Mémoire à l intention de la Commission sur l avenir de l agriculture et l agro-alimentaire québécois (CAAQ) Submission to the CAAQ Name: Karen Rothschild Address: 393 Haut de la Chute, Rigaud, Qc. J0P 1P0 450 451 2207 jumentgrise@gmail.com This is a personal submission, although its author is a citizen member of the Union paysanne with a special responsibility for work in conjunction with the Via Campesina farmer and peasant coalition. I should like to begin by thanking the Commission for this opportunity to contribute to its consultation. I would also like to explain that my text is based on primary and secondary sources and on conversations with persons working in support of immigrant seasonal agricultural workers in Québec and Canada; I have not myself lived or worked on a farm employing these workers. Migrant agricultural workers in Québec. The structure of the seasonal workers programme in Québec: Québec is one of the nine Canadian provinces taking part in the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Programme (SAWP/PTAS) and in the programme for Guatemalan migrant workers sponsored by the International Migration Organization (OIM) of the United Nations. This year, approximately 4,000 seasonal immigrant workers are employed on approximately 350 Québec farms. These are mainly large farms, some of which employ as many as fifty people, and the majority of them are engaged in fruit and vegetable and greenhouse production, including flowers and seedling trees; a few are still engaged in tobacco production. Under the terms of their respective programmes, Mexican workers come to Canada for periods ranging from six weeks to up to eight months, and Guatemalans, who work mainly in greenhouses and as fruit and vegetable packers, may remain for as long as eleven and a half months. The Mexican programme is coordinated by Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) and by the Mexican government, which is represented in Québec by the Consulate in Montréal. The Guatemalan programme, also coordinated by HRSDC, is administered in Guatemala by the International Migration Organization, although the Guatemalan Consulate in Montréal plays a similar role to that of the Mexican Consulate. Although HRSDC has a full-time representative in Montréal who oversees the programmes, it is the non-profit agency FERME that administers the
relations between the employing farms and their workers, processing employer applications to the programme, communicating with the Mexican government, making travel arrangements for workers, etc. All employers and employees must sign a contract drawn up by HRSDC setting out the terms and conditions of employment. Workers must reside on the farms where they are employed, and employers are expected to provide acceptable housing and either meals or cooking equipment. Each season s wage rates are established on the basis of whichever is the highest: the provincial minimum wage; the prevailing provincial wage rate for the type of work; or the wage that is being paid by the employer to any Canadian employees that he may have who are doing equivalent work. (It is HRSDC that determines the prevailing wage rate; they have in the past received some criticism over their alleged failure to reveal the figures on which they base their calculations.) Workers must assume (through deductions in instalments from their salary) the full cost of their visa application and part of the cost of their air fare. (Under certain circumstances, they are required to assume the full cost of their air fare.) The foreign seasonal workers salaries are subject to the same deductions as those of Québec workers. Foreign seasonal workers are not entitled to unemployment benefits, although they may and do receive parental benefits under the federal employment insurance programme. (It should be noted that the foreign workers were never themselves informed of their eligibility for parental benefits; it was left to a community organization in Ontario to discover this entitlement and to begin to advocate on their behalf.) Those workers who return to Canada over a period of many years will, in the course of time, be entitled to receive a Canadian pension. Foreign seasonal workers are (in theory) eligible for the Québec Workers Compensation programme (CSST). They are entitled to provincial health care and are supplied with medical cards. They are also obliged to enrol in a private medical insurance plan run by the Royal Bank of Canada, which covers the cost of medication, time off from work due to illness, etc. (The employer pays the full insurance premium, which is then deducted in instalments from the worker s salary.) All housing accommodations for the workers must be inspected and approved as conforming to provincial or municipal housing standards. Mexican workers are accommodated at no charge; Guatemalan workers pay $35 per week for their housing. The functioning of the seasonal workers programme in Québec: As the foregoing outline shows, there is a very limited role for the Québec government in the present structure of the programme. Furthermore, there is no person or institution whose specific task it is to advocate for foreign seasonal agricultural workers employed in Québec. In principle, it is incumbent upon the consular representatives to fulfill this role, but in practice the consulates have a vested interest in the continuity of the programme, which is both a source of jobs and, since the workers save and send home almost all of their earnings, a source of revenue. Similarly, the responsibility of the representative of HRSDC appears to be that of ensuring the smooth functioning of the
programme. Although, in certain cases, the HRSDC representative may reach a negative evaluation with regard to labour relations at a particular farm, it is the foreign government that has the final say over whether or not it will continue to send workers to that farm. The lack of an official advocate for the workers is compounded by the fact that the terms of the employer-employee contract allow workers to be repatriated at any time for any sufficient reason. It is clear that so imprecise a provision should be subjected to a stringent and impartial appeal process. This is not the case. There is in fact no appeal process for a worker whose employer has decided that he should be sent back to his home country. It is particularly deplorable that workers can be, and are, repatriated in the case of illness. In general, workers are not informed of the terms of their private insurance contract or of their potential eligibility for workers compensation. For the employer, it is less troublesome and time-consuming to send an ill worker home than to fulfill the bureaucratic requirements that are necessary for the worker to obtain temporary out of work benefits from the insurance company. According to reports, consular representatives frequently suggest