Skip to content

Employer immigration compliance obligations

Kathleen Leighton

Employers in Canada are obligated to only employ individuals who are legally able to work for them. Individuals who are neither citizens nor permanent residents of Canada, but who wish to work in Canada (“foreign workers”), generally must obtain a work permit.

While some work permits are “open”, meaning they will allow the permit holder to work for nearly any employer and in nearly any role, other work permits are more restrictive. Namely, “employer-specific” work permits limit the permit holder to working for the employer named on the permit, as well as in the position and location specified on the permit. These permits are therefore also less flexible in terms of the permit holder’s ability to move roles or employers.

In order for a foreign national to obtain an employer-specific work permit, it is necessary for employers to take certain active steps to assist, as discussed below.

Relevant programs

There are two main programs through which an individual can obtain an employer-specific work permit:

  1. The Temporary Foreign Worker Program (“TFWP”): The TFWP enables employers to hire foreign nationals to address labour and skill shortages in their business if they are unable to locate suitably skilled and available Canadian citizens or permanent residents.The employer must apply to Employment and Social Development Canada (“ESDC”) / Service Canada for a Labour Market Impact Assessment (“LMIA”). If a positive LMIA is granted to the employer, the foreign national that the employer wishes to hire can use the LMIA to apply for a work permit.

 

  1. The International Mobility Program (“IMP”): The IMP provides opportunities for employers to hire foreign nationals without an LMIA, as certain workers are considered exempt from the LMIA process. There are a number of categories of LMIA-exempt work permits under the IMP, and the majority of them lead to an employer-specific work permit.While an LMIA is not required, the employer must instead prepare and submit an Online Offer of Employment (aka an Employer Compliance Submission) through the Government of Canada’s Employer Portal, and must pay a $230 Compliance Fee, in order to support the foreign national’s application for the employer-specific work permit.

Creation of obligations

By using the TFWP and IMP, employers are agreeing to various conditions, including to remain actively engaged in the business in respect of which the offer of employment was made, make reasonable efforts to provide a work place free of abuse, and comply with relevant employment and recruitment laws, among others.

Additionally, when preparing an LMIA under the TFWP or Employer Compliance Submission under the IMP, the employer is required to outline various conditions of the foreign national’s employment, including details like the individual’s job title, job duties, hours of work, salary or hourly wage, benefits entitlement, location of work, and similar. In providing these details to facilitate a foreign national’s work permit application, the employer is creating obligations to ESDC or Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”) respectively to honour those conditions.

Employer compliance

Both ESDC and IRCC have the authority to review the activities of any employer using their programs, including by conducting audits or inspections, in order to ensure the employer is complying with their obligations.

For example, these entities may wish to confirm if an employer is in fact providing the foreign national with the salary indicated in an LMIA or providing the type of work outlined in an Online Offer of Employment. Findings of non-compliance with the conditions of work as provided can lead to various consequences, including warnings, monetary penalties, a ban from using the TFWP or IMP, and more.

Our Immigration Team is able to advise employers of foreign workers regarding their obligations and provide best practices to avoid non-compliance and the consequences that may follow.


This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above, please contact a member of our Immigration group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

TTC’s Random Testing Decision: A Bright Light for Employers in the Haze of Marijuana Legalization

April 11, 2017

Rick Dunlop In my December 15, 2016 article, Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?, I noted the Report’s1 suggestion that there was a lack of research to reliably determine when individuals are impaired…

Read More

Unionization in the Construction Industry: Vacation Day + Snapshot Rule = Disenfranchisement

April 4, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Michelle Black On March 14, 2014, CanMar Contracting Limited (“CanMar”) granted a day off to two of its hard working and longer serving employees so they could spend time with their respective families. That…

Read More

Sometimes a bad deal is just a bad deal: unconscionability and insurance claim settlements in Downer v Pitcher, 2017 NLCA 13

March 16, 2017

Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The doctrine of unconscionability is an equitable remedy available in exceptional circumstances where a bargain between parties, be it a settlement or a release, may be set aside on the basis that…

Read More

Privilege Prevails: Privacy Commissioner protects solicitor-client communications

March 16, 2017

Jonathan Coady After more than five years, the Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy Commissioner (the “Privacy Commissioner”) has completed her review into more than sixty records withheld by a local school board on the…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Nova Scotia Teachers Union & Government – a synopsis

March 7, 2017

Peter McLellan, QC & Richard Jordan Introduction On February 21, 2017 the Nova Scotia Government passed Bill 75 – the Teachers’ Professional Agreement and Classroom Improvement (2017) Act. This Bulletin will provide some background to what is, today,…

Read More

Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong: The Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador weighs in on the former client rule in commercial transactions

March 1, 2017

Bruce Grant, QC and Justin Hewitt In the recent decision of Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong1 the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador confirmed that where a law firm acts jointly for the borrower and lender in the placement…

Read More

The Ordinary Meaning of Insurance: Client Update on the SCC’s Decision in Sabean

February 21, 2017

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co, 2017 SCC 7 at the end of January, finally answering an insurance policy question that had divided the lower…

Read More

Client Update: Outlook for the 2017 Proxy Season

February 8, 2017

In preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Client Update: The Future of Planning and Development on Prince Edward Island – Recent Amendments to the Planning Act

January 23, 2017

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…

Read More

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top