How America’s talent wars are reshaping business

2022/02/05 Leave a comment

In Canada, by contrast, immigration is relied upon to meet labour force requirements. One of the consequences, unforeseen or not, was reduced pressure to improve productivity and innovation:

Dcl logistics, like so many American firms, had a problem last year. Its business, fulfilling orders of goods sold online, faced surging demand. But competition for warehouse workers was fierce, wages were rising and staff turnover was high. So dcl made two changes. It bought robots to pick items off shelves and place them in boxes. And it reduced its reliance on part-time workers by hiring more full-time staff. “What we save in having temp employees, we lose in productivity,” explains Dave Tu, dcl’s president. Full-time payroll has doubled in the past year, to 280.Listen to this story

As American companies enter another year of uncertainty, the workforce has become bosses’ principal concern. Chief executives cite worker shortages as the greatest threat to their businesses in 2022, according to a survey by the Conference Board, a research organisation. On January 28th the Labour Department reported that firms had spent 4% more on wages and benefits in the fourth quarter, year on year, a rise not seen in 20 years. Paycheques of everyone from McDonald’s burger-flippers to Citi group bankers are growing fatter. This goes some way to explaining why profit margins in the s&p 500 index of large companies, which have defied gravity in the pandemic, are starting to decline. On February 2nd Meta spooked investors by reporting a dip in profits, due in part to a rise in employee-related costs as it moves from Facebook and its sister social networks into the virtual-reality metaverse.

At the same time, firms of all sizes and sectors are testing new ways to recruit, train and deploy staff. Some of these strategies will be temporary. Others may reshape American business.

The current jobs market looks extra ordinary by historical standards. December saw 10.9m job openings, up by more than 60% from December 2019. Just six workers were available for every ten open jobs (see chart 1). Predictably, many seem comfortable abandoning old positions to seek better ones. This is evident among those who clean bedsheets and stock shelves, as well as those building spreadsheets and selling stocks. In November 4.5m workers quit their jobs, a record. Even if rising wages and an ebbing pandemic lure some of them back to work, the fight for staff may endure.

For decades American firms slurped from a deepening pool of labour, as more women entered the workforce and globalisation greatly expanded the ranks of potential hires. That expansion has now mostly run its course, says Andrew Schwedel of Bain, a consultancy. Simultaneously, other trends have conspired to make the labour pool shallower than it might have been. Men continue to slump out of the job market: the share of men aged 25 to 54 either working or looking for work was 88% at the end of last year, down from 97% in the 1950s. Immigration, which plunged during Donald Trump’s nativist presidency, has sunk further, to less than a quarter of the level in 2016. And covid-19 may have prompted more than 2.4m baby boomers into early retirement, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis.

These trends will not reverse quickly. Boomers won’t sprint back to work en masse. With Republicans hostile to outsiders and Democrats squabbling over visas for skilled ones, a surge in immigration looks unlikely. Some men have returned to the workforce since the depths of the covid recession in 2020, but the male participation rate has plateaued below pre-pandemic levels. A tight labour market may persist.

But base pay is rising, too. Bank of America says it will raise its minimum wage to $25 by 2025. In September Walmart, America’s largest private employer, set its minimum wage at $12 an hour, below many states’ requirement of $13-14 but well above the federal minimum wage of $7.25. Amazon has lifted average wages in its warehouses to $18. The average hourly wage for production and nonsupervisory employees in December was 5.8% above the level a year earlier; compared with a 4.7% jump for all private-sector workers. Firms face pressure to lift them higher still. High inflation ensured that only workers in leisure and hospitality saw a real increase in hourly pay last year (see chart 2).

Raising compensation may not, on its own, be sufficient for companies to overcome the labour squeeze, however. This is where the other strategies come in, starting with changes to recruitment. To deal with the fact that, for some types of job, there simply are not enough qualified candidates to fill vacancies, many businesses are loosening hiring criteria previously deemed a prerequisite.

The share of job postings that list “no experience required” more than doubled from January 2020 to September 2021, reckons Burning Glass, an analytics firm. Easing rigid preconditions may be sensible, even without a labour shortage. A four-year degree, argues Joseph Fuller of Harvard Business School, is an unreliable guarantor of a worker’s worth. The Business Roundtable and the us Chamber of Commerce, two business groups, have urged companies to ease requirements that job applicants have a four-year university degree, advising them to value workers’ skills instead.

Another way to deal with a shortage of qualified staff is for firms to impart the qualifications themselves. In September, the most recent month for which Burning Glass has data, the share of job postings that offer training was more than 30% higher than in January 2020. New providers of training are proliferating, from university-run “bootcamps” to short-term programmes by specialists such as General Assembly and big employers themselves. Employers in Buffalo have hired General Assembly to run data-training schemes for local workers who are broadly able but who lack specific tech skills. Google, a technology giant, says it will consider workers who earn its online certificate in data analytics, for example, to be equivalent to a worker with a four-year degree.

Besides revamping recruitment and training, companies are modifying how their workers work. Some positions are objectively bad, with low pay, unpredictable scheduling and little opportunity for growth. Zeynep Ton of the mit Sloan School of Management contends that making low-wage jobs more appealing improves retention and productivity, which supports profits in the long term. As interesting as Walmart’s pay increases, she argues, are the retail behemoth’s management changes. Last year it said that two-thirds of the more than 565,000 hourly workers in its stores would work full time, up from about half in 2016. They would have predictable schedules week to week and more structured mentorship. Other companies may take note. Many of the complaints raised by labour organisers at Starbucks and Amazon have as much to do with safety and stress on the job as they do wages or benefits.

Companies that cannot find enough workers are trying to do with fewer of them. Sometimes that means trimming services. Many hotel chains, including Hilton, have made daily housekeeping optional. “We’ve been very thoughtful and cautious about what positions we fill,” Darren Woods, boss of ExxonMobil, told the oil giant’s investors on February 1st.

Increasingly, this also involves investments in automation. Orders of robots last year surpassed the pre-pandemic high in both volume and value, according to the Association for Advancing Automation. ups, a shipping firm, is boosting productivity with more automated bagging and labelling; new electronic tags will eliminate millions of manual scans each day.

New business models are pushing things along. Consider McEntire Produce in Columbia, South Carolina. Each year more than 45,000 tonnes of sliced lettuce, tomatoes and onions move through its factory. Workers pack them in bags, place bags in boxes and stack boxes on pallets destined for fast-food restaurants. McEntire has raised wages, but staff turnover remains high. Even as worker costs have climbed, the upfront expense of automation has sunk. So the firm plans to install new robots to box and stack. It will lease these from a new company called Formic, which offers robots at an hourly rate that is less than half the cost of a McEntire worker doing the same job. By 2025 McEntire wants to automate 60% of its volume, with robots handling the back-breaking work and workers performing tasks that require more skill. One new position, introduced in the past year, looks permanent: a manager whose sole job is to listen to and support staff so they do not quit. 

