���˴�Ƭ

Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program has recently come under intense scrutiny, with a new characterizing it as a systemic “.”

The report criticizes the for limiting workers’ freedom of movement by tying their immigration status to a single employer.

In contrast, regional or sectoral contracts could offer workers more flexibility in the labour market, reduce existing power imbalances, and enable them to push for better working conditions without fearing deportation.

Canada’s doctor shortage

The UN report overlooked how similar mobility restrictions imposed on internationally trained physicians (ITPs) .

These mobility restrictions largely stem from what are known as that evaluate the clinical competence of ITPs to ensure they meet the standards required to practice independently in a specific province.

Compounding this issue, return-of-service contracts — often tied to the assessment programs — further limit ITPs’ mobility by mandating that they work in designated, often under-served, areas for a set period of time.

These policies aim to address regional health-care shortages but create significant mobility barriers for ITPs. This deters many from entering the workforce through these pathways. It also intensifies competition for limited residency positions, which Canadian-born medical graduates clamour for.

This restrictive environment worsens Canada’s health-care crisis by preventing the effective distribution of medical expertise. The physician shortage is severe, with only . As a result, patient wait times are dangerously long,

Integrating ITPs into the workforce when supported by appropriate labour protections, including enforceable standards for .

Additionally, integrating ITPs through practice-ready assessment programs has been demonstrated to yield only a nine to 13 per cent return on investment, and a 2019 report by the Royal Bank of Canada estimates that the .

Creating bottlenecks

The health-care crisis and under-utilization of ITPs highlight a significant barrier to their integration into Canada’s health-care system. This issue, similar to the UN’s critique of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, stems from mobility restrictions imposed on ITPs.

Practice-ready assessment programs require ITPs to practice in the province where they completed their assessment. Additionally, return-of-service contracts tied to these programs mandate practice in designated areas, often restricting ITPs to specific health-care facilities or small communities.

As a result, despite 72 per cent of ITPs having more than three years of clinical experience abroad — 20 per cent have more than 10 years under their belts —

This exacerbates competition with Canadian medical graduates for residency positions, creating bottlenecks and forcing ITPs into unnecessary retraining. It also raises concerns about potential violations of mobility rights, akin to those closed work permits recently maligned by the UN and described by one physician as a form of

A different path forward

To address this, the , which , should consider offering financial bonuses or loan forgiveness to attract doctors to under-served areas without restricting ITPs’ mobility.

Financial bonuses have demonstrated immediate rewards for physicians who choose to work in under-served areas, while loan forgiveness programs offer long-term financial relief. In Australia, the Rural General Practice Incentives Program significantly increased the number of rural practitioners, resulting in a .

Additionally, a were willing to work in rural areas of Canada if they received appropriate support and incentives.

Promoting economic growth

For temporary foreign workers and ITPs alike, the introduction of work permits would encourage healthier competition among employers to offer better working conditions, wages and benefits to attract and retain both migrant and domestic workers.

By dismantling the structural inequalities inherent in the closed work-permit system, sectoral work permits could reduce the exploitation of migrant workers, which often indirectly impacts Canadian workers by undermining hard-fought labour standards.

A fairer, more transparent labour market would benefit all workers by ensuring that employment standards are upheld across the board, leading to a more just and equitable work environment throughout Canada.

Eliminating return-of-service contracts could also free up residency spots for Canadian medical graduates, as ITPs would no longer bypass the practice-ready assessment pathway to avoid current mobility restrictions.

Canada’s systemic mobility restrictions on both low-skilled foreign workers and ITPs reflect a broader pattern of exploitation. The UN Special Rapporteur’s critique of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program has troubling parallels in the health-care sector. ITPs face restrictive return-of-service contracts that, like closed work permits, limit their freedom and perpetuate power imbalances favouring employers over workers.

Eliminating these constraints, whether through sectoral work permits or reformed return-of-service contracts, is essential. Such changes would protect worker dignity and rights while enhancing Canada’s labour market health and productivity. Ultimately, these reforms would foster a more equitable and dynamic economy, benefiting both migrant and domestic workers and contributing to Canadian society.

, PhD Student, Political Science,

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .