Get documents about "Opportunities and Challenges of Temporary Workers
Description
Opportunities and Challenges of Temporary Workers document sample
Document Sample
The Changing Economic Context for Canada’s Seasonal Agricultural
Workers Program
Ann Weston, The North-South Institute 1
May 2007
This paper was prepared for The North-South Institute, with the financial support of the Labour
Program of Human Resources and Social Development Canada. The views and opinions
expressed in the paper do not necessarily represent those of The North-South Institute, the
Canada’s Labour Program, or anyone consulted in its preparation.
1
This paper draws on an earlier paper written with Luigi Scarpa De Masellis, ‘Hemispheric Integration and Trade
Relations – Implications for Canada’s Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program’, January 2004.
Weston May 2007 p. 2
Table of contents
List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................ 3
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4
Introduction........................................................................................................................ 6
1. Changing structure of the horticulture sector in Canada .................................... 7
2. Horticultural trade issues .................................................................................... 12
3. SAWP employment by commodity....................................................................... 14
4. Wages in agriculture and SAWP......................................................................... 17
5. Labour shortages in agriculture in Canada ....................................................... 24
6. Federal Government responses ........................................................................... 26
7. Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 30
References ........................................................................................................................ 31
List of Tables/Charts
Table 1. Farm cash receipts (Key crops, Canada, Ontario, Quebec, BC)
Chart 1. Production of certain SAWP crops in Canada (by value, 1990-2005)
Chart 2. Production of selected SAWP crops in Canada (by volume, 1990-2005)
Table 2. Production of SAWP crops in Ontario (value, volume and growth)
Table 3. Trade in selected SAWP crops ($, annual averages)
Table 4. Share of SAWP workers in Ontario by commodity
Chart 3. SAWP Employment in Ontario, 1996 and 2006
Table 5. Numbers of employers using SAWP in Ontario and average number of workers per
employer
Chart 4. SAWP wages for apiary, sod and tobacco and minimum wage
Chart 5. Minimum and SAWP tomato wage
Chart 6. Wages for apiary,
Chart 7. Nursery and greenhouse wage rates in different parts of Ontario
Chart 8. Harvesting labourer wage rates in different parts of Ontario
Weston May 2007 p. 3
List of Acronyms
AAFC Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (the Canadian federal department)
BC British Columbia
CFIB Canadian Federation of Independent Business
CHC Canadian Horticultural Council
CPP Canada Pension Plan
EI Employment Insurance
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization
FARMS Foreign Agricultural Resource Management Service
HRSDC Human Resources and Social Development Canada (the Canadian federal
department), previously known as HRDC
LMO Labour Market Opinion
NOC National Occupational Classification
OFA Ontario Federation of Agriculture
OMAFRA Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
PEI Prince Edward Island
SAWP Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program
TFW Temporary Foreign Workers
US United States
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
WTO World Trade Organization
Weston May 2007 p. 4
Executive Summary
This paper examines the changing economic context for the Seasonal Agricultural Workers
Program or SAWP, in order to understand some of the emerging opportunities and challenges for
Caribbean workers and their government representatives.
Section 1 examines recent changes in horticultural crop production in Canada, focusing on
Ontario, where the majority of SAWP workers from the Caribbean, and in total, are employed.
Three key points emerge. First, this is an important sector in terms of farm cash receipts and one
that therefore should command attention from national farming organizations and from the
Canadian government (both federal and provincial). Second is the concentration of production,
with the emergence of fewer and larger employers, notably in greenhouses. Third is the decline
of some crops while others are expanding. Tracking these changes enables sending government
officials to tailor their engagement with employers, identifying opportunities for expansion and
considering the consequences of contraction, as in tobacco. Some workers may be more suitable
for one type of crop than another.
Section 2 focusses on the changing trade environment for Canadian horticultural producers.
Competition in Canada and the US, which are the two major markets for Canadian producers,
has increased steadily. There are particular concerns about the growth in imports from China, as
well as dumping by subsidized and unfairly priced goods from the US. These appear to have
affected apple sales. Tobacco sales have also fallen because of a switch to imports by cigarette
manufacturers. On the other hand, net greenhouse tomato exports have surged, underlining the
scope for employment in this sector. While farmers groups are keen to address some of these
trade policy issues, there are other factors such as rising energy costs and an appreciating
exchange rate that are weakening their competitiveness. This has increased their emphasis on
controlling labour costs.
Section 3 reviews trends in the location of SAWP employment focusing again on Ontario, the
only province for which detailed statistics are readily available. The information here reiterates
some of the earlier points. One is the shift in the last ten years from tobacco as a predominant
source of employment. SAWP employment is now somewhat more evenly distributed and this
should reduce its vulnerability to market changes. Second, the emergence of new sectors
(flowers, apiary, sod) may require some adaptation by both officials and workers. Third, there is
a wide range in average number of workers employed – producers of some crops hire less than
ten workers on average, while others hire almost 20 or even 40.
Section 4 examines the critical issue of wage rates. SAWP wages are meant to be equal to the
‘prevailing wage’ in the area of production and at least the minimum wage. Agricultural wages
in Canada are generally quite low. Over 1 in 10 Canadian agricultural workers earn the minimum
wage or less; in Ontario over 1 in 4 people in agriculture earn the minimum wage. This may
explain the relatively low SAWP wages. In 1991, the gap between the Ontario SAWP hourly
wage for some crops and the minimum wage was 85 cents or 17 percent. It then virtually
disappeared in the late 1990s, though in recent years it has increased, reaching 58 cents or 7
percent in 2007. Some of the newer activities offer higher SAWP wages however. There have
been problems in identifying the ‘prevailing wage’. Fewer Canadians work alongside SAWP
Weston May 2007 p. 5
workers, wage data for Canadian horticultural workers is not systematically collected, and there
is no agreed methodology for calculating the ‘prevailing wage’ nor process for determining it.
Section 5 turns to the issue of labour shortages in Canadian agriculture and specifically in
horticulture. Recent surveys have found that low wages, difficult working conditions and
seasonality of employment have made it difficult to attract Canadian workers, particularly to do
harvesting labour. Canadian farmers have therefore called for increased flexibility in the foreign
worker program. Skilled labour is also in short supply, and while the focus is on training
Canadians to meet this need, some training of foreign workers has also been suggested.
Section 6 reviews the federal government’s policy responses. First it expanded the SAWP to
more crops and provinces. Second, it allowed agricultural employers to use the low-skilled
Temporary Foreign Worker (TFW) program to bring in workers from countries besides those
traditionally involved in SAWP. The TFW was introduced in 2003 as a pilot project but has
since been extended and broadened in various ways to make it more usable. This has already led
to some 1400 farmworkers from Central America coming to Canada each year. Third, in
November 2006 it helped to create the Canadian Agricultural Human Resources Council,
bringing together representatives of employers and others to consider further policies to meet
labour needs.
