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


 
 

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a mortgage brokerage and mortgage administrator in New Brunswick

July 7, 2016

On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…

Read More

Copyright does not monopolize facts – documentary filmmakers’ claim against book author and publisher fails

June 29, 2016

In May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…

Read More

Solicitor-client privilege vs the Canada Revenue Agency: the SCC speaks

June 10, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…

Read More

Why can’t we be friends?: Lessons on corporate dissolution from Smith v. Hillier

May 30, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…

Read More

Client Update: Supreme Court of Canada dismisses appeals in punitive damages cases

May 26, 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…

Read More

Client Update: Pension update: Countdown to Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans

May 17, 2016

On May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…

Read More

Pension Primer: Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) in Nova Scotia

April 22, 2016

By Level Chan and Dante Manna Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings…

Read More

Client Update: Perrin v Blake reaffirms the law on contributory negligence and recovery of damages

April 14, 2016

In a case where there is a contributorily negligent plaintiff and two or more negligent defendants, can the plaintiff recover 100% of her damages from any of the defendants? The answer in Nova Scotia is…

Read More

Client Update: Interest arbitration changes for New Brunswick postponed for further study

April 11, 2016

On Friday, the Province of New Brunswick announced that it would not proceed at this time with the recently proposed changes to binding interest arbitration. The Province announced that a joint labour management committee will be struck to examine…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top