From “Canadians First” to “Workers Unite”

From “Canadians First” to “Workers Unite”
Student’s Name
Institution
Course Number and Name
Instructor’s Name
Due Date
From “Canadians First” to “Workers Unite”
The article by Foster (2014) offers an expert analysis of the evolution of the labor movement’s narratives of migrant workers. It is surprising that despite the significant steps made towards addressing race and racialization in the Canadian labor force, union leaders still have a lot to do on the issue to improve their relationship with migrant workers. Examining unions’ narratives of migrant workers is integral to understanding the factors that influence the ideas and messages fronted by union leaders. In the article by Foster (2014), migrant workers are referred to as temporary foreign workers (TFWs). Following policy changes in the 2000s, there was an influx of TFWs in Canada. This posed unprecedented challenges for unions in the country, given that migrant workers were not many before the policy changes. The analysis by Foster (2014) shows that from 2006 to 2012, Canadian union leaders developed narratives about TFWs that were shaped significantly by both internal and external pressures. Internal pressures like members’ concerns and external pressures that include history, social justice implications, and the state of the economy drove three narratives of migrant workers: Canadians first, migrants are vulnerable, and a balance between the affairs of Canadians and TFWs.
Internal pressures and primarily the members’ concerns contributed immensely to the unions’ narrative of TFWs. From the article by Foster (2014), some of the worries are that TFWs reduce wage levels and worsen working conditions. It is deducible that union members felt that their living and working standards would be negatively affected by an increase in the number of TFWs. Given that unions exist primarily to protect the interests of workers, it makes sense that union leaders would develop narratives that would put the interests of Canadians first while viewing TFWs as threats. Interestingly, Foster (2014) notes that the data on the negative impact of migrant labor on wage levels is limited. In fact, a study quoted by the author finds no negative impact of migrant labor on wage levels. Nevertheless, the author acknowledges the presence of evidence that shows migrant workers limit the growth of wages. In this sense, union members’ concerns about the likelihood of their jobs being taken away and the reduction of wage level shaped to a great extent the narrative perpetuated by union leaders. As a result, the messages shared by union leaders sought to put the interests of Canadians first, which explains the first arc as described by Foster (2014). To put Canadians first, union leaders had to vehemently oppose TFWs as they were perceived as being used by employers to not only reduce wages but also to avoid unions.
External pressures, one of them being in history, were also quite significant in influencing how unions perceived migrant workers and the narratives they perpetuated about them, according to Foster (2014). Historically, migrant workers have not always been treated well, and this could explain the negative perception that unions developed against them when their numbers increased in Canada in 2006. Foster (2014) pointed out that the Non-Immigrant Employment Authorization Program (NIEAP), developed in 1973, had an immense impact on how the current migrant workers are structured. Through NIEAP, migrant workers were not allowed to have permanent residency in the country and were only limited to a single type of work. Therefore, to a great extent, the labor programs in the past alienated the affairs of migrant workers and perpetuated the perception that they are “others.” Therefore, the perception of TFWs following their influx into Canada in the 2000s is rooted in history, which may explain the unions’ narrative on migrant workers. Although NIEAP evolved to TFWs, it appears it carried with it the idea of prioritizing Canadians while alienating the migrant workers. This alienation characterizes the first arc (Canadians first) as covered by Foster (2014). Interestingly, Foster (2014) shows that some racist elements remained in the way union leaders perceived TFWs as “others.” Historically, Ahlquist (2017) points out that unions opposed immigration due to its potential to exacerbate inequality and the difficulty in organizing migrant workers. The exclusion of immigrants can also be traced back to the 1800s, when early unions chose to use the craft model and exclude certain types of workers (McQuarrie, 2011). Specifically, as McQuarrie (2011) informed, the unions for early miners in British Columbia excluded Chinese workers. While the narratives of union leaders from 2006 do not seem to exclude certain races, they perpetuate the idea that TFWs are “others.” Therefore, it is evident that the history of labor unions in regards to how they treat migrant workers had some influence on labor unions’ narrative to prioritize the conc...