Both workers and employers are adapting. For the most part, they are doing so outside the construct of collective bargaining. Despite a flurry of activity—Starbucks baristas in Buffalo and Amazon workers in Alabama will hold union votes in February—unions remain weak. Last year 10.3% of American workers were unionised, matching the record low of 2019. Within the private sector, the unionisation rate is just 6.1%. Strikes and pickets will be a headache for some bosses. But it is quits that could cause them sleepless nights.

Pay as they go

Companies’ most straightforward tactic to deal with worker shortages is to raise pay. If firms are to part with cash, they prefer the inducements to be one-off rather than recurring and sticky, as with higher wages. That explains a proliferation of fat bonuses. Before the Christmas rush Amazon began offering workers a $3,000 sign-on sweetener. Compensation for lawyers at America’s top 50 firms rose by 16.5% last year, in part thanks to bonuses, according to a survey by Citigroup and Hildebrandt, a consultancy. In January Bank of America said it would give staff $1bn in restricted stock, which vests over time.

Source: How America’s talent wars are reshaping business

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Serwer: Whoopi Goldberg’s American Idea of Race

2022/02/05 Leave a comment

Good thoughtful analysis and commentary, and the importance of understanding historical experiences:

It made sense, to the New York Daily News sports editor, that these guys dominated basketball. After all, “the game places a premium on an alert, scheming mind and flashy trickiness, artful dodging and general smartalecness,” not to mention their “God-given better balance and speed.”

He was referring, of course, to the Jews.

In the 1930s, Paul Gallico was trying to explain away Jewish dominance of basketball. He came up with the idea that the game’s structure simply appealed to the immutable traits of wily Hebrews and their scheming minds. It sounds strange to the ear now, but only because our stereotypes about who is inherently good at particular sports have shifted. His theory is not any more or less insightful now than it was then; his confidence should remind us to be skeptical of similar, supposedly explanatory arguments that abound today.

Looking back at old stereotypes is a useful exercise; it can help illustrate the arbitrary nature of the concept of “race,” and how such identities shift even as people insist on their permanence and infallibility. Because race is not real, it is malleable enough to be made to serve the needs of those with the power to define it, the certainties of one generation giving way to the contradictory dogmas of another.

Whoopi Goldberg, the actor and a co-host of The View, stumbled into a public-relations nightmare for ABC on Monday when she insisted that “the Holocaust wasn’t about race.” After an episode of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert aired in which she opined that “the Nazis were white people, and most of the people they were attacking were white people,” she was temporarily suspended from The View. She has apologized for her remarks.

I don’t mean to pile on Goldberg here, who I think is struggling with an American conception of “race” that renders the anti-Semitism that led to the Holocaust illegible. I regard her remarks not as malicious, but as an ignorant projection of that American conception onto circumstances to which it does not apply. In America, distinctions among European immigrants that were once considered deeply significant dissolved in the melting pot, leaving an absence in popular memory that might explain their salience elsewhere, and how someone could be seen as white in America and yet still be subject to persecution based on their “race.”

The Nazi Holocaust in Europe and slavery and Jim Crow in the United States are outgrowths of the same ideology—the belief that human beings can be delineated into categories that share immutable biological traits distinguishing them from one another and determining their potential and behavior. In Europe, with its history of anti-Jewish persecution and violent religious divisions, the conception of Jews as a biological “race” with particular characteristics was used by the Nazis to justify the Holocaust. In the United States, the invention of race was used to justify the institution of chattel slavery, on the basis that Black people were biologically suited to permanent servitude and unfit for the rights the nation’s Founders had proclaimed as universal. The American color line was therefore much more forgiving to European Jews than the divisions of the old country were. But they are branches of the same tree, the biological fiction of race.

In the United States, physical distinctions between most Black and most white people have misled some into thinking that the American conception of race is somehow more “real” than the racial fictions on which the Nazis based their campaign of extermination. Applying the American color line to Europe, the Holocaust appears merely to be a form of sectarian violence, “white people” attacking “white people,” which seems nonsensical. But those persecuting Jews in Europe saw Jews as beastly subhumans, an “alien race” whom they were justified in destroying in order to defend German “racial purity.” The “racial” distinctions between master and slave may be more familiar to Americans, but they were and are no more real than those between Gentile and Jew.

Adherence to religious belief was not required to be subject to Nazi persecution, and unlike some prior moments in European history, conversion was insufficient to escape danger. Jewish ancestry was enough, because it was ancestry—a person’s “race”—that made someone inescapably Jewish. In his infamous memoir, Adolf Hitler regretted that, early in life, he’d seen anti-Semitism as persecution of a people on the basis of religious belief, which he thought wrong. He later came to think of this as a Jewish lie to hide the reality that the Jewish people were a separate “race” whose goal was to enslave the rest of mankind. It should not be lost that enslaving all of mankind is a concise summary of Hitler’s own political project.

“Judaism predates Western categories. It’s not quite a religion, because one can be Jewish regardless of observance or specific belief,” my colleague Yair Rosenberg wrote. “But it’s also not quite a race, because people can convert in! It’s not merely a culture or an ethnicity, because that leaves out all the religious components.”

This is all true, but Black Americans are not really a “race” either, and the borders of Black American identity can also be difficult to define or agree upon. To some extent, shared history, culture, and ancestry exist, but as the scholars Karen and Barbara Fields write in Racecraft, the very concept of race implies a material reality where none exists. Most American descendants of the emancipated have white ancestry, and millions of white Americans with African ancestry have no knowledge of it. “Race is not an idea but an ideology. It came into existence at a discernible historical moment for rationally understandable historical reasons,” the Fieldses write, “and is subject to change for similar reasons.”

It is not necessary for race to be real for racism to be real. It is only necessary that people believe race to be real. When people act on fictions, those actions have repercussions even if the underlying belief is false—even if the people know that the underlying belief they are acting on is false. The fact that anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Jewish control of the media, of governments, and of financial institutions are untrue does not rob them of their explanatory power for those who choose to believe in them. For Thomas Jefferson to know, somewhere in the disquiet of his own conscience, that slavery was a “cruel war against human nature itself” did not in and of itself grant freedom to those he owned as property.

“The people who settled the country had a fatal flaw. They could recognize a man when they saw one. They knew he wasn’t—I mean you can tell, they knew he wasn’t—anything else but a man; but since they were Christian, and since they had already decided that they came here to establish a free country, the only way to justify the role this chattel was playing in one’s life was to say that he was not a man,” James Baldwin wrote in 1964. “For if he wasn’t a man, then no crime had been committed.”

To this, we could add Jean-Paul Sartre’s observation that “if the Jew did not exist, the anti-Semite would invent him.” Race allows humanity to keep inventing, in language that can bend the most rational minds, groups of people whose supposed characteristics justify whatever cruelty we might wish to indulge.

Adam Serwer is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers politics.

Source: Whoopi Goldberg’s American Idea of Race

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with , ,

USA: From slavery to socialism, new legislation restricts what teachers can discuss

2022/02/05 Leave a comment

Age of ignorance?

