Migration

**The Following Blogpost is a complement to the FPA’s Feature on Canadian Immigration and Economic Rights: Great Decisions Analysis: Economic Rights and Migration by Rich Basas.

In an FT.com article published this week called Jobs for workers of the world, writer Bernard Simon discusses how the Canadian immigration system and local Canadian businesses address the vast number of foreign workers trying to make a living in the city of Toronto, Canada’s largest and most ethnically diverse city. Mr. Simon makes a clear and direct point in discussing the changes made by the company Steam Whistle Brewery in its efforts in absorbing skilled foreign workers in an economy which treats all foreign experience as a burden rather than an asset.

While not known by most Canadians, Canada is well known in many immigrant communities as a place which offers dreams of skilled employment and promotes it via its embassies and cultural offices worldwide, but restricts the certification of foreigners and locals with foreign education so that many will never qualify for the skill which allowed them to come to Canada in the first place. Beyond these economic restrictions, Canadian Immigration policy has focused it efforts in bringing in skilled labour to offset the shortage of skilled workers being lost due to the retirement of Canada’s baby boomers. This is not a problem only in Canada, as developed countries worldwide are desperate to bring in new immigrants to contribute to skilled labour markets, research and development, and create a new productive tax base for supporting those retirees who built the country over the last decades. In reality it is more Canada that depends on those immigrants, not the immigrants who are lacking opportunities in other countries.

Many of those born in Canada often do not go into the trades as commented on in the FT.com article, but often work in larger companies and government positions which afford a good salary and benefits to their employees. While many of the newcomers to Canada often have skills greater or equal to those trained Canada, the bias against any foreign experience including that from Western Europe is common and often discriminatory in its nature, but not considered to be illegal by the government in Ontario even though many newcomers have the same legal rights to work in Canada and are protected under the Canadian Constitution. While there are programs in Ontario and other parts of Canada to help immigrants find equitable employment, there are few true successes and little research and attention paid to these new workers beyond promoting Canada as having multicultural values, but not employing some of the most intelligent people in the country while pushing them toward the economic margins of society.

One of the main issues is that there is no legislated standards in certifying newcomers to Canada, but only private or university run offices which translate scores and qualifications into Canadian grades, but are wholly unofficial in Canada and not given much weight in the hiring process. Another major problem is that many professional associations which have great restrictions on newcomers to Canada are not on par with other developed countries in allowing a fair and equitable method for the re-qualification of people coming into Canada. Until the shortage of skilled labour was made a priority in the latest budget from the Government of Canada, there was no more attention placed on the issue than unknown advisories to companies to give foreigners a try with no concrete push for enshrining their Economic Rights in any Canadian legislative house or jurisdiction. The limitations are so insensible that in one case many nurses who come from other countries to work as foreign nurses on contract are not able to obtain the same job once they enter the process to become a Canadian citizen, but can work with no problems as foreign nurses on contract with the Government of Ontario.

In the past it was assumed that immigrants were on equal footing with Canadians in obtaining those jobs which account for much of the middle class in Canadian society. The issues in letting immigrants work when their initial experience was not in Canada was seen in the past as solely a difference of culture as opposed to that of skill or language. In reality, 45.7% of Toronto’s population was born outside Canada, and while the argument has been made presently that newcomers must adapt to Canadian culture, its often the case that people must adapt to several different cultures, but their skills are not diminished for the sake of lack of Canadian Experience in any way. The true barriers in the past were ethnic, but now even though many ethnicities work in the Toronto job market, “Canadian Experience” is being used as the term which is preventing good jobs from going to good skilled people. This is not uncommon as in the past those immigrants barred from employment in Canada’s large companies and government now account for the majority of Toronto’s Small and Medium Sized entrepreneurs and make up a good number of jobs and tax revenue going into the local economy. With approximately 30% of Canadians working for one branch of the government and large numbers working for Banks and larger institutions, in Canada’s largest cities the small business is dominated by immigrants who came in the last few decades. The unfortunate reality is that these resource rich people if immigrating today to Canada would not have the points to qualify for citizenship as only immigrants with a high levels of education are allowed to come here and work. As we see above, the reality is that they just don’t end up being considered to work in the areas Canadian’s are desperate to fill. A competitive Canadian economy will not be able to compete if it will prevent its most skilled people from jobs it needs to fill in order to grow as a country. It is a classic lose-lose situation, for New Canadians and Old Canadians alike.

