Nanny Canada

Dear Sir/ Madam,

We most recently applied to sponsor a new nanny and I understand that it is now a requirement that sponsor families pay for this.
I am very happy to know that the nannies will now be covered in the event of an emergency! This is great news!

We are lucky, because most of our nannies stay with us a fairly long time and we take great pride in treating them fairly and with respect. We work really hard at having good relationships with our nannies, because that is the way we are and we want everyone to be happy at work and at home. The majority of our nannies have told us how much they learn from us, how much they know we care about them, and they know it is better to work at a good relationship for the long term, rather than not working at it and quitting and restarting jobs over and over again. All relationships take work, communication and understanding on both sides of the equation.

Previously a nanny we sponsored worked with us for a week and then quit.
Over the 8 years that we have hired nannies, I have come to learn that many of them already have family here which is great! However, we have also learned that many of the nannies who do have family here, are given advice that they just need to agree to the contract terms like the minimum wage standard to get sponsored and once they get here, they can just quit and find another family who is willing to pay them double that amount. They also agree to be flexible with their schedule, but then when they arrive here they refuse to work anything but Mon – Fri 9 – 5. As you know, by hiring 2 nannies at a time, we go out of our way to be fair and make sure we don’t ask too much of any one nanny. We follow all the rules of law and do the right thing. But our work does require flexibility. It does not seem fair to the sponsor family when the nannies sign a contract and agree to the terms, and yet has the intention to quit before they even get here and before they even give the family a chance.

Thus, when we have someone come to work for a few weeks, who does not even give us a chance, does not get to know us and just ups and quits after a week, we have to wonder about their motives. I am happy to pay for their flights and medical if they are willing to give us a chance, get to know us and work with us. When we have to pay out this additional money to them, it would seem to me, that there should be compensation to us for this expense if they turn around and quit as soon as they arrive.

My other concern is that if a nanny does that to us, and we have paid for their flight and temporary medical insurance, they should have to reimburse us for that cost. I am happy to pay for these things, as I pointed it out to our agency and your office that these girls were not being covered for temporary medical insurance, but it seems the scale has tipped outside what is fair if a nanny doesn’t have any intention to stay once they get here anyway.

Perhaps it could be regulated that if a nanny quits the sponsor family within a certain period of time after arriving in Canada, they have to reimburse that sponsor employer for the flight and temporary health care and the new employer who takes over their sponsorship has to pay them for those benefits?

Warm regards,

Diane

2 Comments »

From Monday’s Globe and Mail

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney’s plan to accept 10,000 more skilled workers into Canada next year is a sound one, and so is the government’s overall target of 255,000 newcomers. Some other changes make less sense, and may be motivated by politics, more than economics.

Mr. Kenney acknowledged that the seven-year backlog to sponsor grandparents and parents has become unmanageable, and announced a two-year moratorium on applications. In the meantime, however, he will increase the quota by 10,000 over two years, to 25,000, and introduce a two-year multiple-entry visitor’s visa for these family members.

To compensate, there will be a lower quota in other categories, including live-in caregivers. The target is 8,000-9,300, compared to 10,500-12,500 in the past two years.

Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Why would a country with a declining fertility rate and the expected mass retirements of baby boomers want to recruit yet more older people? “The government has it backwards,” says Sergio Karas, an immigration lawyer.

While family reunification is a goal for Canada’s immigration program, family-class newcomers already make up two-thirds of all those accepted. Parents and grandparents are unlikely to create economic growth and will have more health needs.

Live-in caregivers are a category that should be expanded. They perform a key role in the labour market: caring for children in a country with no national daycare policy, and looking after the elderly. There is already a shortage of quality care for the aged, a problem that will grow in years to come with the country’s demographic shift.

Canada’s live-in caregiver program is unique in the world, and allows caregivers to apply for permanent residency after living with a family for two years, caring for either children or the aged. It has real weaknesses, such as long application-processing times, abusive employers and nannies being recruited for “fake” jobs, but the program itself remains sound.

The government would be wise to put resources into having it run more smoothly, and make sure that well-qualified caregivers are recruited to bona fide jobs and that their permanent residency applications are processed in a timely fashion. As the population ages, Canada will need more of them.

11 Comments »