Foreign worker myths exposed with shocking data
On This Page You Will Find:
- The truth behind 5 controversial myths about Canada's Temporary Foreign Worker Program
- Real data on wages, job displacement, and economic impact that politicians won't tell you
- CFIB's explosive 2026-2028 immigration plan that could change everything
- Why 1 in 5 small businesses might close without foreign workers
- Actionable insights for employers navigating the current restrictions
Summary:
Canada's Temporary Foreign Worker Program faces unprecedented scrutiny, with politicians and media painting it as a threat to Canadian jobs. But what if everything you've heard is wrong? The Canadian Federation of Independent Business, representing over 100,000 employers, just released explosive data debunking five major myths that are driving current policy decisions. From wage suppression claims to job theft accusations, the reality is far different from the headlines. With new immigration levels being set for 2026-2028, understanding these facts isn't just interesting—it's critical for Canada's economic future. Here's what small business owners, workers, and policymakers need to know before it's too late.
🔑 Key Takeaways:
- Foreign workers represent less than 1% of Canada's workforce, yet 42% of small businesses cite labor shortages as their biggest growth barrier
- 85% of temporary foreign workers earn the same wages as Canadians, with only 3.5% earning slightly less
- Without the TFWP, 20% of businesses would likely close and 24% would cut operating hours
- CFIB proposes grandfathering existing foreign workers and creating pathways for those with 18+ months Canadian experience
- The real solution isn't scaling back the program—it's strengthening oversight while addressing legitimate labor market needs
Maria Santos stared at the "Help Wanted" sign she'd posted six months ago outside her bakery in rural Saskatchewan. Despite offering $18 per hour—well above minimum wage—she hadn't received a single qualified application from local candidates. Meanwhile, her temporary foreign worker's permit was set to expire in three months, threatening to shut down the business that employed twelve Canadians and served as the town's only bakery.
Maria's story isn't unique. Across Canada, small business owners are caught between political rhetoric about foreign workers "stealing jobs" and the harsh reality of unfilled positions that keep their doors open. But what does the data actually say about Canada's controversial Temporary Foreign Worker Program?
The Real Numbers Behind the Headlines
The Canadian Federation of Independent Business recently released comprehensive data that challenges nearly every assumption driving current TFWP debates. Their findings, based on feedback from over 100,000 small and medium-sized business owners, reveal a program that's both more limited and more essential than most Canadians realize.
Here's the shocking truth: temporary foreign workers represent less than 1% of Canada's total labor force. Yet somehow, this tiny fraction has become the scapegoat for complex economic challenges affecting millions of workers.
The timing of this data release isn't coincidental. As the federal government prepares its 2026-2028 Immigration Levels Plan, decisions made in the coming months will determine whether programs like Maria's bakery survive or become casualties of political positioning.
Myth 1: Businesses Are "Addicted" to Foreign Workers
The Reality: It's About Survival, Not Convenience
When politicians talk about business "addiction" to foreign workers, they're missing a crucial point: 42% of small businesses identify labor shortages as their second-largest constraint on growth. This isn't about finding cheap labor—it's about finding any labor at all.
Consider the numbers. In sectors like agriculture, hospitality, and healthcare support, vacancy rates often exceed 15%. Rural communities face even steeper challenges, with some regions seeing 20-30% of positions unfilled for months at a time.
The "addiction" narrative also ignores the substantial costs employers face. Hiring a temporary foreign worker involves thousands of dollars in processing fees, recruitment costs, housing arrangements, travel expenses, and health insurance. If qualified Canadians were readily available, no rational business owner would choose the more expensive, bureaucratic option.
Myth 2: Foreign Workers Are Stealing Canadian Jobs
The Reality: They're Filling Gaps Canadians Won't or Can't Fill
This might be the most persistent—and most dangerous—myth surrounding the TFWP. The data tells a completely different story.
To receive a positive Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA), employers must demonstrate that no qualified Canadians are available for the position. This isn't a rubber-stamp process. It requires documented recruitment efforts, competitive wage offerings, and detailed justification of the need.
But here's what really matters: without access to the TFWP, the economic consequences would devastate Canadian employment. According to CFIB data:
- 20% of businesses would likely close entirely
- 24% would be forced to cut operating hours
- Over 50% couldn't meet customer demand
These aren't just statistics—they represent real jobs for real Canadians. When a rural restaurant closes because it can't find kitchen staff, it doesn't just affect the foreign worker who might have filled that role. It eliminates jobs for Canadian servers, managers, and suppliers throughout the community.
Myth 3: Foreign Workers Accept Below-Market Wages
The Reality: The Numbers Don't Support Wage Suppression Claims
Perhaps no myth is more emotionally charged than the idea that foreign workers are undercutting Canadian wages. Employment and Social Development Canada's own data reveals the truth:
- 85% of temporary foreign workers earn exactly the same wages as their Canadian counterparts
- Only 3.5% earn slightly less (often due to experience differentials)
- No national evidence supports systematic wage suppression linked to the program
The wage suppression argument also ignores basic economics. Employers using the TFWP face additional costs that actually make foreign workers more expensive than Canadian hires. Between LMIA fees, recruitment costs, housing support, and travel expenses, the total cost of employing a temporary foreign worker often exceeds that of hiring locally.
