuto de residente permanente a menos de 90.

Segundo o advogado, entre novembro a dezembro de 2014, das mais de 150 pessoas envolvidas na ação judicial contra o Governo canadiano, cerca de 100 são portugueses, imigrantes «bem-sucedidos» e que são «muito bons trabalhadores», com dinheiro, casas e filhos nas escolas.

Os trabalhadores alegam na ação que o ministro de Imigração, Chris Alexander, e o seu antecessor, Jason Kenney, manifestaram publicamente e implementaram um programa que favorece os irlandeses, ingleses, e os candidatos australianos pelos «valores comuns» que nutrem com os canadianos.

Cerca de 30 mil autorizações de trabalho temporárias nos comércios são emitidas para os candidatos da Irlanda, Inglaterra e de França, reivindica o processo judicial, enquanto um «miserável e desproporcional número de vistos e autorizações de trabalho foram emitidos para os imigrantes de países que não têm como língua principal a inglesa».
The Source:http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/internacional/canada/portugueses-processam-governo-canadiano-por-discriminacao

Monday, February 9, 2015

"Monday, February 9, 2015

Migrant construction workers sue Ottawa for discrimination

“Why are we good enough to work here but not good enough to stay?” That’s what more than 150 workers from Italy, Portugal and Poland are asking as they fight policies that favour Brits, Irish and Australians for permanent residency.

Juvenal Cabral, a custom carpenter with 22 years of experience, came here from Azores, Portugal, on a work permit in 2008. Immigration did not consider his permanent residency application because he failed the English test twice. "Why are we good enough to work but not good enough to stay?"
NICHOLAS KEUNG
Juvenal Cabral, a custom carpenter with 22 years of experience, came here from Azores, Portugal, on a work permit in 2008. Immigration did not consider his permanent residency application because he failed the English test twice. "Why are we good enough to work but not good enough to stay?"
More than 150 migrant construction workers are suing Ottawa, claiming they have been discriminated against under a program that invites them to work in Canada but welcomes only English-speaking candidates when it comes to letting them stay on permanently.
The workers from Italy, Portugal and Poland have been employed in Canada on work permits for at least two years. But under the Federal Skilled Trades (FST) program, they must pass a language proficiency test to be considered for permanent resident status.
“They did not require English to have us work here on work permits. When we wanted to stay, they said we needed to pass the English test to qualify,” said Juvenal Cabral, 48, a Portuguese-speaking custom carpenter from the Azores and one of the plaintiffs in the case. “Why are we good enough to work here but not good enough to stay?’
The migrant workers’ lawsuit comes as the federal government is launching a commercial blitz to promote its new apprenticeship grants in a bid to meet Canada’s shortage of one million skilled-trade workers by 2020.
To allow much-needed skilled trades to immigrate to Canada in a system otherwise geared toward attracting university-educated and highly skilled professionals, Ottawa introduced the FST program in 2013.
The first-year target was 3,000 applicants but the program yielded dismal results: it drew just 266 applications — and fewer than 90 of those were granted permanent resident status.
Citizenship and Immigration Canada said skilled tradespersons are not restricted to the skilled trades workers program for permanent residency — they can be admitted to Canada under other immigration programs, such as the Canadian Experience Class and Provincial Nominee Program.
“The FST program targets a very valuable but narrow category of economic permanent residents. We want to see this stream grow, but recognize these skilled tradespeople also have other programs available to them,” said department spokesperson Remi Lariviere.
“So far, refusals have been due largely to applicants submitting incomplete applications or applying without meeting program requirements. This is not unusual for a new program, while applicants learn the requirements.”
In their lawsuit, the Italian, Portuguese and Polish workers said Immigration Minister Chris Alexander and his predecessor, Jason Kenney, have publicly expressed and implemented a program that favours Irish, English and Australian applicants for their “shared values” with Canadians.
They said Kenney travelled to Ireland and England between 2012 and 2014 to announce and promote the federal temporary workers and trades program, promising they would be entitled to apply for permanent residence after a two-year work permit.
“No such representation nor opportunity was offered to Italians or Portuguese or any other non-Irish/English/Australian countries, or any other linguistic group or nationality, who are only entitled, on the vast average, a six-month permit which they must renew, without break, until they qualify to apply for permanent residence,” their claim said.
About 30,000 temporary work permits in the trades are issued to applicants from Ireland, England and France, the lawsuit claims, while a “measly, chintzy, under-disproportionate number of visas, work permits were issued for the rest of the non-English/French-speaking world.”
Toronto lawyer Richard Boraks, who routinely handles work permit applications for clients, said many English and Irish migrant construction workers simply do not apply for permanent status after their employment stints in Canada.
“The retention rate for these (English-speaking) workers is really low. They are here to make some quick money, then go home. They just can’t stand our weather,” he said. “The federal government is somehow obsessed with shared language and shared culture, but all the employers care about is getting the job done.”
Under Canada’s immigration laws, Boraks said officials have an obligation to open and assess a federal skilled trade application if an applicant “will become economically established in Canada.” Currently, authorities do not even open the file if the applicant did not pass the English test.
The perceived biases against non-English speaking workers and migrants are echoed in the strong Italian-Canadian community and could be a factor in this October’s federal election.
“It should be without contest that a priority list in the 21st-century Canada should be based on a candidacy framed by talent and merit, rather than fluency in English or French,” said the National Congress of Italian Canadians in a letter to Kenney and Alexander obtained by the Star.
“It is sad to believe that our country considers language fluency to be the exclusive criterion for admission into the country, rather than a foreign worker’s successful economic penetration in the country as determined by Canadian employers.”
Joe Lima, owner of Stonecast Contracting Ltd., a Hamilton-based construction company, said he has managed to expand in the past five years with help from skilled workers from Portugal.
“We have tried to train the locals but they come and leave because this is too tough for them,” said Lima. “These foreign workers are well-rounded. We give them safety training and orientation. They don’t speak fluent English, but sooner or later they will learn the language by living and working here.”
Last year six of Lima’s 20 employees were from Portugal, but three recently left because their work permits were not renewed.
Filip Jose Henriques has failed the mandatory IELTS (International English Language Testing System) test three times. He scored well in the speaking and listening portions but fared poorly in writing and reading.
“The test has nothing to do with construction. I had to write a letter in 150 words to ask a friend for photos taken during a vacation and a 250-word essay to explain why kids learn faster than adults,” said the 27-year-old cement finisher from Leiria, Portugal. “I just feel really bad. The test is not practical to our jobs.”
In mid-January, the government filed a motion to ask the federal court to dismiss the trades workers’ case, arguing the claim “discloses no reasonable cause of action.”
A ruling is pending."
The source: thestar.com