Across the U.S., educators are being censored for broaching controversial topics. Since January 2021, researcher Jeffrey Sachs says, 35 states have introduced 137 bills limiting what schools can teach with regard to race, American history, politics, sexual orientation and gender identity.

Sachs has been tracking this legislation for PEN America, a writers organization dedicated to free speech. He says the recent flurry of legislation has created a “minefield” for educators trying to figure out how to teach topics such as slavery, Jim Crow laws or the Holocaust. One proposed law in South Carolina, for instance, prohibits teachers from discussing any topic that creates “discomfort, guilt or anguish” on the basis of political belief.

“That means that a teacher would have to be very, very careful about how they discuss something like, let’s say, fascism or racism or antisemitism,” Sachs says. “These are political beliefs, and it means that teachers are going to have to second-guess whether they can describe that political belief in as forthright and honest a way as we wish for fear of falling afoul of this bill.”

Critical race theory, an academic approach that examines how race and racism function in American institutions, has inspired a backlash in conservative circles across the United States. In one of his first acts in office, Glenn Youngkin, the Republican governor of Virginia, established a hotline to allow parents or members of the community to report critical race theory in the classroom. Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, a conservative mom’s group is offering a $500 bounty to catch teachers who break a state law prohibiting certain teachings about racism and sexism.

“I think it must be a very terrifying time to be an educator at any level in higher ed or in K-12,” Sachs says.

“You have, unfortunately, the kinds of daily stressors that we’ve all become used to because of COVID,” he says. “And now on top of that, these educators are trying to negotiate outraged parents and media pundits. … When you listen to what educators are saying, they’re burned out, and many of them, I think, will head for the exits.”

Interview highlights

On how some of the proposed bills would be impossible to comply with

Some of the bills — I would say many now — include a provision that says something to the effect of: Teachers cannot be compelled to discuss a controversial contemporary issue, but if they do, they must do so evenhandedly and without any kind of favoritism. However, many of those same bills also would require teachers to denounce, in the strongest possible terms, ideas like Marxism or socialism.

For instance, a bill in Indiana that is currently under consideration would require, among other things, that in the run-up to any general election in the state, students must be taught “socialism, Marxism, communism, totalitarianism or similar political systems are incompatible with and in conflict with the principles of freedom upon which the United States was founded.” And it goes on to say as such, “socialism, Marxism, communism, totalitarianism or similar political systems are detrimental to the people of the United States.”

The issue there, among many others, is that it’s a bill requiring students to be exposed to this litany of claims about different ideologies. And it also requires that in doing so, teachers cannot show favoritism or bias in any one direction. In other words, it’s a bill that can’t possibly actually work. Teachers are being pulled in two different directions, and the consequence is going to be a kind of self-censorship.

Another Indiana bill … prohibits teachers from including in their class any “anti-American ideologies.” Now that term is never defined, and again, it’s not that teachers can’t endorse or promote anti-American ideologies — they’re just simply forbidden from even discussing them.

On bills that address sexuality, gender and LGBTQ issues

It differs bill to bill. But again, many do include language prohibiting teachers from discussing concepts like gender fluidity. It prohibits them from discussing “nontraditional gender identities” and in many cases forbid[s] teachers from discussing controversial events that would presumably include, in many cases, ones like gay marriage or LGBTQ rights.

We see as well many bills requiring teachers to report to parents if their children are asking questions about their gender identity, and in many cases as well — for instance, in a Florida bill — that prohibit teachers from “encouraging any conversation about sex and sexuality.”

So it really puts teachers in an impossible situation. In a contemporary high school or middle school, even earlier in elementary school, these sorts of topics arise. And in particular, it would put LGBTQ teachers in a really difficult situation where they’re forced, essentially, to disguise their identity or the status of their relationships in order to fend off running afoul of these bills.

On how these laws are similar to what’s going on in authoritarian countries

It often gets dismissively described as “woke ideas,” and more broadly, I think we would just describe these ideas that we’re talking about as socially liberal ideas. And unfortunately, what we’re seeing is in countries like Russia, China, in Turkey, in Hungary, we are seeing these regimes targeting educational institutions and other sites of cultural production like museums or the media, [as] an attempt to drive these ideas out — to signal that to be a “real” Russian or to be a “true” Hungarian, one must be straight, one must be socially conservative. These efforts underway in these regimes, that are either authoritarian or unfortunately trending in that direction, all signal the kind of political energy that leaders believe they can get by attacking these ideas.

On a new law that addresses the concept of systemic racism

There’s a law currently on the books in North Dakota that was passed last November after just five days of consideration that has me up at night. This is a law that attempts to prohibit critical race theory in K-12 schools, and I just want to reemphasize here this is not a law that prohibits people from endorsing or promoting critical race theory. It’s a law that forbids them from even including critical race theory in the classroom. And the way that that law defines critical race theory is what has me so concerned: … “critical race theory, which is defined as the theory that racism is not merely the product of learned individual bias or prejudice, but that racism is systemically embedded in American society and the American legal system to facilitate racial inequality.” In other words, the law now is saying that whenever a teacher talks about racism, they may only describe it as a product of an individual’s own biases or prejudices. They cannot describe it — even when the facts command them to — as something more endemic or embedded within American society. It’s a way essentially of preventing teachers, I think, from being honest about a lot of the uglier sides of American history and contemporary society.

Whenever you discuss slavery, your teacher would have to essentially say, “These slaveholders were racist.” The system that they were in, the laws that supported them, the economy that made that business profitable, you’d have to separate those institutional features and describe slavery purely as a product of individual bias, which does violence to the topic. It fails to educate students, and I think might discourage students from thinking critically about contemporary institutions and identifying whether or not they also might be guilty of systemic racism.

On how the idea for these restrictive teaching bills first came about

The origins here … go back to that summer of 2020. There’s a researcher there named Christopher Rufo, who was then with the Discovery Institute in Seattle. This is in a conservative educational institute centered around the promotion of intelligent design. And Christopher Rufo wrote a series of articles for an online website called City Journal. And in his City Journal articles, he detailed what he described as indoctrination in K-12 schools or in employee training programs in businesses or state agencies, programs that he said were training people to become critical race theorists.

Those articles caught the attention of Tucker Carlson, the Fox News host, and Rufo appeared on his program in early September of 2020. The very next day, he received a phone call from Mark Meadows, then chief of staff for the Trump administration. Apparently, Trump had watched the program that evening. He’d seen what Rufo had to say, and within a matter of days, Rufo was in conversation with the Trump administration on some sort of legislative or executive response. The product of that conversation was Trump’s executive order in late September, where he prohibited any state agency from discussing certain ideas as part of employee training or [training for] a state contractor that wishes to do business with the federal government.

Source: From slavery to socialism, new legislation restricts what teachers can discuss

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Black parliamentarians say protest convoy is a venue for ‘white supremacists’

2022/02/05 Leave a comment

Indeed:

A group representing Black MPs and senators is calling the protest convoy that’s been encamped for a week around Parliament Hill a venue for “white supremacists” and other extremists.