Moreover, many TFWP positions exist in sectors with standardized wage structures—healthcare facilities, agricultural operations, and franchised restaurants—where individual employers have limited ability to set wages below market rates.
Myth 4: Foreign Workers Burden Public Services
The Reality: They Enable Essential Services to Function
This myth flips the actual relationship between foreign workers and public services on its head. Rather than straining systems, temporary foreign workers often make essential services possible.
CFIB found that 76% of small and medium-sized enterprises using the TFWP said it allowed them to meet customer demand. These aren't abstract business metrics—they represent:
- Construction workers building the homes Canadians need
- Agricultural workers growing and processing the food on Canadian tables
- Healthcare support staff caring for aging populations
- Childcare providers enabling Canadian parents to work
In rural communities, this dynamic becomes even more critical. Without foreign workers, many small towns would lose essential services entirely. The local grocery store, gas station, or medical clinic often depends on these workers to maintain operations.
Myth 5: The Program Enables Worker Abuse
The Reality: Strong Oversight Mechanisms Are Working
Stories of worker abuse grab headlines, but they don't reflect the program's overall operation. Canada's Labour Code and Employer Compliance Regime provide substantial protections for temporary foreign workers, and enforcement data shows these mechanisms are effective.
In 2024-2025, compliance audits found that 90% of employers met all TFWP requirements. While any abuse is unacceptable, the data suggests that problematic employers represent a small minority rather than a systemic issue.
The compliance regime includes:
- Regular workplace inspections
- Anonymous reporting mechanisms for workers
- Significant penalties for violations (including program bans)
- Requirements for employer-provided housing, healthcare, and transportation
Critics argue that workers fear reporting violations due to permit dependencies, and this concern has merit. However, recent policy changes have strengthened worker protections, including provisions for permit transfers when abuse is documented.
What CFIB's 2026-2028 Immigration Plan Reveals
Beyond debunking myths, CFIB's submission for the upcoming Immigration Levels Plan offers a roadmap for reform that addresses legitimate concerns while preserving essential programs.
Retaining Existing Workers
The most practical recommendation involves grandfathering current foreign workers under previous rules. This acknowledges that employers have invested significantly in training and integrating these workers, while workers themselves have built lives and contributed to Canadian communities.
CFIB proposes creating pathways for foreign workers with 18+ months of Canadian experience, regardless of skill level. This recognizes that contribution to Canadian society shouldn't be measured solely by education credentials or wage levels.
Aligning Immigration with Labor Realities
The plan calls for expanding economic immigration streams where employers play active roles—Provincial Nominee Programs, Rural Communities Immigration Pilot, and Atlantic Immigration Program. These programs have higher success rates because they connect immigrants directly with verified job opportunities.
Critically, CFIB recommends splitting provincial allocations between public-sector priorities (healthcare, education) and private-sector needs. This prevents government hiring from crowding out small business access to immigration programs.
Optimizing Existing Talent
Rather than focusing solely on new arrivals, the plan emphasizes better utilizing temporary residents already in Canada. This includes allowing students to work more hours, enabling spouses of workers to participate more fully in the labor force, and creating multi-employer work permits for greater flexibility.
The Path Forward: Strengthening, Not Scaling Back
The evidence suggests that Canada's challenge isn't too many foreign workers—it's too little coordination between immigration policy and labor market realities. The solution isn't to eliminate programs that support thousands of Canadian jobs, but to improve them.
Smart reforms could include:
- Faster processing for renewals in sectors with persistent shortages
- Regional flexibility that recognizes varying labor market conditions
- Enhanced worker protections without eliminating employer access
- Better data collection to identify genuine abuse versus political rhetoric
For business owners like Maria, these aren't academic policy debates. They're decisions that will determine whether her bakery—and the dozen Canadian jobs it supports—survives the next year.
The stakes extend far beyond individual businesses. Rural communities, essential services, and entire economic sectors depend on finding the right balance between protecting Canadian workers and addressing legitimate labor shortages.
What This Means for Canada's Economic Future
As federal officials draft the 2026-2028 Immigration Levels Plan, they face a choice between evidence-based policy and political expedience. The CFIB data provides a roadmap for the former, but implementation will require courage to challenge popular misconceptions.
The real test isn't whether Canada can eliminate its reliance on foreign workers—it's whether the country can create an immigration system that serves both Canadian workers and the employers who provide their jobs. Getting this balance right matters for everyone, from the temporary foreign worker seeking a better life to the Canadian family depending on services these workers help provide.
The myths surrounding the TFWP have dominated headlines for months, but myths don't create jobs, build homes, or care for aging populations. Only evidence-based policy can achieve those goals while protecting the interests of all workers—Canadian and foreign alike.
For Maria and thousands of employers across Canada, the coming months will reveal whether data or politics drives immigration policy. The choice will shape not just the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, but the economic future of communities from coast to coast.
FAQ
Q: What percentage of Canada's workforce consists of temporary foreign workers, and how does this compare to the political attention the program receives?