to ailing workers that, since they are ill and cannot work, they would be much better off returning home. In such cases, if a worker readily agrees that he would like to go home, he is considered to have left his job and is therefore obliged to pay his own return air fare. The question of CSST eligibility is even more complicated. In order to receive out of work benefits and medical treatment following a workplace accident, a worker must be in Québec. (Like any other worker, he is supposed to be available to return to work as soon as he has recovered from his injury.) However, once a seasonal worker has been in Canada for the maximum time covered by his work permit (that is to say, eight months for Mexican workers and eleven and a half months for Guatemalan workers), he loses his Canadian Immigration status as a temporary worker; he is reclassified by Canadian Immigration as a tourist, which means that he has become ineligible for CSST benefits. Moreover, it is in any case very difficult for a worker to support himself during the time period while his application is being processed by the CSST. This writer has been given some details of two cases of foreign workers who applied for CSST benefits. In one case, the worker was granted benefits. However, he returned to his country before his medical treatments were completed, following the suggestion of his Consul, who reportedly informed him that he would be eligible for free treatments in his home country. (That information turned out to be inaccurate.) In the other instance, the worker has had a fouryear struggle with Canadian and Québécois authorities, and he is expecting a final decision on his case very soon. It is only thanks to a family who have provided him with long-term physical sustenance and moral support that he has been able to persevere. In fact, the absence of an appeal process has repercussions on almost every part of the seasonal foreign workers programmes. Workers often hesitate to form a union or even to complain to their employer about any aspect of their employment. If they do so, not only do they risk losing months of work and the greater part of their travel expenses, but they
may also be categorized as troublemakers and thus become ineligible to continue with the programme in future years. Although the contract provides for an eight-hour day and a six-day work week, it also states that the worker may, if requested to do so by the employer, work for more than eight hours and postpone the rest day. Without an appeal process, it is easy to see that may can actually become must. It should, however, be stated that this writer has been informed that workers rarely complain of excessive work hours, as they are anxious to earn as much as possible while they are working in Québec. One thing that they do report, but hesitate to complain of, is that at times they are not given the forty hours of minimum average weekly work time called for by their contract.in general, they do not complain, because those who do so, even if they are not repatriated, risk receiving a negative recommendation from their employer. A worker who receives a negative recommendation at the end of the work season is extremely unlikely to be accepted into the programme the following year. It is easily apparent that the above observations also apply to conditions for food and lodging. For many workers, putting up with uncomfortable housing and inadequate meal provisions is preferable to risking repatriation or a negative recommendation. There are even reported cases of workers hesitating to seek medical attention because of a fear of job loss. Another problem area, separate from but not unrelated to the above considerations, is the use of pesticides. All too frequently, workers are given no training in the handling and use of pesticides, and, when required to spray, they are not given protective equipment apart from gloves. Since they do not speak or read French or English and they have received no training, they are essentially unaware of the potential dangers of the pesticides to which they may be exposed. (They do in many cases use gloves because they have seen and suffered the effects of these chemicals on their hands.) And, like many Québec and Canadian farmers, they may find it difficult to envisage the negative effects on their health that could occur in ten or fifteen years time. It is also reported that there are occasions when the prescribed delays between spraying and the resumption of field work in the sprayed area are not respected by the employers. This means that it is not only the workers who are actually carrying out the task of spraying who are exposed to the pesticides. It goes without saying that this deplorable situation is linked to the even larger problem of pesticide use in Québec and to the very inadequate policies of the government with regard to support for organic farmers and for farmers who are in transition to organic methods. It can fairly be concluded that although foreign seasonal agricultural workers are entitled in theory to Québec and Canadian labour and social standards, in practice they become a group apart. They are certainly not slaves, for they can go home if they wish. But as long as they are in Canada, they do not have the freedoms enjoyed by Canadian workers. In fact, there is even an effort on the part of employers to define their own contractual responsibility of ensuring that workers receive necessary medical attention as a prohibition for the workers themselves to exercise any choice as to which doctor to consult or as to who will accompany them on a medical visit. Similarly, employers are trying to define the Canadian Immigration requirement that workers must reside with
their employers as an absolute prohibition against a worker s leaving the farm property overnight. Furthermore, despite the fact that all agricultural workers in Québec have a legal right to join a union, the agency FERME has even gone so far as to recommend that workers be ordered not to associate with members or employees of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. There are also reports that, upon their arrival at the farm, workers are asked to sign a paper requesting their employer to take into his keeping their personal documents: passport, medical card, etc. At this time, the Guatemalan workers on one Québec farm are now union members. This is due to the successful organizing efforts of the farm s Québécois workers, who have insisted that all the workers be included in the union. Mexican workers on three other farms have taken the risk of embarking on the process of union organization. They have faced lengthy delays due to legal efforts on the part of the employers to prevent the formation of a union. These Mexican workers are now awaiting the final decision of the government of Québec. The circumstances of all of the foreign workers are worsened by