“The ‘Freedom Convoy’ protest became an opportunity for white supremacists and others with extreme and disturbing views to parade their odious views in public,” the Black parliamentary caucus said in a news release Thursday.

“This is unacceptable. These displays of hatred and violence offend Canadians and have no place in our country.”

Source: Black parliamentarians say protest convoy is a venue for ‘white supremacists’

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Cohen: Truck convoy — An American-style protest, a limp Canadian response

2022/02/04 Leave a comment

Good commentary, money quote:
“The prissy city that issues parking tickets on Christmas Eve and makes kids shut down lemonade stands is afraid to ticket truckers blocking downtown, because, you know, they might get angry.”
It is easy to talk of the Americanization of Canada, particularly in our political institutions. We now set fixed election dates, we ask appointees to the Supreme Court to appear before Parliament, we embrace attack advertising in elections.

More than anything, the tone of our politics has changed. Parliament does not have the congeniality or collegiality of a generation ago. Members clash in raw personal terms. Parliament sounds like Congress.

The Conservative Party is no longer the Progressive Conservative Party. Increasingly, it is what was once the now-defunct liberal wing of the Republican Party. It has acquired a hard-edged social conservatism, which makes winning hard in a moderate, centrist country.

Source: Cohen: Truck convoy — An American-style protest, a limp Canadian response

Filed under Multiculturalism, Other Tagged with ,

Immigration Critics Wrong: Fewer Visas Did Not Help U.S. Workers

2022/02/04 Leave a comment

Useful analysis of this natural experiment given US government policies remained largely unchanged:

The number of new foreign-born workers in the United States declined because of the Covid-19 pandemic, but U.S. workers were not better off, according to new research. That refutes a long-held anti-immigration argument and addresses a concern raised by some labor unions. Worker shortages, partly a result of restrictive immigration policies and made worse by the pandemic, have contributed to empty shelves in supermarkets, shorter hours in restaurants and elsewhere, and an inability for many companies to fill jobs and grow in the United States.

The research focused on H-1B visas for high-skilled foreign nationals, H-2B visas for nonagricultural seasonal workers, and J-1 visas for summer work travel. The focus is timely because some labor unions have argued against the Biden administration increasing by 20,000 the number of H-2B visas, even though such visas help reduce illegal entry and prevent at least some of the dangerous border crossings that cause hundreds of deaths annually, such as the recent drowning of a 7-year-old girl from Venezuela in the Rio Grande.

“The Covid-19 pandemic resulted in a sharp drop in international migration to the United States, but there is no evidence the entry of fewer foreign workers on temporary visas improved outcomes for U.S. workers,” concluded Madeline Zavodny, an economics professor at the University of North Florida and a former economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, in a new report for the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP).

“The research examined labor markets where more temporary foreign workers were employed prior to the pandemic and found the drop in H-2B program admissions did not boost labor market opportunities for U.S. workers but rather, if anything, worsened them,” writes Zavodny. “The results also do not indicate gains for similar U.S. workers in labor markets that had relied more on the H-1B and J-1 visa programs. There is no evidence of improved labor market opportunities for U.S. workers in the leisure and hospitality sector during the summer months as a result of the virtual shutdown of the J-1 Summer Work Travel program.

“There is also no evidence of faster employment growth or lower unemployment rates for college graduate U.S. natives as a result of decreased admissions via the H-1B program. Instead, labor markets that had been more reliant on temporary foreign workers via the H-1B program before the pandemic appeared to have had more unfilled jobs during the pandemic. The large drop in new temporary foreign workers via the H-1B program thus does not appear to have led to better labor market outcomes for the U.S. natives who might compete with those workers for jobs.”

Among the findings of the report are new estimates that show the number of working-age migrants from abroad has declined:

·       “The U.S. received some 630,000 fewer working-age international migrants between mid-March 2020 and mid-March 2021 than at its peak during the corresponding period in 2014-2015, a drop of over 75% in inflows.

·       “Even if new arrivals in 2019-2021 had maintained just the average annual pace over 2010-2019, the U.S. would have received almost 600,000 more working-age international migrants than it actually did during that two-year period.

·       “The decrease in working-age international migrants was similar for migrants who had at least a bachelor’s degree and those who had at most a high school diploma, both down 75% in 2020-2021 from their peak year-to-year inflow during the previous decade.

·       “The number of J-1 exchange visitor visas issued plummeted from about 350,000 per fiscal year to about 100,000 in FY 2020 and a similar level in fiscal year (FY) 2021. The drop in the Summer Work Travel (SWT) program within that visa category was even more precipitous, falling from over 100,000 annually to under 5,000 in FY 2020.

·       “The number of H-1B specialty occupations visas issued fell from almost 190,000 in FY 2019 to about 125,000 in FY 2020 and under 62,000 in FY 2021.

·       “The number of H-2B non-agricultural worker visas issued fell by almost half in FY 2020 before returning to near its pre-pandemic level in FY 2021.”

Zavodny notes it is tempting to argue that some of the increase in labor market opportunities for workers is due to reduced international migration. “The analysis here gives little reason to believe any gains for U.S. workers are linked to lower admission of temporary foreign workers,” writes Zavodny. “The ongoing shortages of workers in many labor markets reflect U.S. employers’ need for additional workers from both domestic sources and abroad. The research also examines data on job postings and the results point to jobs, particularly highly skilled jobs, going unfilled when temporary foreign workers were unable to enter the country. The decrease in new temporary foreign workers in the U.S. as a result of the pandemic thus does not appear to have led to better labor market outcomes for U.S. natives but rather to jobs left unfilled.”

Immigration critics have insisted that fewer legal visas would translate into gains for U.S. workers. The Covid-19 pandemic created a natural experiment to test that proposition and found it to be untrue. The results show a simplistic, zero-sum argument that restricting the size of the labor force benefits U.S. workers is incorrect. Such an argument fails to take into account many factors, including the role played by capital and entrepreneurs in a market economy. Instead, imposing visa restrictions and having fewer available workers reduce economic growth and make it more difficult for businesses to expand and deliver products and services to Americans.

Source: Immigration Critics Wrong: Fewer Visas Did Not Help U.S. Workers

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Canadian citizenship application delays causing uncertainty for Calgary immigrants; ‘There’s nothing left to do’: Soon-to-be Canadians slam long waits for citizenship oath ceremonies

2022/02/04 Leave a comment

Funny that on the same day, we have stories in Calgary and Montreal on the impact of delays on citizenship applications.

Significant delays in the approval process to become a Canadian citizen due to ongoing staffing shortages and widespread travel restrictions from the COVID-19 pandemic have forced some immigrants to wait nearly two years to take their oath.

The extra wait times are now impacting hopeful Canadians like Amani Kaman. who immigrated to Canada as a refugee in 2013 to escape from war. Sadly, his father was killed by rebels in the process.

Source: Canadian citizenship application delays causing uncertainty for Calgary immigrants

From Montreal:

When Rakhee Barua and her family’s permanent residency (PR) cards expired last year, she said she didn’t even consider renewing them.