Apologies for an extended absence, but this blog author has been applying to grad school (yet again) to pursue a degree in comparative migration policies. As such, I have been thinking about related issues for a number of weeks and thought I would share some of my recent writing. Please find one of my essays below:

More than 82 million people live in Germany – 19% of these have a migrant background (Migrationshintegrund). These figures imply that nearly every fifth banker, teacher, baker, engineer and manager is of immigrant descent. Even a superficial look at the German social landscape reveals that this is not the case. Structural discrimination in-built in the German education system prevents this from happening.

The German government has recently invested an undisclosed amount in an advertising campaign to raise the profile of migrants and their contribution to the German economy. In the speech launching the new initiative, the High Secretary for Integration pointed to US statistics proving that diversified companies far outperformed their peers on the stock market. She also underlined that an EU study had shown that SMEs were losing up to 11% of their export-oriented business, because they failed to bridge linguistic and cultural gaps. Thus, her argument went, migrants in Germany needed to be seen as an asset, their bicultural knowledge and understanding giving the country as a whole the tools it needed to succeed in a globalized world.

But for the 188,000 unemployed migrants between the ages of 18 and 35 in Germany (by far the largest group), the picture is quite different. Recent studies have shown, that many of the unemployed, young migrants fail job interviews because of their German language skills. Nor do most of these youths speak their native languages fluently, and often have only a rudimentary knowledge of their mother tongue’s grammar and spelling. Three quarters of the young Turkish immigrant population in Germany were educated in the lowest tiers of the three-tiered German school system, and were not offered additional linguistic coaching as children, a pan-European comparison has recently highlighted. In addition, the OECD’s PISA tests revealed that second generation migrant students in Germany had the poorest comparative reading and language skills of all countries surveyed. Almost three times as many migrant children are school dropouts, and 40% receive the lowest possible secondary degree, graduating after nine years of formal education. Only 10% go on to earn a high school degree, while more than a quarter of the Germans do. The country’s industry associations have been calling on the government to remedy this situation, as these structural inefficiencies translate into a second generation of “economic deadweight” in the German labor market.

Germany is failing to “make use of the biculturalism of its migrant population” as the minister argued, because the majority of the younger generation does not have the full command of both their native and the German language and is hampered by structural problems in the education system. This, in turn hampers mobility, which is one of the four freedoms of the European Union and a clear advantage of globalization.

A look across the border proves the advantages Germany could reap from introducing enhanced language education: A study examining the Danish situation proved that contrary to public belief, bilingual education helps students integrate quicker into their host country and learn Danish faster. Sweden has proven that the combination of special instruction in the host language coupled with 3-hour language classes in immigrants’ native language from pre-school onward enhances academic performance and later facilitates education and training.

Instead of investing in superficial advertising campaigns and creating business competitions on diversity management that offer cash prizes - as is the case in the government’s most recent campaign - it should re-invest these funds into strategic partnerships with businesses, based on already existing formulas toward enhancing early-childhood education in Germany (i.e. the so-called Wissensfabrik). These could finance specialized teacher training for German-as-a-second-language and the introduction of bilingual language training (Turkish and Italian first) into the pre- and primary school curricula.

Businesses have a vested interest in investing in such an initiative: The looming demographic crisis in Germany dictates that the country cannot afford to turn out graduates with insufficient skills. DaimlerBenz, Deutsche Bank and others have issued public statements on the value-added that diversity and bilingualism brings to their companies, from the factory floor to the management level. The advantages of multi-lingual employees and the importance that diversity has in attracting and retaining employees have been proven in a number of EU and OECD studies. These type of initiatives will undoubtedly take time, but they require a first step, a declaration of ownership and commitment to remedying the problem by designating funds, creating local, innovative partnerships toward developing best practice and extending these models across the entire country over time.