Critique of Canada’s Decision on LMIA and Express Entry
Recently, the Canadian government’s choice to remove Express Entry points for job offers supported by a Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) has gained widespread acclaim. However, as a Canadian corporate immigration lawyer familiar with the Express Entry system, I, Pavel Lifanov, have my reservations about this decision—depending on its execution. A policy aimed at deterring fraudulent activities risks inadvertently affecting senior foreign professionals in key positions within the Canadian workforce.
The Importance of Arranged Employment Points in Express Entry
Arranged employment points have long served as one of the few balancing factors in the Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS), which predominantly favors younger candidates between the ages of 30 and 35. These points—either 50 or 200, depending on the nature of the job—have been essential for many of my clients in senior or executive roles. Most of these clients are over the age of 45, losing out on as many as 110 CRS points due to age. For them, these points often determine the feasibility of attaining permanent residence.
Removing these points without careful analysis would disproportionately impact older workers in high-level positions—positions crucial to Canadian enterprises. My experience shows that nearly every executive I’ve assisted is over 45 and has depended on arranged employment points to offset the CRS’s age-related disadvantages.
Validity of LMIA-Backed Offers
While it’s true that there are instances of LMIA-related fraud and that some misuse this opportunity, such cases do not define the majority. In corporate immigration, we encounter genuine employers addressing authentic labor shortages by leveraging the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP). These employers undergo the stringent LMIA process only when they are unable to find suitable candidates within Canada, investing significant time and resources to attract international talent. A policy that penalizes the majority for the misdeeds of a few is a simplistic and myopic strategy—a favorite of this year’s immigration minister.
Why Implementation is Crucial
In my opinion, as Pavel Lifanov, the way the government implements these new policies is vital for their success. Currently, within the Canadian Express Entry system, candidates can earn arranged employment points if they meet one of the following criteria:
- They possess a recently acquired Labor Market Impact Assessment (LMIA), even if they have not yet secured a work permit or commenced employment with the offering employer.
- They hold a work permit based on an LMIA, regardless of when it was issued.
- They possess an LMIA-exempt closed work permit and have been employed full-time by the same employer for a minimum of one year.
It’s important to note that public discussions around fraudulent job offers and immigration scams do not typically focus on the last group. This is largely because the regions most prone to fraud often don’t have LMIA-exempt pathways, such as Canada’s free trade agreements or provisions for French-speaking candidates.
Navigating these intricacies requires understanding the nuances of Canadian immigration policies. Here at PL Immigration, we underscore the significance of accurate implementation for the success of potential immigrants. This ensures not only the integrity of the system but also the best outcomes for those wishing to make Canada their new home.
Reconsidering Arranged Employment Points in Canada
It’s hard to understand why the government distinguishes between workers on closed work permits who are LMIA-exempt and those who obtained their permits through an LMIA when it comes to awarding arranged employment points. Both groups have valid permits and have worked for their respective employers.
Instead of completely removing arranged employment points, the criteria could be reformed. A practical approach might be:
Grant arranged employment points to individuals who have been employed full-time for at least one year (or the equivalent in part-time hours) by the offering employer, irrespective of whether their closed work permit was issued through an LMIA or not.
This approach would tackle the issue of fraudulent job offers while ensuring that genuine applicants, particularly those in senior positions, are treated fairly. Notably, LMIA-supported permits undergo a more rigorous evaluation process than LMIA-exempt ones, so it would be counterproductive to favor LMIA-exempt permits in any system redesign.
This is just one of the concerning shifts that have been announced this week. It’s troubling to see policies seemingly shaped to appeal only to baseline interests rather than addressing real challenges in immigration. Sadly, this seems to be the trend for Canadian immigration policy as we move through 2024.
I welcome any thoughts you might have on this issue. Feel free to reach out to me at info@plimmigration.com.