After all, the Bangladesh-born family, who came to Canada in 2016, had passed their Canadian citizenship exam months earlier, and had just one last step to take before becoming full-fledged Canadian citizens: being sworn in at an oath ceremony, typically scheduled three to four months after passing the exam.

But almost a year later, Barua and her family are still waiting for an invitation to take their oath from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).

“We were thinking, ‘we’ll get it next month, we’ll get it next month, we’ll get it next month,'” said Barua’s husband, Jewel Debnath, of the torturous wait for the invitation.

The uncertainty weighs heavily on Barua, who can’t travel to Bangladesh to be with her mother — who has breast cancer — due to her expired PR card and the delay on her status.

“My mother is sick. I cannot wait because I don’t know what will happen.”

Barua said her mother has been pleading for a visit before undergoing more treatment.

IRCC delays in scheduling the simple ceremony, which has been moved online due to COVID-19, has left thousands of Canadian hopefuls like Barua and her family in limbo — waiting months, and even years, to become citizens.

“There’s nothing left to do,” said a frustrated Debnath of the citizenship process.

‘I’m just waiting for that oath’

Because her PR card has expired, Barua would not be allowed back into Canada after travelling overseas to visit her mother. Renewing the card costs $50 per person, and after looking into the process, she said the wait time is between five and six months due to the backlog at IRCC.

“Like us, many people are suffering,” she said.

Oleksii Verbitskyi, a software developer from Ukraine, says his family has been waiting for more than two years for their Canadian citizenship, and he’s spent 11 months of that time period waiting for a date to attend the oath ceremony.

“It’s ridiculous, I have everything completed, I’m just waiting for that oath,” said Verbitskyi, who came to Canada with his wife and daughter in 2016 and passed the citizenship exam in March 2021. His youngest son was born in Montreal.

“It’s important … but it’s [a] formality, to be honest.”

After contacting the IRCC through online forms and emails, Verbitskyi says he still only receives boilerplate responses from the department. He says the lack of communication is frustrating.

“We live in the 21st century, you have online tools and everything,” he said. “Give us something, some feedback, like some way to know.”

60,000 approved applicants awaiting ceremony

Last year, Canada announced it would spend $85 million to plow through the backlog of immigration applications caused by COVID-19. On Monday, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Sean Fraser said the government hopes to expand virtual citizenship ceremonies, as well as introduce an electronic oath of citizenship to help speed up the process.

Fraser said there are currently around 60,000 people approved for citizenship who are waiting for a ceremony.

“We will be having conversations to ensure that we administer the system in a way that improves efficiency, but at the same time doesn’t deny those people who want to take part in a formal ceremony and be welcomed into the Canadian family in that traditional way,” the minister said.

But the president of Quebec’s association of immigration lawyers, which goes by its French acronym, AQAADI, says there’s no reason the process should be taking this long.

“The oath is the end of the process, it’s not a question of deciding anything, it’s just to receive the documents,” said Stéphanie Valois. The process took only a few weeks before the pandemic, she said.

“[People have] been waiting a year, more than a year, a year and a half … It should definitely be addressed because there are no reasons,” she said.

A responsibility to make Canada better

Both Barua and Verbitskyi immigrated to Canada with the hope of giving their children a better life, and are eager to obtain citizen status.

“It’s a very peaceful country … It’s known as the best country in the world,” Barua said of Canada, smiling.

Verbitskyi says he loves living in the quaint suburb of Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue in Montreal’s West Island, and he touts the expertise of doctors who he says saved the life of his youngest child.

“For eternity, I will be grateful to Canada,” he said, tearfully.

But Verbitskyi says calling out the inefficiencies in the country’s immigration system is his civic duty, and he hopes it will make the process easier for other prospective immigrants and citizens.

“It’s our responsibility as loyal citizens to make [Canada] even better.”

Source: ‘There’s nothing left to do’: Soon-to-be Canadians slam long waits for citizenship oath ceremonies

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

They paid big money up front to immigrate to Quebec — but face wait times of more than seven years

2022/02/04 Leave a comment

Sometimes the focus on individual stories misses the broader picture of the Quebec investor immigrant program being a backdoor to immigrants seeking to live in Toronto or Vancouver (How over 46,000 wealthy immigrants took a back door into Vancouver and Toronto’s housing markets).

One of the better decisions of the previous government was to cancel the business immigrant program given the evaluation showed that “their economic performance and extent to which BIs [business immigrants] had economically established is low compared to other economic classes considered.” Census data largely confirms the limited economic benefits and earnings of investor immigrants:

Pakistani entrepreneur Nazakat Nawaz had the money, so the process of moving to Quebec as an investor to start a new life in Canada seemed straightforward.

The province wanted net assets of $1.2 million, two years of management experience and a five-year, interest-free investment of $800,000 entrusted with the province. That was in 2016.

It took 18 months for Nawaz to be screened and issued a Certificat de Selection du Quebec by the Quebec government so he could be referred to the federal immigration department to complete the processing of his family’s permanent-residence application.

Today, after investing hundreds of thousands of dollars and years of time in the process, the 45-year-old, his wife and their four children are still waiting in the United Arab Emirates, waiting.

“For the immigration department, it’s no problem to wait for a few years, but, for us, it’s our lives at stake,” says Nawaz, who has been running his own computer business since 2004.

His application was submitted to the federal immigration department in October 2018. His plan was to open an autobody shop in Quebec.

“Canada kept taking new immigration applications. If they didn’t have the processing capacity, why did they keep accepting new ones? It’s all because they’re greedy for more money. Just take our money and throw our applications in cold storage.”

The federal immigration department has been plagued by backlogs since the pandemic hit in March 2020, with global travel restrictions limiting the admission of newcomers and lockdowns hampering the processing of immigration applications here and abroad.

Like other provincial immigration programs for investor and entrepreneurs that vet and nominate their own applicants, those looking to migrate to Quebec must go through the same two-step process: Get a nomination from the province, then go through another round of screening and processing by the federal government to obtain permanent residence.

But Quebec-bound investors are facing a particularly long queue at both the provincial and federal levels.

The current processing time for the Quebec investor immigration program now stands at 65 months just at the federal end, up from 43 months in 2017. (The wait is six months for online applications and 25 months for paper applications in other parts of Canada.)

As of Jan. 23, there were some 14,000 people in the queue who had been referred by the Quebec government, most of them in the investor stream.

On the provincial front, the processing time has also crept up over the same period — from 21 months to 28 months, with a backlog of 1,075 applications in the system — compared to anywhere between four weeks and six months in other provinces, according to their websites.

In Quebec, that means the whole process adds up to a combined 93 months — more than seven years.

“Quebec sets its own annual immigration thresholds, and we receive more applications than the number of spaces that Quebec has allocated for the Quebec Business Class program,” said federal immigration department spokesperson Rémi Larivière.

“The number of applications that we process cannot exceed the number of spaces that Quebec has allocated for this program.”