Temporary foreign workers represent less than 1% of Canada's total labor force, making the intense political focus on the program seem disproportionate to its actual size. Despite this tiny fraction, 42% of small businesses identify labor shortages as their second-largest growth constraint. The disconnect between the program's limited scope and the heated political rhetoric suggests that complex economic challenges are being oversimplified. This 1% supports critical sectors like agriculture, healthcare support, and rural services where Canadian workers are often unavailable. The political attention appears driven more by perception than by the program's actual impact on the broader labor market, highlighting the need for evidence-based policy discussions rather than emotionally charged debates.
Q: Do temporary foreign workers really suppress wages for Canadian workers?
Employment and Social Development Canada's data contradicts wage suppression claims. 85% of temporary foreign workers earn exactly the same wages as their Canadian counterparts, while only 3.5% earn slightly less, often due to experience differentials. The economics actually work against wage suppression—employers face additional costs including LMIA fees, recruitment expenses, housing support, and travel costs, making foreign workers more expensive than local hires. Many TFWP positions exist in sectors with standardized wage structures like healthcare facilities and franchised restaurants, where individual employers have limited ability to set below-market wages. The total cost of employing a temporary foreign worker frequently exceeds hiring locally, making the wage suppression argument economically illogical for most employers.
Q: What would happen to Canadian businesses and jobs if the Temporary Foreign Worker Program was eliminated?
The economic consequences would be devastating for Canadian employment. According to CFIB data from over 100,000 employers, without access to the TFWP: 20% of businesses would likely close entirely, 24% would be forced to cut operating hours, and over 50% couldn't meet customer demand. These closures wouldn't just affect foreign workers—they would eliminate jobs for Canadian servers, managers, suppliers, and entire supply chains. For example, when a rural restaurant closes because it can't find kitchen staff, it impacts the entire community's economic ecosystem. In sectors like agriculture and healthcare support with vacancy rates exceeding 15%, elimination of the program would force widespread service reductions, affecting everything from food production to elder care that Canadians depend on daily.
Q: How does the Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) process actually work to protect Canadian job opportunities?
The LMIA process requires employers to demonstrate that no qualified Canadians are available before hiring foreign workers. This isn't a rubber-stamp approval—employers must provide documented recruitment efforts, offer competitive wages, and justify their specific needs. The process includes advertising positions for minimum periods, conducting interviews with Canadian applicants, and explaining why local candidates weren't suitable. Employers must also show they're offering wages meeting or exceeding prevailing rates for the occupation and region. The assessment considers local unemployment rates, availability of Canadians in the specific skill area, and whether hiring foreign workers might adversely affect Canadian employment. With 90% of employers meeting all TFWP requirements in recent compliance audits, the oversight system appears to be functioning as intended to prioritize Canadian workers first.
Q: What are CFIB's key recommendations for the 2026-2028 Immigration Levels Plan?
CFIB's plan focuses on three main areas: retaining existing talent, aligning immigration with labor realities, and optimizing current resources. They recommend grandfathering current foreign workers under previous rules and creating pathways for those with 18+ months Canadian experience, regardless of skill level. For new immigration, they propose expanding employer-connected programs like Provincial Nominee Programs and splitting provincial allocations between public-sector needs (healthcare, education) and private-sector requirements. To optimize existing talent, they suggest allowing students to work more hours, enabling worker spouses to participate more fully in the labor force, and creating multi-employer work permits for greater flexibility. These recommendations aim to address legitimate labor shortages while maintaining strong oversight and worker protections.
Q: How effective are current worker protection mechanisms in preventing abuse within the TFWP?
Canada's Labour Code and Employer Compliance Regime provide substantial protections, with enforcement data showing these mechanisms are working effectively. Compliance audits found that 90% of employers met all TFWP requirements in 2024-2025, suggesting problematic employers represent a small minority rather than a systemic issue. The compliance regime includes regular workplace inspections, anonymous reporting mechanisms, significant penalties for violations including program bans, and requirements for employer-provided housing, healthcare, and transportation. Recent policy changes have strengthened worker protections, including provisions for permit transfers when abuse is documented. While critics rightfully point out that workers may fear reporting violations due to permit dependencies, the data indicates that strong oversight mechanisms are functioning and that abuse cases, while unacceptable, don't reflect the program's overall operation.
Q: Which sectors and regions are most dependent on the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, and why?
Agriculture, hospitality, healthcare support, and rural communities show the highest dependence on the TFWP due to persistent labor shortages and geographic challenges. Agricultural sectors face seasonal demands and physically demanding work that often can't attract sufficient Canadian workers, with some operations reporting vacancy rates exceeding 20%. Rural communities face unique challenges where a single business closure can eliminate essential services entirely—the local grocery store, gas station, or medical clinic often depends on foreign workers to maintain operations. Healthcare support roles, particularly in long-term care and home care, struggle with high turnover and growing demand from aging populations. Construction and food processing also rely heavily on the program due to skill shortages and work conditions. These sectors often offer standardized wages and benefits but struggle with recruitment despite competitive compensation, making the TFWP essential for maintaining services Canadians depend on.
