Temporary Foreign Worker Program: Polarizing views, voices and paths forward

Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) allows employers to hire workers from abroad when qualified Canadians or permanent residents are unavailable. It was originally introduced in the 1970s to fill temporary labour shortages. Over time, it has expanded into multiple streams (high-wage, low-wage, seasonal agriculture, caregiver, etc.) and has become a fixture in sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, hospitality and care‑giving.

Why it matters

In recent years, the program has drawn intense scrutiny from both ends of the political spectrum:

• Labour shortages: Employers in agriculture, seafood processing, tourism and health care have argued that they cannot find enough domestic workers. The Fisheries Council of Canada says an aging workforce and tight labour market make it impossible to staff year‑round seafood production without foreign workers, and warns that the industry’s sustainability is jeopardised if the program is cut. Similarly, small businesses surveyed by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) say the TFWP is vital to keeping doors open; 89 % said it helps them stay in business and 70 % said it helps them retain employees.

• Economic and human rights concerns: Critics charge that the program suppresses wages, displaces Canadian workers and exposes migrants to exploitation. Amnesty International’s 2025 report documented wage theft, excessive work hours and racial discrimination; it argued that tying workers to a single employer (closed work permits) creates vulnerability to abuse, describing the program as “inherently exploitative”. The UN special rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery went further, calling the TFWP a “breeding ground for modern slavery” because employer‑specific permits and fear of deportation allow unscrupulous employers to intimidate workers.

The tension between meeting genuine labour needs and preventing exploitation has led to calls ranging from outright abolition to cautious reform. The debate intensified in 2025 when Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre said he would “scrap” the program entirely, arguing that it displaces young Canadians and allows corporations to keep wages low. British Columbia’s premier David Eby joined the chorus, suggesting the program should be cancelled or dramatically reformed to address youth unemployment and housing pressures.

Polarizing views

Calls to cancel the program

Critics	Key arguments and proposals
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre	Argues the TFWP lets corporate elites “scoop up jobs” meant for young Canadians, suppressing wages. Pledges to stop issuing temporary foreign‑worker visas and “make wages rise” by forcing employers to compete for Canadian workers.
B.C. Premier David Eby (NDP)	Says the program should be cancelled or severely cut back because it displaces youth and strains housing and social services. He proposes a meeting of provinces to discuss immigration’s impact and contends that businesses should raise wages instead of relying on foreign labour.
Human‑rights advocates (Amnesty International, UN special rapporteur, Migrant rights groups, NDP MP Jenny Kwan)	Document systemic abuses like wage theft, long hours, racial discrimination and substandard housing. Denounce employer‑specific permits as creating “modern slavery” and call for open work permits and pathways to permanent residence.
Some labour unions	Argue that the program undercuts Canadian workers, particularly in low‑wage sectors, and is used by employers to avoid offering better pay and training. They support ending closed permits and transitioning to unionised permanent positions.

Defenders and reformers

Supporters	Key arguments and proposals
Small business groups (CFIB)	Contend that the TFWP is a last resort but a lifeline for rural restaurants, farms and care facilities. CFIB notes that 94 % of employers were compliant with worker‑protection rules in 2023, 85 % paid TFWs the same as Canadians, and many say the program helps them hire more Canadians. Warn that scrapping it would force closures and hurt local economies.
Industry associations (Fisheries Council of Canada, tourism operators)	Highlight chronic labour shortages and seasonal work patterns that make local recruitment difficult. The Fisheries Council says year‑round seafood processing depends on TFWs and cautions that limiting the program threatens food production. Tourism and hospitality streams rely on temporary workers during peak seasons and encourage provincial pathways to permanent residency.
Canadian Chamber of Commerce	Acknowledges cases of abuse but rejects the UN’s “modern slavery” claim, noting that federal inspections found 94 % compliance and that the program is essential for long‑term care, farming and affordable goods. Urges government to address exploitation without punishing compliant employers.
Provincial governments with pro‑TFW policies (Alberta, Quebec)	Some provinces actively encourage temporary workers to transition to permanent residents through immigration nominee programs. Alberta’s 2024/25 Alberta Advantage Immigration Program gave 85 % of its nominations to workers already in Canada through the TFWP, launching tourism and law enforcement streams. Quebec requested and received a six‑month freeze on low‑wage permits in Montreal for 2024 but still supports agricultural and high‑wage streams.
Policy analysts	Suggest incremental reform rather than abolition. A 2025 commentary in The Hub warns that scrapping the program would leave sectors like construction and agriculture stranded; instead, it calls for faster labour‑market impact assessments, better domestic training and clear pathways to permanent residency.

Where provinces and regions stand

Canada’s labour market varies widely across provinces:

• Western provinces such as Alberta and Saskatchewan have historically supported the program. Alberta’s tourism and hospitality stream explicitly targets temporary foreign workers who are already in the province, and the province uses its provincial nominee program to transition them to permanent residency.

• Quebec struck a more cautious tone. In 2024 the federal government approved Quebec’s request to temporarily suspend low‑wage LMIA (Labour Market Impact Assessment) processing in Montreal for six months, citing high unemployment. Exceptions were made for agriculture, construction and health care, reflecting a recognition that some sectors still rely on TFWs.

• British Columbia faces high youth unemployment and housing pressures. Premier David Eby advocates for either cancelling or dramatically reforming the program. Yet sectors like seafood processing on Vancouver Island and horticulture in the Fraser Valley depend on temporary workers; scrapping the program could harm these industries.

• Atlantic provinces rely on TFWs in fisheries and seasonal tourism. Industry groups warn that labour shortages are chronic and domestic recruitment efforts have failed.