the fact that they are alone, without friends and family members, in a strange country. The seasonal agricultural workers programmes particularly favour married men (and in a minority of cases single mothers), who cannot, however, be accompanied to Canada by their dependents. As a result of this arrangement, Mexican families can be separated for half the year or more and Guatemalan families for almost twelve months. These separations often take place over a long time period, as some workers continue with the programme for many years. General Observations: It is important to note that such situations are by no means specific to Québec and Canada, and that international human rights bodies have attempted to respond to some of the human rights problems related to migration. The United Nations International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families specifically calls for the right of appeal in cases of expulsion. Other international legal instruments are concerned with the isolation suffered by migrant workers. Indeed the very fact that migrant agricultural workers are so often the victims of human rights abuses, as is shown by the situation of the millions of Mexican and Central American farm workers in the United States and the thousands of Moroccan and Eastern European migrant harvesters in the European Union, can be considered to be a characteristic feature of modern industrial agriculture. It should be remembered that some of the very same Mexican workers who are now migrating to Canada and the United States have lost their livelihoods because of the catastrophic effects of the NAFTA on Mexican agriculture. Although it is beyond the scope of this text to enter into a discussion of these much broader issues, it should be recognized that for a number of Mexican social analysts the real solution to the problem of migrant workers must be found at home. These analysts speak of the right not to have
to migrate and of the right of peasants to continue to be peasants. They call for massive support for small and medium scale agriculture and for a halt to development mega-projects (such as mines and dams) that further endanger peasant agriculture. It is not my intention in submitting this text to enter into the specific problems of agriculture in Québec. Nevertheless, the situation of the foreign workers must be seen in the context of Québec agriculture as a whole specifically in the context of the concentration in the size of the largest farms and the increasing financial difficulties of smaller farms. Recommendations: A) Although there are now approximately 4,000 foreign seasonal workers who are regularly employed in Québec, the government of Québec has no real role in the organizing and administering of the seasonal agricultural workers programmes. It is therefore recommended that the Québec government, with the agreement of the Canadian, Mexican and Guatemalan governments and of the International Migration Organization, set up an office or Ombudsperson whose task will be to act as a neutral authority to oversee the programmes, and that: 1) Except in cases of extreme emergency, no repatriation or expulsion of a worker should be carried out without the specific approval of the Ombudsperson, who should function as an instance of appeal that gives special consideration to the testimony of the affected worker or workers (and, should they be unionized, the testimony of their union representatives). 2) That all negative evaluations and recommendations from the employer should be reviewed by the Ombudsperson, and that no worker should be excluded from the programme as a whole without the consent of the Ombudsperson. 3) That steps should be taken to ensure that workers are informed of their entitlements under the private insurance plan and the CSST, and that the necessary changes should be made to ensure that, when necessary, they can actually benefit from those rights. In the case of the CSST, this will mean that a new agreement must be reached with Immigration Canada to ensure that an injured worker who is receiving benefits can continue to be classified as a worker for the duration of his treatment - or in the case of a single financial compensation for an injury that has permanently incapacitated a worker, until that worker has been awarded the allotted sum of money. 4) That steps be taken to promote and protect the right of foreign workers to join unions (and in their off-work hours to associate freely with persons of their choice). 5) That workers should not be asked or expected to hand over to the employer their personal documents.
6) That there be periodic inspections by the competent provincial or municipal authorities of the buildings in which workers are housed. It has been pointed out, by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union and others, that the suitability of a dwelling depends partly on how many people are occupying it. It is important that the actual living conditions of the workers be assessed. Reports of such inspections should be submitted to the Ombudsperson. 7) That there be full compliance with all governmental laws and regulations, including any additional recommendations from the Ministry of Public Health, regarding the utilization of pesticides. 8) That all farms have access to the services of a competent interpreter and that this service be provided without charge for workers The Ombudsperson s office should be fully able to work in Spanish as well as French and English, (and in the case of any Guatemalan workers who speak one of Guatemala s twenty-one indigenous languages and who do not speak Spanish, the office should locate a person who is able to function as an interpreter in emergency situations). All workers should receive written and verbal information in Spanish on the role of the Ombudsperson and they should be encouraged to report to the Ombudsperson any and all problems related to compliance with items 3-8 of the above. (Indigenous language speakers from Guatemala should receive this information verbally in their own language.) B) The seasonal foreign labour force makes a very significant contribution to Québec agriculture. In recognition of this fact, the Québec government should give very serious consideration to selecting experienced (skilled) agricultural workers as landed immigrants. In practice this could mean that, after having worked in Québec for a period (necessarily interrupted since they are seasonal workers) of twenty-four months, workers would have the right, should they so wish, to apply for landed immigrant status for themselves and their immediate family members. (At a Canadian level, a similar recommendation has been made on more than one occasion by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. It should be noted that what is being recommended is very similar to the existing Canadian arrangements for immigrant domestic workers.)