Section 7 draws some conclusions. There are three key points that emerge. First, that the
demand for foreign agricultural workers is likely to expand over the long-term. But employment
will continue to shift between crops, employers and provinces. Some newer crops may require
different skills and offer different working conditions. Workers that have depended on a crop
now in decline, such as tobacco, may need support to adjust to the opportunities in other crops.
Second, Caribbean governments may wish to engage with the Canadian Agricultural Human
Resources Council in discussions about strategies to address labour shortages, including issues of
training and wages. Third, the new Temporary Foreign Workers program presents employers
with ways to complement or substitute SAWP workers. At the same time it opens the door to
new sectors and employers for Caribbean low-skill workers.
Weston May 2007 p. 6
Introduction
This paper provides an overview of the changing economic context for the Seasonal Agricultural
Workers Program or SAWP. The aim of the paper is to illustrate both the opportunities and the
challenges arising for temporary workers from the Caribbean, as a result of 1. changing
production patterns in agriculture, 2. labour shortages in agriculture and other sectors, and 3.
policy responses adopted by the federal government, including both changes to SAWP and the
introduction of a low-skilled Temporary Foreign Worker (TFW) program. This suggests
increasing competition for SAWP workers. On the other hand it also creates new opportunities
for low-skilled temporary employment outside seasonal agriculture and in other sectors such as
hospitality.
For those interested in the SAWP and the opportunities for temporary employment in Canada for
farmworkers and other low skilled workers, it is important to understand that the context is quite
fluid, and therefore should be monitored closely. Low-skilled labour shortages in Canada are
projected by most observers to continue, as a result of both demographic trends associated with
an aging population, and a preference by Canadians for higher skilled and paying jobs. Further
policy innovation is likely.
Section 1 highlights the increasing importance of the horticulture sector in the Canadian
economy and reviews its changing structure, in particular which crops are becoming more
significant and which are declining in Canada as a whole as well as Ontario, where SAWP
workers are still concentrated.
Section 2 examines the shift in trade patterns in horticulture and other SAWP crops, and
emerging trade issues, to understand some of the competitive pressures facing producers.
Section 3 focusses on SAWP employment in Ontario by commodity and how this has changed
over time.
Weston May 2007 p. 7
Section 4 then considers the issue of SAWP wages in Ontario and how these compare to wages
paid to Canadians and landed immigrants.
Section 5 then reviews some of the trends in the agricultural labour market in Canada, notably
the labour market shortages that have emerged in the horticultural sector, as well as other
agricultural sectors (tobacco and ginseng amongst others).
Section 6 examines some of the policy responses designed to meet agricultural employer needs.
While the government has introduced some changes to the SAWP, more recently it has
introduced a low-skill Temporary Foreign Worker (TFW) program which can also be used to
bring in agricultural workers.
Section 7 draws a number of conclusions for employment opportunities for Caribbean
farmworkers under SAWP and the implications of the TFW program. It also makes some
suggestions for further improvements to SAWP.
1. Changing structure of the horticulture sector in Canada
In this section we examine recent developments in the horticulture sector, in order to understand
future prospects for SAWP workers, in terms of employment levels.
Vegetables and floriculture are now leading sectors within agriculture in Canada in terms of farm
cash receipts, with floriculture in 2005 ranking first, ahead of wheat – traditionally the most
important and now ranking third – and canola, with vegetables ranking fourth. This is in contrast
to 1996, when floriculture and vegetables ranked third and fourth respectively (see Table 1).
According to the CHC, horticulture cash receipts exceed grains and oilseeds in seven out of ten
provinces in Canada. 2
2
CHC, Farm Labour Issues note, p. 1.
Weston May 2007 p. 8
Table 1. Farm Cash Receipts (1996, 2006, $ million)
1996 2006 1996,% 2006,%
Total crops 14,016 13,500 100% 100%
Floriculture 999 1,907 7% 14%
Canola 1,969 1,855 14% 14%
Wheat 3,482 1,722 25% 13%
Vegetables 968 1,611 7% 12%
Corn 808 634 6% 5%
Barley 960 341 7% 3%
Source: Statistics Canada, Farm Cash Receipts, 11-210-XIB, on-line
consulted February 5, 2007
More detailed data relating to number of farms and acreage is contained in the 2001 Census of
Agriculture. Comparable data from the 2006 Census will only be released in late 2007. For
Canada as a whole, the 2001 Census shows at least four key features in the 1991-2001 period in
crops employing SAWP and temporary foreign farmworkers more generally. There was a
reduction in the number of fruit tree farms (28%) and their total acreage (23%). The area under
berries/grapes grew (51%) even while the number of berry/grape farms remained relatively
steady. The number of vegetable farms fell (8%) but there was a small increase in their acreage.
The most remarkable change was the rise in the number of greenhouse farms (22%) along with a
fairly substantial increase in their average area (75%) with the result that the total greenhouse
area more than doubled (113%). Provincial data shows broadly similar trends in the four main
horticultural provinces (Ontario, Quebec, BC and Alberta).
These structural changes in horticulture parallel the changes in primary agriculture in Canada,
notably the decline in farm numbers and the increase in concentration of production amongst
very large farms. “Production is concentrated on very large farms, in particular greenhouse and
nursery farms, hog farms, potato farms and poultry and egg farms. In 2003, these very large
farms produced close to 85% of agricultural production for these farm types”. In fact greenhouse
and nursery production appears to be the most concentrated. 3 This may have consequences for
the types of relationships that employers have with employees and their government
representatives, in contrast to those of smaller farmers.
3
AAFC, pp. 4-5.
Weston May 2007 p. 9
Total Canadian production of the main crops in which SAWP workers have been employed has
increased by some 57 percent in value in the last 15 years. This overall trend, however, conceals
fluctuations from one year to the next and between crops. As Chart 1 shows, while there has
been a steady increase in the value of greenhouse tomatoes to 2004, and a slow but steady
decline in the value of tobacco and apples produced, the value of other major crops has been
fairly constant.
In volume terms, there has been no significant increase in greenhouse tomatoes since 2001, while
apple production has also remained fairly level after a steep decline from 1995 to 2002 and
tobacco production has declined fairly significantly. Otherwise the main growth has been in
field tomatoes.
Chart 1. Production of certain SAWP crops in Canada (by value, 1990-2005)
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
Apples
Tomatoes
250,000
Tobacco
$000s
Cucumbers
200,000 Peaches
Greenhouse Tomatoes
Greenhouse Cucumbers
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
year
Source: derived from Statistics Canada data. NB the value of tobacco production for some years had to be estimated
on the basis of volume increases and assuming no change in the unit value.