After coming into power in late 2018, the Coalition Avenir Québec or CAQ reduced the province’s annual immigration intake by 20 per cent to 40,000. It set an annual quota of 3,400 for its business immigration program, which covers the entrepreneur, investor and self-employed streams.

It’s not known how much the delay to the processing applications is a result of the province’s reduced intake or COVID-related disruption with its federal counterparts. However, after failing to meet even its lower target during the pandemic, the Quebec government this year has raised it aims and wants to admit 52,500 new permanent residents, including 4,000 to 4,300 under its business immigration program.

According to federal officials, the overall backlog for the Quebec business immigration category has actually decreased in the past five years.

Due to the pandemic travel restrictions, at the request of the province, federal officials have prioritized the processing of applicants from Quebec who were already in Canada in order to maximize admissions to meet Quebec’s target. That hurts the business class applicants: “More than 95 per cent of applicants in the Quebec business class reside abroad,” said Larivière.

Alain Ayache, a spokesperson with Quebec’s Ministry of Immigration, Frenchisation and Integration, said the province’s admission targets are determined based on its immigration objectives and integration capacity to meet its “socioeconomic needs.”

“These targets were established to reduce the waiting periods for the applicants, more specifically by reducing the number of applications to the federal government waiting for permanent residence,” Ayache said.

Applicants under the Quebec investor program, meanwhile, are left confused and frustrated.

Before submitting a permanent-resident application to the federal immigration department, Nazwaz, like other applicants accepted by Quebec at the time, was required to deposit $800,000 for the five-year investment, either directly in cash or financed by paying a non-refundable fee — about $230,000 — to a designated financial institution. (The five-year term investment requirement has since been raised to $1,200,000.)

“We contacted the Quebec government and they said the federal government is responsible for processing and delays. When we contacted the federal government, they said Quebec gave them a quota to process applications,” said Nawaz.

“All I can say is they have ruined our lives. Everybody got their share of money and we are left with empty promises.”

Anup Kishin Gandhi was 45 when he applied under the Quebec program in 2018. A year later, he was selected and issued the selection certificate from the province. He immediately applied to the federal immigration for permanent residence.

“The stress is that when we started the process, I was 45 and I was expecting to settle by 50 and start my business, but today, I have no idea where my file is,” said Gandhi, now 49, who is from India but works in Abu Dhabi as a vice-president in human resources for a French energy company.

“Any delay is going to make it difficult for me (at my age) to start a business and to sustain. It would require a minimum four to five years to build a successful business. If I start something at 55, it’s near impossible.”

Gandhi said he has lived all his life in the United Arab Emirates but his family’s status there hinges on his job and they would have to leave and return to India if he is ever no longer employed there.

“I wanted my children not to have similar situations. Accordingly we all decided to immigrate to Canada, where there is security, safety and equal opportunities,” said Gandhi, whose 17-year-old twin boys, Maaluv and Mankush, have been studying French and were hoping to study medicine at McGill University.

Naween Verma said he applied to the same program in Quebec in 2015 and came to Canada for an interview two years later. After making his deposit, he got the selection certificate for his family and applied to the federal government in September 2017.

“Both governments are playing the blame game. Quebec already got our money and now they don’t care about us. The federal government thinks we gave money to Quebec, not them, so we are not a priority,” said the 50-year-old man, who runs a company in New Delhi that helps build infrastructure like bridges, roads and industrial buildings.

“We have already contributed so much money in the Canadian economy even before we get to go to the country. We don’t know what the future holds for us.”

Another Indian applicant, Preet Mann, 53, has paid $10,000 to hire a consultant to help with the application and another $15,000 just for the application fee under the Quebec investor stream. He has also sent his 21-year-old son to study in Montreal as an international student in preparing for settlement in the province.

The family was approved and issued the selection certificate from Quebec in 2017. By the end of that year, the federal immigration department confirmed the receipt of their application, which has been stalled since.

“We cannot deny that the global pandemic has disrupted the immigration system to some extent, but we had applied in 2017, surely a delay of more than four years cannot be attributed to the pandemic alone,” said Mann, who is the head of the marine department of a Japanese oil and gas company.

“The ever increasing processing times are creating havoc for cases like ours. We have given Canada our very hard earned money and there is no turning back for us now.”

Source: They paid big money up front to immigrate to Quebec — but face wait times of more than seven years

Filed under Citizenship, citizenship-by-investment, Immigration Tagged with

Canada’s decision to land over 400,000 immigrants in 2021 has come at a cost

2022/02/04 Leave a comment

Good analysis and reasonable recommendations by Kareem Al-Assal:

Consequences of the 401,000 newcomer target

On the flip side, IRCC has recognized the decision to pursue 401,000 landings in 2021 has resulted in negative consequences. Regrettably, these consequences could have been avoided had the Canadian government chosen to pursue a more sustainable immigration policy last year

The purpose of increasing the immigration target was primarily to promote population, labour force, and economic growth, while also continuing to reunite families and help refugees. Given that some 60 per cent of new immigrants fall under the economic class, it is safe to say Canada’s main immigration objective is economic in nature.

And yet ironically, the Canadian government’s goal last year undermined its own objective of supporting the economy via immigration. It decided to focus on transitioning more people from within Canada to permanent residence. Prior to the pandemic, about 30 per cent of new economic class permanent residents transitioned from within Canada, while 70 per cent arrived from abroad. Last year, this was reversed, as 70 per cent of new economic class landings came from within Canada, while 30 per cent came from abroad.

A first consequence of this decision is the reduced flow of new immigrants from abroad is contributing to weaker population, labour force, and economic growth. Canada’s population growth is the weakest since 1915/16. Prior to the pandemic, Canada’s population was growing by over one per cent per year which was the highest rate among highly developed countries. Some 80 per cent of annual population growth was thanks to immigrants moving to Canada.

Reducing the share of new economic class immigrants coming from abroad last year has also hurt the labour market. Immigrants were comprising 80 per cent or more of Canada’s new workers each year. The limited foreign arrivals is contributing to the highest job vacancy rate in Canadian history, with nearly 1 million jobs currently unfilled.

Pursuing the target has also led to IRCC reducing its selection standards. When it launched Express Entry in 2015, IRCC said the new Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) was a scientific way of selecting candidates best positioned to succeed in the labour market.

Prior to the pandemic, a candidate needed a CRS score of around 470 to be invited to apply for permanent residence. Last year, however, IRCC brought the score down to as low as 75, so it could get more in-Canada candidates to count towards its 401,000 admissions target. In other words, the Canadian government felt it was more important to achieve this target than to use the own evidence-based criteria it has set to evaluate an Express Entry candidate’s suitability to succeed in our economy.

This is not to say that those with lower CRS scores are unable to contribute to Canada. History shows that immigrants of all socio-economic backgrounds do make overwhelmingly positive contributions. But rather, this observation is meant to point out the disconnect in the Canadian government’s immigration policy.