Main controversies and systemic issues

1. Employer‑specific or “closed” permits – Workers who come under the TFWP are tied to one employer. Critics say this leads to power imbalances, fear of retaliation, and barriers to reporting abuse; the UN rapporteur described it as a breeding ground for modern slavery. Advocates propose open work permits that allow workers to change employers without losing status.

2. Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) delays and fraud – Employers must obtain LMIAs to prove that no Canadian worker is available. In practice, processing times often exceed 62 business days, meaning conditions may change by the time workers arrive. The system is vulnerable to fraudulent LMIAs and unscrupulous recruiters charging illegal fees to workers.

3. Impact on wages and youth employment – Political critics like Poilievre and Eby argue that the program keeps wages low and displaces Canadian youth. Some economists counter that wages in low‑wage sectors have remained stagnant for decades due to structural factors and that eliminating foreign workers might simply force businesses to close rather than raise wages.

4. Access to permanent residency – High‑skilled streams often provide pathways to permanent residency, while low‑wage workers face limited options. Amnesty International notes that despite their contribution to Canada’s food and care sectors, many workers have no realistic path to settle permanently. Alberta and Quebec’s targeted nominee programs show one model for addressing this gap.

PGWP and the broader context of temporary residents

The Temporary Foreign Worker Program is just one piece of Canada’s temporary‑resident puzzle. Two other categories—the Post‑Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) and family open work permits—have grown rapidly in recent years and contribute to the perception that temporary entrants are crowding out domestic workers.

Post‑Graduation Work Permit (PGWP)

The PGWP allows recent international graduates of Canadian institutions to work anywhere in Canada for up to three years. It began as a pilot program in 2003 in select provinces and became available nationwide in 2005. Significant reforms in 2008 gave graduates an open work permit lasting up to three years with no requirement for a job offer. A 2014 change allowed students to work after completing their studies while waiting for their PGWP approval.The number of PGWP holders reporting income increased from 10,300 in 2008 to 135,100 in 2018, reflecting explosive growth in international student participation. About three‑quarters of PGWP holders become permanent residents within five years, making this stream a pipeline to immigration rather than a purely temporary workforce.

The PGWP’s popularity means that any discussion of temporary workers must acknowledge that many international students are working legally after graduation. While PGWP holders are not part of the employer‑specific TFWP, their numbers influence labour‑market dynamics. The federal government has responded by tightening PGWP eligibility and capping study permits. In 2024 Ottawa introduced an annual cap on study permits and announced a further 10 % reduction for 2025. Between January and June 2025 there were 214,520 fewer arrivals to Canada compared with the same period in 2024, including 88,617 fewer new students and 125,903 fewer new temporary workers. These measures show that the government is already reducing the inflow of international students and temporary workers, which will ease some pressure on housing and services.

Spousal open work permits

Many temporary residents bring spouses and children who can work under open work permits. To curb this influx, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada announced in January 2025 that only spouses of certain international students and high‑skilled foreign workers would be eligible for family open work permits. Eligible students must be enrolled in master’s or doctoral programs (16 months or longer) or certain professional programs, and the principal foreign worker must have at least 16 months remaining on their permit. Spouses of workers in TEER 0 or 1 occupations and select TEER 2–3 occupations are eligible, while dependent children are no longer eligible. These changes, along with the PGWP reforms and study‑permit caps, aim to manage temporary resident numbers while supporting labour needs in critical sectors.

Possible solutions and forward‑thinking reforms

Taking sides isn’t productive; instead, the focus should be on balancing economic need, worker rights and social cohesion. Several reforms stand out:

1. Replace closed permits with open or sector‑al permits. Open permits would allow workers to leave abusive employers without risking deportation and would discourage wage suppression. Sector‑al permits could strike a compromise by tying workers to an industry rather than a single employer.

2. Streamline LMIA processing and crack down on fraud. Reduce processing times to ensure labour‑market assessments reflect real conditions and strengthen enforcement against bogus recruiters. Penalties for employers who misrepresent labour shortages should be significant.

3. Expand pathways to permanent residency and skills training. Provincial nominee programs that prioritise workers already contributing to local economies (as Alberta does) should be scaled up. At the same time, invest in domestic training and apprenticeships to reduce reliance on TFWs over the long term.

4. Enhance oversight and worker protections. Increase random inspections, provide access to unions and legal support, and ensure that TFWs receive housing and wages equal to Canadians. Only 6 % of employers were non‑compliant in 2023, but these cases tarnish the program’s reputation and demand swift action.

5. Rethink regional quotas and targeted suspensions. In areas with high unemployment, temporary suspensions of low‑wage streams (as Quebec did) may be justified. However, such measures should be paired with support for businesses and workers to transition.

The Temporary Foreign Worker Program has become a lightning rod in Canadian politics. Cancelling it outright may sound cathartic on the campaign trail, but the reality is messier. On the one hand, abuse and exploitation are real and unacceptable; no one wants a system that fosters modern‑day slavery. On the other hand, many businesses — particularly small, rural and seasonal operators — rely on temporary workers to survive. In an era of labour shortages and an ageing population, simply closing the door could undermine food production, care services and hospitality industries.

A forward‑looking approach should acknowledge the program’s flaws while recognising its necessity, and move towards a system that protects workers, meets economic needs and offers fair pathways to belonging. Solutions lie not in sharp ideological divides but in evidence‑based reforms, strong enforcement and a commitment to dignity for all workers. Let’s aim for a Canada where, whether born here or arriving on a temporary visa, people can work safely, be fairly compensated and feel at home.