Weston May 2007 p. 10
Chart 2. Production of selected SAWP crops in Canada (volume)
700,000
tomatoes
600,000
500,000
Apples
400,000 Tomatoes
Tobacco
tonnes
apples Cucumbers
Peaches
300,000 Greenhouse Tomatoes
Greenhouse Cucumbers
200,000
greenhouse tomatoes
100,000 cucumbers
tobacco
peaches
0
1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
year
Source: derived from Statistics Canada data
Total greenhouse sales of flowers, plants and vegetables fell for the first time in 2005. Amongst
issues identified as affecting the growth of the greenhouse sector were: “the strengthening
Canadian dollar, … a saturation of the market, which may depress prices, and higher energy
costs which are generally 30 to 40% of production costs for greenhouse vegetable growers.” 4
Tobacco production fell by 44 percent from 1998 to 2005 i.e. to 41,000 tonnes. 5 Flue-cured
tobacco – which accounts for the majority of the crop -- was projected at 25,000 tonnes in 2006
(0.6 percent of world output), down from 52,000 tonnes in 2000 (1.4 percent of world output) 6 .
This decline in production has been “attributed to four factors: illicit trade, taxation which tends
to reduce demand, anti-smoking campaigns, and most importantly, the three largest Canadian
4
Purdy 2005
5
OFA October 2006. NB the tobacco production volumes for recent years have had to be calculated on the basis of
this percentage growth; also the ratio of flue to total (38 to 41) was then used to calculate total tobacco production
for the years 2000 to 2005 shown in the Chart. It is not easy to find current timeseries for leaf tobacco production in
Canada.
6
FAO data on-line
Weston May 2007 p. 11
purchasers switching from domestic to imported tobacco.” 7 The decline in tobacco production
has particularly affected farmers in Southwestern Ontario, who account for some 90 percent of
Canadian tobacco output (the rest being grown in Quebec and a small amount in PEI) and the
bulk of this is flue-cured tobacco. Their total annual output averaged 71,700 tonnes in the 1990s
but fell to 49,000 tonnes in 2002. With little prospects for a reversal in this downward trend in
2006, and many tobacco farmers facing bankruptcy, the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’
Marketing Board recommended that the federal and provincial governments help farmers to
adjust out of tobacco production and provide assistance to the communities where tobacco is
produced to minimize their economic hardship. (This exit strategy was endorsed by the Ontario
Federation of Agriculture in late 2006. 8 ) It is not clear whether their proposal could be extended
to the communities of Caribbean farmworkers who have been involved in Ontario tobacco
production for over 50 years.
The tree fruit industry in Ontario has also called on the government to support a national replant
strategy, “if the sector is to survive,” according to the OFA. 9 Such a program is considered
necessary to increase productivity and reverse flat or declining producer returns, which have
been exacerbated by increasing competition from imports.
Table 2 shows what has happened in Ontario – the main locations still for SAWP workers from
the Caribbean. 10 The data show a somewhat mixed picture 11 . In the greenhouse sector, which
has been a growing source of employment for SAWP in the past (see Section 3), the value of
tomato production has increased since 2000 but the volume of production has remained
somewhat static; the value of cucumber production declined slightly. Field tomatoes, in contrast,
grew substantially. Both apples and peach production fell in value and volume while cherry
production increased substantially.
7
AAFC
8
OFA 2006
9
OFA Commentary, 2006
10
NB the focus on some crops means that the table may be missing some of the dynamism in other crops – notably
other fruits, vegetables -- and sectors such as nursery and canning/processing, and newer sectors like floriculture.
11
NB the picture may change somewhat if we consider three year averages rather than comparing single years.
Weston May 2007 p. 12
Table 2. Production of SAWP crops in Ontario (value, volume and growth)
($000s) ($000s) (tonnes) (tonnes)
2000 2005 Growth Growth 2000 2005 Growth Growth
1980- 2000- 1980-2000 2000-
2000 2005 2005
Greenhouse Tomatoes 177,223 205,455 1058% 16% 130,499 125,184 990% -4%
Greenhouse Cucumbers 97,252 93,738 994% -4% 75,973 591%
Tomatoes 56,730 77,500 27% 37% 408,685 620,515 3% 52%
Apples 97,200 51,700 223% -47% 262,861 154,221 53% -41%
Peaches 24,700 23,000 90% -7% 24,132 17,917 -18% -26%
Cucumbers 14,205 10,500 83% -26% 47,854 31,751 21% -34%
Cherries (sweet and sour) 3,030 8,180 -56% 170% 1,658 8,670 -86% 423%
Tobacco 239,947 -18% 48,272 -51%
subtotal 710,287 470,073
Source: derived from Statistics Canada
2. Horticultural trade issues
Canada is a major agricultural exporter, ranking third in 2005 after the EU and the US, with
US$41.2 billion or 4.8 percent of the world total (and 11.5 percent of Canada’s total exports). Its
agricultural imports amounted to US$21.5 billion in that year (2.5 percent of the world’s total
agricultural imports and 6.8 percent of Canada’s imports). 12
Competition in world markets has increased with the emergence of China as a major producer
and now exporter of fruits and vegetables, following the US, Spain and the Netherlands, with its
low labour costs being cited as a particular source of advantage. 13 In Canada and the US,
Canada’s main export market, China has rapidly expanded its sales in recent years. It recorded
annual average growth rates of 27 percent and 21 percent respectively from 2000 to 2005
compared to average increase in world exports to Canada of 7 percent p.a. and to the US of 7
percent p.a. 14 At the same time China presents an expanding market for Canadian agro- and
agro-processed products.
Canadian apple producers in particular have reported competition from China in the apple juice
concentrate market displacing Canadian product in Canada and in the US. 15 “Canada has
12
WTO 2007
13
Fresh Produce Information 2007
14
http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2006_e/section4_e/iv07a.xls
15
personal communication, 2006, and USDA 2005
Weston May 2007 p. 13
increased its imports of apple juice concentrate from China and fresh apple imports from
countries such as New Zealand, South Africa and Chile. A combination of these factors has
contributed to a decline in the producer price for both fresh and processing apples.” 16 In early
2007 BC apple growers complained of dumping by US counterparts, though this case was then
dropped for the time being. 17 More generally, the CHC has called on the government to seek
changes in the WTO and NAFTA that would allow such dumping to be more effectively
addressed, including through rules to limit the effects of dumping in third country markets. 18
Table 3. Trade in selected SAWP crops ($, annual averages)
1990 to 1992, average $ 2000 to 2002, average $ 2003 to 2005, average $
Exports
Tobacco 8,874,026 16,188,548 88,060,977
Tomatoes 5,319,917 260,338,500 342,461,959
Apples 23,496,652 41,384,931 44,174,547
Peaches 1,154,342 720,858 163,733
Cucumbers 3,797,954 45,163,917 76,232,004
Cherries 153,242 1,210,928 13,439,262
subtotal 44,236,442 366,154,407 564,532,482
Imports
Tobacco 864,978 425,425 26,963,214
Tomatoes 127,664,612 201,846,875 245,707,735
Apples 74,036,182 105,494,104 155,034,134
Peaches 57,782,941 6,653 85,114,942
Cucumbers 22,792,565 13,360,610 41,040,701
Cherries 17,211,767 599,382 64,569,862
subtotal 302,070,037 321,771,055 618,430,588
Net Exports
Tobacco 8,009,048 15,763,122 61,097,763
Tomatoes -122,344,695 58,491,625 96,754,224
Apples -50,539,530 -64,109,173 -110,859,588
Peaches -56,628,599 714,204 -84,951,208
Cucumbers -18,994,611 31,803,307 35,191,304
Cherries -17,058,525 611,546 -51,130,600
subtotal -257,833,596 44,383,352 -53,898,105
Source: Strategis on-line data
16
Canadian Apple online
17
The Record, 2007
18
CHC, Trade Issues note, p. 3
Weston May 2007 p. 14
Table 3 illustrates a number of key developments in the last 15 years: continuing growth of net
exports of tomatoes and (to a lesser extent) cucumbers, growing net imports of apples, peaches
and cherries, and for tobacco, declining exports and increasing imports resulting in falling
tobacco net exports.