It remains to be seen how well those who gained permanent residence via Express Entry with a lower CRS score will do in the labour market. Chances are they will do just fine, but IRCC and Statistics Canada research strongly suggests candidates with higher human capital end up with higher earnings and better overall labour market outcomes. If this holds true, IRCC will have given up the opportunity to select higher-potential immigration candidates in exchange for breaking Canada’s annual admissions record.

IRCC concedes that the focus on the target has made backlogs even worse. The department now sits on a backlog featuring 1.8 million people, up from 1.5 million in July 2021. This is because IRCC focused on processing in-Canada applications while existing and new applications were given less priority since they would not count towards the 401,000 admissions goal. Unfortunately, this is creating a vicious cycle.

The backlog will continue to slow the arrival of economic class immigrants from abroad, further stalling labour force and economic growth. In addition, family reunification and refugee resettlement processing will also remain slower.

As noted, IRCC and Immigration Minister Sean Fraser came out on January 31 to do some damage control by acknowledging the scale of the backlog problem and outlining the steps being taken to get processing times back to IRCC’s service standards.

This is a positive step but there are other things the government can do in the meantime to get the immigration system back on track.

Suggestions to get the immigration system back on track

It would be beneficial for IRCC to communicate to the public its strategy to tackle the backlogs. Applicants have a right to know where they stand and when they can expect decisions to be made on their files. It would be better for IRCC to be transparent and honest about the actual length of time it is taking to process a given application stream as opposed to the current approach of applicants being left in the dark for much of the process.

IRCC also needs to sustain its processing capacity at a high level throughout the year. Its processing capacity understandably fell immediately following the pandemic. However it was not until June 2021 that it began to finalize permanent residence applications at a much higher rate and they eventually managed to finalize over 500,000 in total last year.

According to IRCC, sustaining this level will see it get through its entire permanent residence inventory by the end of this year. IRCC should keep up this pace beyond 2022 so that all applicants see their files processed in a timely manner.

IRCC should also resume Express Entry invitations to Federal Skilled Worker Program (FSWP) and Canadian Experience Class (CEC) candidates immediately for a variety of reasons.

First, Express Entry is crucial to Canada’s economic recovery and alleviating current labour shortages.

Second, given its current Express Entry inventory, IRCC should be able to reduce processing times for new Express Entry applications by the second half of the year, and hence issuing Invitations to Apply (ITA) now would not create significant additional pressure for the department since they will be in better position to process such applications in a timely manner once they are submitted (applicants have up to 60 days from when they receive an ITA to submit a completed permanent residence application).

Third, the rationale for pausing FSWP invitations (travel restrictions) has not existed since Canada lifted travel restrictions on all Confirmation of Permanent Residence (COPR) holders in June 2021. It is also worth noting IRCC has been processing work permit, study permit, and temporary resident visa applications of those abroad over the past year, so there is little justification for the slow pace of FSWP application processing.

Fourth, resuming draws would help to restore Canada’s global competitive standing. The pause in FSWP draws over the past year has caused global talent to consider their immigration options elsewhere.

Fifth, a sustained pause in draws will see thousands of CEC candidates lose their status in Canada and the absence of a solution by IRCC will force such individuals to leave Canada.

This leads to a final suggestion: IRCC should introduce another temporary public policy to allow those in Canada seeking to remain as a permanent resident to extend their temporary status in an easier way. For example, it can offer a one-time work permit extension to all CEC candidates residing in Canada that have been affected by the pause in Express Entry invitations to them since September 2021.

IRCC did something similar last year when it offered a one-time 18 month work permit extension to Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) holders so they would have more time to obtain permanent residence. Among the benefits of this approach is it would give Canadian employers sustained access to such work permit holders and would mitigate the labour market risks of seeing tens of thousands of workers having to leave Canada due to the expiry of their work permit status.

The Canadian government can not undo the past, but what they can do is think creatively to come up with solutions to the negative consequences that have occurred due to their pursuit of over 400,000 immigrant landings in 2021. Coming up with effective solutions will be to everyone’s benefit and would be another major reason to commend IRCC.

Source: Canada’s decision to land over 400,000 immigrants in 2021 has come at a cost

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

IRCC Departmental Performance Report: #Citizenship

2022/02/03 Leave a comment

While I haven’t gone through the entire DPR, I have looked at the citizenship section, excerpted below, and have the following comments.

Percent of applications within service standards: Only 9 percent compared to the target of 80 percent, given the closing of the citizenship program for a number of months. IRCC relies on growing application volumes and dated systems as well to explain the dramatic decline (dated systems have long been an issue that IRCC has neglected but is being addressed with funding in Budget 2021). IRCC has also recently implemented online applications.

The other factor not acknowledged by the department is that citizenship is a lessor priority even under normal times.

In the context of the pandemic, some prioritization made sense (e.g., facilitating the entry of temporary agriculture and other workers); in others, it was more of a political and policy choice (e.g., lowering the Express Entry score to 75 for the large CEC draw or the focus on attaining the political target of 401,000 Permanent Residents).

Service Satisfaction: Basically met, less than 1 percent under the target of 90 percent. However, the DPR usefully contrasts the experience of applicants affected by COVID (82 percent) and those that were unaffected (96 percent).

Percentage of permanent residents who become Canadian citizens: This is IRCC’s and possibly the government’s most meaningless indicator, as it refers to all permanent residents, whether they arrived five or 50 years ago, and not the more meaningful measure of the percentage of permanent residents who with the last five-to-nine years (previous Census period) that measures naturalization of recent immigrants. The report even. states that: “naturalization rates in Canada have remained relatively steady and have demonstrated a slight growth” despite the the StatsCan report, Trends in the Citizenship Rate Among New Immigrants to Canada, that showed that the naturalization “rate has been falling among recent immigrants to Canada.”

Number of people granted Canadian citizenship: Only 58,000 compared to the target of 200,000, given the same reasons as for not meeting the service standards.

No mention, of course, of political commitments that have not yet been implemented, whether it be the release of the revised citizenship study guide or the elimination of citizenship fees.

———————

Eligible permanent residents become Canadian citizens2

Indicator: Percentage of citizenship applications that are processed within service standards

Date to achieve target: March 2021

Target: At least 80%. Actual result 9%. Status: Target not met

Result explanation: In 2020–21, 9% of all citizenship grant applications were processed within the 12-month service standard. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic related closures and the implementation of business resumption initiatives for the Citizenship Program, growing application volumes and dated systems have caused increased processing times. IRCC is exploring ways to deliver improved processing as it moves from paper-based applications to e-applications and continues to advance e-initiatives including the online knowledge test and virtual ceremonies.

MethodologyRationale: This indicator measures the degree to which IRCC is able to meet published service standards for those applying for Canadian citizenship.