The main trade policy changes affecting Canadian horticultural producers in recent years have
been the negotiation of the NAFTA, leading to increased competition from Mexican products in
Canada and the US, the reduction of tariffs under the Uruguay Round and the entry of China into
the WTO. Further tariff cuts are likely to be negotiated in the current Doha Round, as well as
under bilateral and regional free trade agreements with a variety of countries, which may include
the Commonwealth Caribbean. As a result of the cuts that have already occurred, tariff
protection no longer appears to be a key issue for Canadian producers. Rather their interest
appears to be in securing an effective (i.e. speedy) mechanism to avoid injury from surges of
low-cost imports, whether these are fairly or unfairly priced imports (with the appropriate
remedy being respectively either a safeguard or an anti-dumping duty on these imports). Trade-
distorting domestic support programs may be another concern to be addressed in 2007 following
the US administration’s proposal to extend its programs to fruit and vegetable producers (with $5
billion to be spent over 10 years in the form of research, school buying programs etc). 19
Finally, besides pressures arising from the changes in the domestic and export markets as a result
of changing trade policies, another factor raised by the CHC is “the consolidation and
amalgamation of the retail food sector and its impact on primary horticultural producers.” 20
Evidence in the agricultural sector more generally suggests this will continue to have downward
pressure on farmgate prices.
3. SAWP employment by commodity
In the last decade there has been a major shift in the crops for which SAWP workers are hired in
Ontario, as Table 4 and Chart 3 illustrate. There has been a sharp decline in the relative and
absolute importance of tobacco. Declining Canadian tobacco production has seriously affected
19
Bridges 2007
20
CHC, Trade Issues, p. 1
Weston May 2007 p. 15
employment prospects for SAWP workers. At its peak, in 2001, SAWP employment in tobacco
involved 5,528 workers, of which 5,392 in Ontario. By 2006 there were only 2,918 SAWP
workers in Ontario involved in tobacco. The share of workers in the vegetable sector has fallen,
though it still remains the largest single source of SAWP employment, with almost a quarter,
while the share of fruit (excluding apples) has risen to second place, with more than a fifth of all
workers. The greenhouse sector grew from 7 per cent to 19 percent.
Table 4. Share of SAWP workers in Ontario by commodity
1996 2006
Tobacco 37% 16%
Vegetables 27% 23%
Fruit 16% 21%
Greenhouse 7% 19%
Apples 4% 7%
Nursery 3% 7%
Canning/processing 0% 2%
Ginseng 2% 3%
Flower 2%
Other (Bee/sod) 0%
Total !00% 100%
Source: FARMS
Weston May 2007 p. 16
Chart 3. SAWP Employment in Ontario, 1996 and 2006
1996 = 10,595
280 259 36
402
0 0
727 Tobacco
Vegetables
3877 Fruit
Greenhouse
Apples
1662
Nursery
Canning/processing
Ginseng
Flower
Other (Bee/sod)
2847
2006 = 17,786
486 435 11
Tobacco
431 2918
1206 Vegetables
Fruit
1208
Greenhouse
Apples
4120 Nursery
3313 Canning/processing
Ginseng
Flower
3658 Other (Bee/sod)
Derived from FARMS data
Weston May 2007 p. 17
Table 5. Numbers of employers using SAWP in Ontario and average number of workers
per employer.
Employers Workers per Employer
2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006
Tobacco 510 489 413 7.5 7.4 7.1
Vegetables 350 357 360 11.0 11.4 11.4
Fruit 297 283 335 11.1 10.9 10.9
Greenhouse 173 176 182 13.9 17.0 18.2
Apples 114 126 108 13.5 13.8 11.2
Nursery 48 52 64 17.1 18.0 18.8
Canning/processing 10 11 11 42.4 36.5 39.2
Ginseng 56 48 56 9.2 9.0 8.7
Flower 33 37 39 9.5 8.3 11.2
Other (Bee/sod) 2 4 7 2.0 2.0 1.6
1,593 1,583 1,575
Source: derived from FARMS
Table 5 shows there are some 1,500 employers involved in SAWP in Ontario – with the most
still in tobacco followed by vegetables and fruits other than apples. In terms of workers per
employer, it is canning/processing employers who have the largest number of SAWP workers on
average with some 39 in 2006; followed by nursery (19), greenhouse (18) and vegetables, apples
and flowers (11), while the fewest go to work on sod and bee farms (less than 2 on average).
4. Wages in agriculture and SAWP
An important issue for SAWP workers and employers alike is the wage rate. While the SAWP
may provide some non-pecuniary benefits (such as work experience), the key interest for SAWP
workers and governments alike is the income workers earn during their stay in Canada, and the
associated foreign exchange that they generate. Wages, non-wage benefits such as housing,
deductions, and hours of work are therefore of particular concern. For employers, on the other
hand, wages are a key part of their labour costs (the others being EI contributions, housing and
some part of transport costs) which in turn account for a high share of production costs in most
sectors employing SAWP workers. At times of increasing competition squeezing prices,
exacerbated by the appreciating Canadian dollar, and rising costs from other inputs notably
energy, there may be concerns to minimize increases in the wage bill.
According to the Caribbean SAWP worker agreements, employers are required to pay the
greatest of:
Weston May 2007 p. 18
1. the wage for agricultural workers provided by law in the province in which the workers
is employed,
2. the rate determined annually by HRSDC to be the prevailing wage rate for the type of
work being done by the SAWP worker in a particular province, or
3. the rate being paid by an employer to their regular seasonal workforce performing the
same type of agricultural work.
In Canada, agricultural wages are generally quite low. The 2003 Labour Force Survey found
that agriculture was the sector with the second highest incidence of workers earning a wage at or
below the legislated minimum wage, i.e. 10.3 percent of all agricultural workers. In other words,
from a wage perspective agriculture could be considered a depressed sector . 21 The industry with
the highest incidence of below minimum wag workers was the accommodation and food sector
with 17.3 percent. This compares to a national average in 2003 of 4.1 percent. This may reflect
the fact that “farm labour has traditionally been excluded from minimum wage provisions, and
workers in this industry are often not unionized”. 22 As well, agricultural workers often receive
some non-wage benefits (free room and board). Nonetheless, the relatively high incidence of
low wages may explain why so few Canadians are keen to work in the sector, and why SAWP
workers’ wages are close to the minimum.
Chart 4 shows the SAWP wages for fruits, vegetables, flowers, greenhouses and nurseries in the
various provinces for 2004 to 2007 23 . Broadly speaking the chart shows that the higher wage
rates are found in BC, Ontario and Quebec and the lowest in PEI and Nova Scotia. In Ontario,
hourly wages are slightly higher for sod workers ($8.99) and black tobacco harvesting ($9.63).
21
According to Gunderson, 2007, p. 40, in Ontario in 2006 27.6% of people working in agriculture earned the
minimum wage.
22
Sussman and Tait, 2004, pp. 9-10
23
There are some minor variations in Quebec and Saskatchewan; for example, nursery workers in Quebec were paid
$8.35 in 2004, 2005 and 2006.
Weston May 2007 p. 19
Chart 4. SAWP wage rates for fruit, vegetables, flowers,
greenhouses and nurseries
$10.00
$9.00
$8.00
$7.00
$6.00
SAWP hourly wage
$5.00
rates 2004
$4.00
SAWP hourly wage
$3.00
rates 2005
$2.00
SAWP hourly wage
$1.00
rates 2006
$0.00
SAWP hourly wage
rates 2007
ch a
d
ol ta
a
an
M rio
un a
k
O c
b
ov lan
Br oti
be
bi
ic
r
sk nit o
be
ew
a
um
sw
c
nt
ue
Is
ew S
Al
a
Q
d
a
ar
at
C
w
sh
N
Ed
Sa
it i
N
Br
ce
in
Pr
Source: HRSDC, SAWP Wage Rates 2005-2007, as of January 2005.
Chart 5 compares the SAWP wage for tomato workers and the minimum wage in Ontario for the
last 20 years. The wage paid to tomato workers is the same as that paid to many other types of
SAWP workers. The chart shows us that in the initial period SAWP workers received a wage
that was well above the minimum wage. From the late 1980s to 1991, the SAWP wage was
between 11 and 17 percent above the minimum wage. From 1992 to 2000 the SAWP wage was
either equal to the minimum wage or 1-2 percentage points higher. Subsequently the margin
grew somewhat larger, reaching 9 percentage points in 2003, though it has since fallen back to 7
points in 2007, when the hourly wage for many crops was set at $8.58/hour for many crops
compared to a minimum wage of $8.00. 24
24
For some types of tobacco the wage rate is $9.63/hour, while some types of tobacco work have a piece-rate.
Weston May 2007 p. 20
Chart 5. Minimum wage and SAWP tomato wage
(Ontario)
10.00
9.00
8.00
7.00
wage ( current
6.00
$/hour)
5.00 Minimum
4.00 Wage
3.00 Tomatoes
2.00
1.00
0.00
87
89
91
93
03
05
07
95
97
99
01
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
19
19
Year
Derived from HRSDC data and also Ontario government minimum wage data.
Establishing the ‘prevailing wage’ rates and hence the basis for the SAWP wage rates has been a
contentious issue since the closure in 1996 of the federal agricultural employment service offices
which had collected data on wage rates from the employer ‘orders’ for Canadian workers, which
the employment services offices had received. After the offices were closed, and until 2000,
Statistics Canada wage rate data was used to calculate the ‘prevailing wage’, adjusted for
changes in the Consumer Price Index for Ontario from January to September. For 2001 to 2003,
the ‘prevailing wage’ was determined by negotiations between the horticultural industry, HRDC,
the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) and AAFC, taking into
account labour market conditions and the overall state of Ontario horticulture.
Despite these various changes it was generally recognised that a number of problems persisted. 25
One was the inconsistencies and changes in the methodology used to calculate the ‘prevailing
wage’. In the absence of adequate and objective data, SAWP wages became determined by a
process that involved industry representatives. But as worker representatives were not included
this process was considered quite subjective. Certainly there appeared to be significant
25
HRSDC, Annual SAWP Review Meeting, Barbados 2006, Powerpoint presentation, December 5, 2006
Weston May 2007 p. 21
discrepancies between what Canadians and SAWP workers were earning in the same
occupations. 26
In response to considerable frustrations amongst workers and their government representatives,
in 2004 there was discussion about a new approach to be introduced in 2005. It was agreed to
use data gathered during a 2003 wage survey as one input to calculating the SAWP wage rates
for the following 2005-2007 year period, and to do this through a process that involved
representatives of sending governments as well as employers (including the Canadian
Horticultural Council). These discussions produced an agreement starting in 2005 to introduce a
form of wage differentiation between workers through the use of “recognition pay” i.e. an
additional $4 a week (to a maximum $128/worker) for workers with 5 years consecutive years of
work for the same employer.
Chart 6. SAWP wages for apiary, sod and tobacco and
minimum wage
14
12
10
$/hour
8
6
4
2
0
supervised
Tobacco
Minimum
Tobacco
Sod
Sod
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
Minimum
assistant
Apiary
Apiary
Apiary
Apiary
Apiary
Apiary
Apiary
Quebec Ontario Manitoba Sask Alberta
But there was still no consensus on the actual wage scale, leading HRSDC to impose their own
scale. In the case of apiary, sod and tobacco workers, HRSDC applied a 2.1 percent increase
each year on the grounds that this corresponded to the average hourly wage rate in Canada, as
26
see Weston and Masellis 2004
Weston May 2007 p. 22
reported by Statistics Canada. The result was wage levels that were well above the minimum
wage (Chart 6). For fruits, vegetables, flowers, greenhouse and nurseries (shown in Chart 4), the
increase in wage rates was intended by HRSDC to eliminate the differential between the
‘prevailing rate’ and the SAWP wages. But this move reportedly left both workers
representatives and employers dissatisfied. In the past, employers had argued for de-linking
SAWP wages from the prevailing wage rate, “in light of falling commodity prices and other
factors.” 27 It was therefore decided to hold further consultations about the wage calculations,
and taking into account the differences that can exist between jobs even within the same NOC
category of work. These consultations started in late 2006, and were due to conclude by April
2007, but no information was available about the outcomes at the time of writing.
Wage comparisons can be difficult – comparing hourly wages paid to SAWP and those paid to
other workers, whether minimum or prevailing, does not reflect total remuneration differences.
In the case of SAWP workers, some additional costs are paid by employers such as part of the
travel costs 28 , the work permit fee, private health insurance costs (if public insurance is not
available) and accommodation. Such costs are not covered for Canadian or landed immigrant
workers, however in a few cases they receive vacation pay (harvesters after 13 weeks and ‘near
farmers’ such as sod workers, and seasonal workers in the canning/processing. The latter are
also eligible for over-time pay after 50 hours/week (if they work less than 16 weeks in a year,
otherwise they are eligible after 44 hours/week). 29 In practise, wage earnings differentials may
be narrowed by SAWP workers being required to work longer hours.
Also, as already noted above, there can be differences between job responsibilities even within
the same four-digit NOC job category. Bearing these points in mind, the following Charts 7 and
8 shows reported wage rates which might be considered to be ‘prevailing’ in 2005 -- using the
latest official labour market information available from different areas in Ontario for two broad
categories of farmworkers and comparing these rates with the 2005 SAWP wage for fruits,
vegetables (including canning/processing), flowers, greenhouses and nurseries and the 2005
provincial minimum wage. This information suggests that in 2005 there was a discrepancy
27
CHC, Farm Labour Issues note, p. 2.
28
Employers can deduct up to C$450 of the transport cost from workers’ wages.
Weston May 2007 p. 23
between the ‘prevailing wage’ and the SAWP wage rates. For greenhouse workers 30 , in seven of
the nine areas shown, the SAWP wage is either equal to or below the low ‘prevailing wage’; in
all cases it is below the average ‘prevailing wage’. In the case of harvesting labourers 31 , the
SAWP wage is above the low prevailing wage rate in five of nine areas, and equal to it in another
two areas. But again, in all areas the SAWP wage is below the average harvesting labourer
‘prevailing wage’ let alone the high rate, which in turn are below the ‘union’ rates reported in
one area. (The average union wage rate for nursery/greenhouse workers in Windsor-Essex was
reported to be $11.40 compared to the overall average of $8.60.)
Chart 7
Greenhouse wage rates in different parts of Ontario (2005)
14
12
10 Average
wage
8 High
$/hr
wage
6 Low
wage
4
2
0
Source: derived from Service Canada data on www.labourmarketinformation.ca, as well as
FARMS and Ontario government data
29
Details of the Ontario Employment and Standards Act as at
http://www.soscanada2000.com/hiring/legislations/empstnact/agriwork.html
30
According to Services Canada, Nursery and Greenhouse Workers (NOC 8432) plant, cultivate and harvest trees,
shrubs, flowers and plants, and serve nursery and greenhouse customers. They are employed in indoor and outdoor
nurseries and greenhouses http://srv108.services.gc.ca/english/profiles/122.shtml
31
According to Services Canada, Harvesting Labourers (8611) assist other farm workers to harvest, sort and pack
crops. http://srv108.services.gc.ca/english/profiles/136.shtml
Weston May 2007 p. 24
Chart 8
Harvesting Labourer wages in different parts of Ontario (2005)
14
12
10
8
Average wage
High wage
$
6 Low wage
4
2
0
a
lk
n
e
n
o
x
c
c
e
c
re
ag
se
et
et
ag
io
nt
io
et
fo
A
eg
eg
ro
s
w
ge
a
w
or
d
-E
th
oo
e
To
R
R
N
P
um
id
nt
or
ar
W
d-
gw
rk
m
br
ui
aw
ds
im
SA
an
ha
Yo
am
Q
lin
in
in
K
m
ur
ol
C
W
M
di
d
D
C
an
r,
al
d/
ne
t-H
gh
un
he
n
ou
So
ra
itc
or
B
K
en
rb
w
te
O
Pe
Source: as for Chart 6
5. Labour shortages in agriculture in Canada
Agricultural labour shortages over forty years ago triggered the first SAWP agreement in 1966
with Jamaica to supply seasonal workers. The agreement was then replicated with other English-
speaking Caribbean countries, and Mexico in 1974, and the number of SAWP workers entering
Canada each year grew steadily. From 1,271 workers in 1971, the total rose above 22,000 in
2006.
Foreign migrant workers were seen as critical to the competitiveness of the Canadian
horticultural sector at a time of liberalisation in the Canadian and US markets. As noted by
FARMS (Foreign Agricultural Resource Management Services, i.e. the private sector agency
responsible for processing farmers’ requests for SAWP workers in Ontario) in 1995, “Seasonal
offshore workers constitute a safety valve that ensures a successful harvest. With a practical,
Weston May 2007 p. 25
responsive offshore labour program, the Ontario horticulture industry will expand and prosper.
Without it, the industry will stagnate and decline.” 32
Despite the expansion of the SAWP, farmers in horticulture and other sectors have continued to
face labour problems. In April 2004, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) approved a
Rural Issues Policy Statement, which included a section on labour. In this, the CFA drew
attention to the need for both “a skilled, well-paid, secure and satisfied labour force” and “an
adequate labour supply to meet the needs of all agriculture sectors, which can include adequate
off-shore worker programs.” Amongst areas for policy change, the CFA listed programs to help
farmers offer competitive salaries, amendments in Employment Insurance (EI) for short-term
seasonal workers, and free movement of agricultural labour across Canada.
Some of these suggestions were elaborated in a series of studies commissioned by the CFA in
2004-05 on the specific issue of agricultural labour shortages. 33 One study found that farmers
had had particular difficulty in attracting harvest labour compared to other agricultural worker
categories. 34 At the same time the studies identified a shortage of skilled agricultural labourers,
and a growing need for training as farming machinery had become more complex, food
standards were raised, and farmers competed for a place in global supply chains. 35 Some
suggested that training should be targeting foreign workers (before they left for Canada and
during their stay in Canada) as well as offering training including apprenticeships to
Canadians. 36
The problem of attracting and retaining unskilled Canadian workers was found to be worse in
horticulture than in other agricultural segments. 37 More generally employers were unable to pay
high wages and to offer full-time work. Several felt that “given low commodity prices and the
resultant low wages that producers can pay, their ability to attract Canadians to the sector is not
32
‘The Quest for a Reliable Workforce in the Horticulture Industry’, mimeo, 1995, p. 5.
33
See for example, Malatest and Associates, GPC 2004, and George Morris Centre, 2005.
34
GPC, p. 12
35
Malatest p. 9 and George Morris p. 29
36
Malatest p. 13
37
Morris p. 28.
Weston May 2007 p. 26
going to improve. Consequently, many regarded foreign labour as the only solution and felt that
without it, their operations would have to be shut down”. 38
Other factors identified were EI, social safety nets, and tax policies, as they discriminated against
short-term and low-paid employment, and the ending of federal Agricultural Employment
Services centres. 39 Agriculture was not a sought-after career and finally, “based on
demographics alone, the domestic workforce is likely to shrink, so the difficulties accessing
domestic and especially seasonal domestic labour are likely to worsen”. Employers reported that
foreign workers were a very important source of labour and that they had a “greater commitment
to work and willingness to work long hours in poor conditions.” 40
Amongst suggestions for improvements were relaxing the ‘Putting Canada First Policy’ on the
grounds that it did not make sense when so few Canadians wanted to work in the sector. Others
were to make the use of foreign workers more flexible, and to increase immigration for farming
families.
In early March 2007, labour shortages were a priority item being raised by the Canadian
Horticultural Council at its 2007 meeting. Amongst various issues, one proposal to be discussed
was “the streamlining of visa applications from young people in foreign countries who want to
come to Canada to work in the agriculture sector.” 41
6. Federal Government responses
In the last two to three years, labour shortages across a wide range of sectors have attracted
considerable attention in Canada at the federal and provincial levels as well as in the private
38
Malatest pp. 9 and 11
39
Morris p. 26, 28. Interestingly the report notes “it is surprising that little attention has been paid to the potential for
unions to be engaged as agents in securing a reliable workforce. At a minimum, one would expect the advantages of
a union in providing a supply of labour could be compared against the disadvantages from potential cost increases
and work stoppages. Secondly, little focus was paid to working conditions in attracting a workforce. In particular, if
agriculture is viewed by some as a dirty, uncomfortable, or unsafe industry to work in, it must surely affect the
willingness of workers to be employed in agriculture. Third, existing studies do not appear to have focused on the
movement toward aligned supply chains and differentiated products in agriculture, and on any differences in skills
or training that are generated as a result.”
40
Malatest p. 20
Weston May 2007 p. 27
sector. The greatest attention has been given to skilled labour needs, but there is a growing
recognition that less skilled workers are also in short supply and that this is constraining a
number of sectors.
Following suggestions from the CFA, in November 2006 the federal government supported the
creation of the Canadian Agriculture Human Resources Council, following the model used in its
Sector Council Program, which brings together industry leaders, educational analysts and others
to discuss human resource issues in particular sectors. Besides addressing the long-term needs
for training and skills development, it is intended to consider ways to attract and retain unskilled
labour. This is likely to involve discussions about the scope for using domestic labour and the
role to be played by increasing the number of foreign migrant workers. It is also likely to
address policies such as EI and other legislation that affect foreign workers. 42
In the meantime, the federal government has already taken several steps to meet the growing
demand for farmworkers by making it easier for employers to bring in temporary foreign
workers.
1. The initial strategy was to expand the coverage of the SAWP to include additional crops
(such as flowers) and all provinces (except Newfoundland).
2. The second strategy has been to make it possible for employers to bring in foreign
farmworkers from other countries under other programs. In 2003, the government introduced the
“Pilot Project for Hiring Foreign Workers in Occupations that Usually Require a High School
Diploma or Job-Specific Training.” This has also become known as the “Pilot Project for
Occupations Requiring Lower Levels of Formal Training (i.e. National Occupational Categories
C and D)”, and the “Low-Skill Pilot Project” and most recently as the “low-skill Temporary
Foreign Worker program” or TFW. Under the TFW, employers are required to pay full
transportation costs to/from Canada and their country of residence, at least the prevailing wage
rate, and full medical insurance. They are not required to provide accommodation, but must
ensure that reasonable accommodation is available.
41
Kelowna Daily Courier 2007
42
CFA 2007
Weston May 2007 p. 28
3. The Low Skill Pilot Project was initially introduced for two years, and only allowed
workers to stay for up to one year. It has since been extended, improved and broadened, with a
number of changes announced in November 2006 and again in February 2007, as follows.
a. In November 2006, the federal and some provincial governments agreed to accelerate
TFW procedures by lowering advertising requirements for particular categories of labour
scarcity, identified in lists of “regional occupations under pressure” in Alberta and British
Columbia. To date, only Alberta includes general farmworkers (National Occupational
Classification or NOC category 8341) and greenhouse workers (NOC 8342) in this list. 43 (For
these categories of workers and others requiring only NOC skill level C or D, employers must
advertise for at least 7 working days in the national job bank and also have a recruitment system
in place. This is a lesser requirement than normally applies for TFW. Also, TFW units were to
be created to advise and assist employers wishing to use TFW in these two provinces.)
b. Further changes were announced in February 2007. Employers may now apply for a
labour market opinion (LMO) on-line. Also, while the LMO is being considered, foreign
workers may apply for a TFW workpermit instead of waiting until the LMO has been issued.
TFWs may now stay in Canada for two years, though not in the case of seasonal jobs. 44 Workers
may be rehired, but only after they have returned to their country of origin for four months and
after the employer has met the other requirements for their rehire.
These changes respond to growing pressure to address the shortage of less skilled workers
reported by business; in December 2006, for instance, a report from the Canadian Federation of
Independent Business found that 49 percent of labour needs were in the NOC C and D
categories 45 – with 32 percent for Skill level C and 17 percent for level D. 46 As the President of
the CFIB, Catherine Swift, has said, “With the shortage of labour at an all-time high, foreign
workers are a more and more important resource for small businesses”. 47 The CFIB
recommended that the government: exempt more occupations from requiring LMOs unless
43
http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/epb/lmd/fw/AB_ROL_200611_e.pdf
44
http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/epb/lmd/fw/lowskill.shtml
45
NOC consists of five skill levels, A through D and O. The NOC C skill level usually requires secondary-level
school and/or occupation-specific training or up to two years on-the-job experience or special training, while NOC
D usually does not require formal training instead on-the-job experience.
46
CFIB 2006
47
Government of Canada 2007
Weston May 2007 p. 29
strong arguments were presented as to why one was necessary, 48 increase work permits to two
years, relax the requirement to pay the workers’ airfare, allow spouses and teenage children (who
are allowed to accompany skilled TFW) to take jobs, cut payroll taxes (EI, CPP) and instead
allow those resources to be used for training and wages, and make it easier for TFW to apply for
permanent residency.
The TFW program is of interest to the Caribbean countries both for the challenges and
opportunities it presents for the SAWP and more generally. In 2003, the first year of its
operation, some 160 workers from Guatemala were brought to Quebec under the low-skill TFW
for agricultural employment 49 . In 2005 there were 611 men and 64 women farmworkers from
Guatemala in Quebec. By 2006 this number had increased to more than 1,000, working for 6-7
months though up to a year in some cases, and according to one report this number could double
by 2010. 50 Similarly 358 workers from El Salvador entered Canada as temporary workers in
2005.
The TFW provides the Caribbean – as any country – with opportunities for sending workers to
Canada for temporary employment in other sectors. This is an area that is outside the scope of
discussion for this paper but which would be an important area for further research. One issue to
consider in such research is what lessons might be drawn from the ‘best practices’ in SAWP that
could be applied to the low-skill TFW program. For instance, these might include the role
played by the sending government officials in supporting workers and liaising with employers,
and the services provided by the employers’ organization, FARMS.
The challenges which the TFW may present for SAWP are in terms of competition for
employment opportunities and the effect this may have on wages and benefits offered under
SAWP (though in principle both SAWP and low-skill TFW should be paid the ‘prevailing wage’
rate.) It is also possible that some aspects of the low-skill TFW will provide the opportunity for
48
At present those groups not requiring LMOs include the professional categories and intracorporate transferees
listed under trade agreements such as NAFTA, amongst others.
49
Canadian Embassy in Guatemala website, 15 juillet 2003 consulted 5 avril 2007
50
Le Bulletin des agriculteurs, 11 juillet 2006, at
http://www.lebulletin.com/informations/actualite/article.jsp?content=20060714_175156_5516 consulted April 5,
2007
Weston May 2007 p. 30
discussions about modifications in SAWP (such as longer employment periods for agricultural
work which is not seasonal).
7. Conclusions
There are three broad sets of conclusions to draw from this paper:
First, Canada’s demand for foreign agricultural workers is likely to expand over the long-term.
But employment will continue to shift between crops, employers and provinces. As we have
seen, in an increasingly competitive product market, some products have contracted while others
expanded. New SAWP employment in some crops may require different skills and offer
different working conditions. Workers that have depended on a crop now in decline may need
support, such as training, to adjust to the opportunities arising in other crops.
With the sharp decline in tobacco production, consideration should be given to the consequences
for workers and their communities and what mitigating strategies might be appropriate. One
idea would be to draw on the workers’ EI contributions during the years of their employment in
Canada. Another might be to assist retrenched workers to access job opportunities emerging in
other sectors under the SAWP or the TFW. This approach could then be a model for other
sectors to follow as needed.
Second, Caribbean governments may wish to engage with – or even be represented on – the
Canadian Agricultural Human Resources Council in discussions about strategies to address
labour shortages. There are a number of sector-wide issues still to resolve such as the way in
which wages are established, the collection and use of EI, and training programs for seasonal
workers.
For competitive reasons, employers have resisted raising SAWP wages to the level of the
‘prevailing wage’ rates for Canadians and landed immigrants. These rates are no longer
systematically surveyed. Available data suggests that SAWP wages are lower than some wages
paid for broadly similar work in similar areas. Yet SAWP wages are better than the minimum
wage that is received by over a quarter of people working in agriculture in Ontario.
Weston May 2007 p. 31
Third, the new Temporary Foreign Workers program presents employers with ways to
complement or substitute SAWP workers. Farm employers may now source workers via the
SAWP from the Caribbean or Mexico, or through any country in the world under the new
program. At the same time it opens the door to new sectors and employers for Caribbean low-
skill workers; employers in other sectors may hire workers from the Caribbean or elsewhere.
References
AAFC, Next Generation of Agriculture and Agri-Food Policy, Changing structure of primary
agriculture, 2006 at http://www.agr.gc.ca/pol/consult/index_e.php?s1=econom&page=structure
AAFC, website http://www.agr.gc.ca/misb/spec/index_e.php?s1=tbc&page=intro consulted
April 8, 2007
Bridges, on-line, February 21, 2007.
Canadian Apple online at http://ats.agr.ca/applecanada/production-e.htm)
Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Rural Issues Policy Statement, 2004at http://www.cfa-
fca.ca/pages/index.php?main_id=49
Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Research on the development of an Agriculture Sector
Council, 2007 at http://www.cfa-fca.ca/pages/index.php?main_id=255
Canadian Federation of Agriculture, 2007 Rural Issues Policy Statement at http://www.cfa-
fca.ca/pages/index.php?main_id=49
Canadian Federation of Independent Business, “Ideas to Better Respond to Canada's Skills and
Labour Shortage, December 2006”at www.fcei.ca/sql/skills.html
Canadian Horticultural Council, Farm Labour Issues paper, no date, at
http://www.hortcouncil.ca/FLIssue.pdf consulted April 12, 2007
Canadian Horticultural Council, Trade Issues paper, no date, http://www.hortcouncil.ca/TIssue.htm
consulted April 12, 2007
Canadian Horticultural Council, Report to the Human Resources Committee, Doug Connery, March
2007.
FARMS, The Quest for a Reliable Workforce in the Horticulture Industry’, mimeo, 1995
FARMS, data on-line.
Weston May 2007 p. 32
Fresh Produce Information at www.freshproduceinfo.com found on agrifoodstandards.net on 14
February 2007
George Morris Centre, Environmental Scan and Literature Search of Agricultural Human
Resources Issues, February 2005 at http://www.cfa-
fca.ca/upload/GMCEnviroScan%20Final%20March%2005%20(2).pdf
Government of Canada Press Release, February 23, 2007.
GPC Public Affairs Report on the Employers-Producers Survey on Human Resources in
Agriculture 2004 at http://www.cfa-fca.ca/upload/Employers-
Producer%20Survey%20Report%20-%20Revised,%20April%204,%202005.pdf
Gunderson, Morley, Minimum Wages: Issues and Options for Ontario. Paper for the Ontario
Ministry of Finance, February 2007 available online at
http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/publications/2007/Gunderson/
HRSDC, Background notes for the TFW Program discussion
HRSDC, Annual SAWP Review Meeting, Barbados 2006, Powerpoint presentation, December
5, 2006
Kelowna Daily Courier online version March 4, 2007
Labour market information, April 10, 2007
Le Bulletin des agriculteurs, 11 juillet 2006, at
http://www.lebulletin.com/informations/actualite/article.jsp?content=20060714_175156_5516
Malatest and Associates, Human Resource Needs and Issues in the Agricultural Sector. Focus
Groups. Final Report. June 2005 at http://www.cfa-
fca.ca/upload/FINAL%20Agriculture%20HR%20Sector%20Council%20Report.pdf
OFA Tobacco Board – Exit Strategy, 06-10-419, at http://www.ofa.on.ca consulted April 8, 2007
OFA Commentary 0607, ‘More to be done for horticultural producers,’ at http://www.ofa.on.ca
consulted April 8, 2007
Jake Purdy, High-tech vegetables: Canada’s booming greenhouse vegetable industry, Statistics
Canada, Vista on the Agri-food industry and the farm community at
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/21-004-XIE/21-004-XIE2005001.pdf
Statistics Canada, Farm Cash Receipts, 11-210-XIB, on-line
Strategis on-line trade data at http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrkti/tdst/engdoc/tr_homep.html
Weston May 2007 p. 33
Sussman, Deborah, and Martin Tait, Minimum Wage Workers, Statistics Canada Perspectives
March 2004.
The Record, March 6, 2007 online version consulted March 13, 2007
USDA at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FruitAndTreeNuts/fruitnutpdf/freshmarketapples.pdf
March 31, 2005 consulted March 13, 2007
Weston, Ann and Luigi Scarpa De Masellis, ‘Hemispheric Integration and Trade Relations –
Implications for Canada’s Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program’, January 2004.
WTO on-line trade statistics at http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/its2006_e/section4_e/iv07a.xls
Related docs
Other docs by ejs19664
Opportunities and Limitations of the Solution Selling Concept in Franchise Systems - PDF - PDF
Views: 41 | Downloads: 0