Calculation / formula: Service standard adherence for citizenship grants is calculated as the percentage of completed applications that were processed within the published service standard. The performance target is to process 80% of completed applications within the 12-month service standard. (This standard is effective for all applications received after April 1st, 2015.) Data Source: GCMS Baseline: 2016-17: 90%

Definitions: NIL

Notes: NIL

Last year’s target: At least 80%

Last year’s actual result: 65%

Indicator: Percentage of citizenship applicants who report they were satisfied overall with the services they received

Date to achieve target: March 2021

Target: At least 90%

Actual result: 89.2%

Status: Target not met

Result explanation: While the client satisfaction rate has remained steady and satisfactory over recent years, 2020–21 saw the lowest applicant satisfaction rate of the past reporting years, including a drop of over 5% between 2019–20 and 2020–21. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to office closures and processing delays, may have had a direct impact on client satisfaction levels over the past year. IRCC’s analysis shows a lower satisfaction rate of 82% for citizenship grant clients who said they were affected by the pandemic when interacting with IRCC, compared to a satisfaction rate of 96% for citizenship grant clients not affected by the pandemic when interacting with IRCC. IRCC remains committed to making services as efficient and client-focused as possible so that citizenship applicants are satisfied with their citizenship naturalization process.

MethodologyRationale: Client satisfaction is the broadest measure of overall success in providing excellent client service. It is the client’s perception of the service experience.

Calculation / formula: Percentage of respondents who answered ‘yes’ to ‘Citizenship Grant’ OR ‘Citizenship Certificate’ within the question “Have you completed the application process for in year” AND who answered ‘yes’ to the question “Overall, were you satisfied with the service you received from IRCC?”. The question regarding satisfaction is asked twice in the survey – once at the beginning of the survey, and once at the end. Here we will capture the latter question, which provides the respondent with a ‘yes/no’ response option.

Data Source: IRCC Client Satisfaction Survey Baseline: 2016: 94% (composite average for Citizenship Grants and Citizenship Certificates (i.e. Proofs)). The baseline is based on responses from the IRCC annual client satisfaction survey conducted in 2016.

Definitions: The Client Satisfaction Survey questionnaire focused on drivers of client satisfaction, such as timeliness, access and ease of use. Questions are developed based on the Common Measurement Tool (CMT). Respondents are directly asked the question, so the definition of “satisfaction” is determined by the respondent.

Notes: The narrative will be supplemented with information from additional indicators and data on areas such as ease of process, ability to find information/get updates, etc.

Last year’s target: At least 90%

Last year’s actual result: 95%

Indicator: Percentage of permanent residents who become Canadian citizens

Date to achieve target: December 2021

Target: At least 85%

Actual result (interim): 86%

Status: Result to be achieved in the future

Result explanation: The ultimate goal of the Citizenship Program is to facilitate naturalization for eligible permanent residents to become Canadians. This indicator reflects naturalization rates in Canada and is based on the 2016 Census. Over the last decade, naturalization rates in Canada have remained relatively steady and have demonstrated a slight growth. As this indicator is based on the Census, the result of the last fiscal year remains the same and there will be new naturalization rates based on the 2021 Census reported in the next fiscal year. Between fiscal year 2018–19 and 2020–21, over 512,000 permanent residents applied and met the requirements and were thus granted Canadian citizenship.

MethodologyRationale: Canada’s immigration model encourages newcomers to naturalize (become citizens) so that they can benefit from all the rights of citizenship and fully assume their responsibilities, thereby advancing their integration. Take-up rates are considered a proxy that illustrates to what extent permanent residents value Canadian citizenship.

Calculation / formula–Numerator: Permanent residents in Canada who are eligible to acquire Canadian citizenship and self-report on the Census that they have acquired Canadian citizenship. Denominator: Permanent residents in Canada who are eligible to acquire Canadian citizenship.

Data Source: Statistics Canada’s Census Baseline: 2016: 85.8%

Definitions: Naturalization: The Census instructs individuals who have applied for, and have been granted, Canadian citizenship (i.e., persons who have been issued a Canadian citizenship certificate) to self-report their citizenship as “Canada, by naturalization”.

Notes: In the performance narrative, IRCC administrative data could be used to tell the story of citizenship from an operational and policy perspective. Information on age, gender, immigration stream, and country of origin of new citizens would be considered in order to explain changing trends. It is also important to note that calculations using IRCC’s administrative data will be based on the number of people admitted as permanent residents who took up citizenship. Figures from Statistics Canada indicate that in 2011, about 6,042,200 foreign-born people in Canada were eligible to acquire citizenship. Of these, just over 5,175,100, or 85.6%, reported that they had acquired Canadian citizenship. This naturalization rate in Canada was higher than in other major immigrant-receiving countries. In telling the story of the naturalization rate, it will be important to explain the reasons why some people choose not to naturalize.Last year’s targetAt least 85%Last year’s actual result86%Programs tagged as contributing to this result

Citizenship Programs

  • Citizenship 2020-21 Spending: $83.3 M2020-21, Number of Full Time Equivalents: 917 See the infographic
  • Results
    • ▼People who meet the criteria for citizenship are successful at becoming Canadian citizens
      • Indicator: Number of people who are granted citizenship
      • Date to achieve target: March 2021
      • Target: At least 200,000
      • Actual result: 57,823
      • Status: Target not met
      • Result explanation: Due to the strained processing capacity of the Citizenship Program caused by COVID-19 closures almost 58,000 residents who applied and met the requirements were granted Canadian citizenship in 2020-21. Even before the pandemic, growing application volumes and dated systems strained the operational processing model for the Citizenship Program resulting in increased processing times. The Citizenship Program is continuing to explore ways to improve processing as it moves to online applications and advances online services such citizenship ceremonies, interviews and hearings and online testing.
      • MethodologyExplanation/rationale: The main objective of the Citizenship Program is to encourage and facilitate naturalization. The program seeks to ensure that all eligible permanent residents who apply are successful at becoming Canadians. The number of individuals who are granted citizenship is a measure of how this result is achieved.
      • Formula/calculation: Using GCMS, for the given fiscal year, count the total number of individuals who were granted citizenship and who have taken the oath when required: This count is based on the Citizenship Effective Date. This is the date that an applicant, who was granted citizenship in GCMS, is confirmed to have taken the oath of citizenship. In instances where a person is not required to take the oath, the effective date of citizenship is the date that they are granted citizenship in GCMS.
      • Application Categories: Adoption, Grant, Resumption
      • Citizenship Effective Date: the given fiscal year Count of persons
      • Measurement strategy: Data is extracted annually from GCMS. Baseline: 2016-2017: 109,543
      • Notes/definitions: Canadian citizen: Under the Citizenship Act, a person is described as a Canadian citizen if the person is Canadian by birth (either born in Canada or born outside Canada to a Canadian citizen who was themselves either born in Canada or granted citizenship) or the person has applied for a grant of citizenship and has received Canadian citizenship (naturalization). Grant of citizenship (Naturalization): Grant of citizenship or naturalization is the formal process by which a person who is not a Canadian citizen becomes a Canadian citizen.
      • Note: The count includes all individuals who became citizens of Canada under Sections 5(1), 5(2), 5.1 and 11(1) of the Citizenship Act.
      • Last year’s target: At least 138,000
      • Last year’s actual result: 247,139

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →