Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

RBC replaces Canadian staff with foreign workers


Recommended Posts

Who was the person on this thread that said I had my position because I wasn't affected by the situation ?

Don't be so concerned with my motivations - I'm sure you have motivations too.

If I said it, it was long ago on another thread before I knew your story.

You're right about not worrying about motivations, but it does cut both ways, You've made assumptions about others for this same discussion - that all they do is complain but not adapt to the situation, say. This affects all of us, whether we're sitting pretty or dealing with layoff or who knows what. Society is interdependent. It's not good for any of us if people's hopes are stymied or they have to work at Mcjobs. It costs all of us money at the least, as well as what ever moral feelings we have about it. Especially people who are shoved aside when they are older, that's where it becomes really difficult. We should do our best to help people find a new place in the workforce, it will keep Canada the great place it is to live. We should start by severely limiting the temp worker program, and also restricting immigration much more. First dibs should go to Canadians. Global village is a very nice concept, but if your country won't look out for your wellbeing, no other country will.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 417
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You're right about not worrying about motivations, but it does cut both ways, You've made assumptions about others for this same discussion - that all they do is complain but not adapt to the situation, say.

Well, I would say that I'm talking about arguments here - complaints made on this thread, and adapting - well, maybe I could say "accepting", that would be better.

This affects all of us, whether we're sitting pretty or dealing with layoff or who knows what. Society is interdependent. It's not good for any of us if people's hopes are stymied or they have to work at Mcjobs. It costs all of us money at the least, as well as what ever moral feelings we have about it. Especially people who are shoved aside when they are older, that's where it becomes really difficult.

Yes, and all of this happened to me too, so I have perspective on it.

We should do our best to help people find a new place in the workforce, it will keep Canada the great place it is to live. We should start by severely limiting the temp worker program, and also restricting immigration much more.

We should absolutely do more for transitions, yes I agree. If we're going to displace people then we need to do more for transitions.

Do we need to limit the temp worker program ? Maybe we do. But as part of that we need to elevate the dialogue around what happens with economic policies such as this. There is definitely an overall challenge where wages can be pushed down and business can get all the gains. For us to discuss the overall costs/benefits, though, we have to engage with these questions openly.

What is the opposite of open ? Industries lobbying for policies that benefit themselves only, with the economic benefits not explained to the public before policies are enacted, and not measured during and after are some examples. Others examples might be: protesting every economic policy on the idea that some job is lost somewhere, and making an emotional case in the media based on that and nothing else. Such arguments make it impossible to have a real dialogue, and push government towards secretive policies.

First dibs should go to Canadians. Global village is a very nice concept, but if your country won't look out for your wellbeing, no other country will.

Economic policies should benefit Canadians of course.

Here's something else to thing about, though, and I don't have a strong idea of what it means: the banks can move their money offshore without any controversy as they had this week. They can move the work to people on the other side of the world, no problem. But if the people try to come to the work, they're restricted. That goes for us too.

I think a more natural way would be for people to have the same freedom to move as money does, but I don't know how we could make that happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we need to limit the temp worker program ? Maybe we do.

There's no maybe about it, that program should be stopped immediately.

Our unemployment numbers are going up, more and more are under employed, more and more are struggling to make ends meet because wages haven't kept up with the cost of living..

The last thing this country needs is the filthy rich corporate scum bringing in TFW to steal jobs from Canadians so they can increase their profit margins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no maybe about it, that program should be stopped immediately.

Stopped ?

Absolutely stopped ?

Why do you say that ?

The last thing this country needs is the filthy rich corporate scum bringing in TFW to steal jobs from Canadians so they can increase their profit margins.

Right - your input here is an example of the type of dialogue that prevents open discussion, IMO.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stopped ?

Absolutely stopped ?

Why do you say that ?Right - your input here is an example of the type of dialogue that prevents open discussion, IMO.

Yes absolutely stopped. Why? Because it serves CANADIANS no purpose other than to drag our wages down. The only ones who benefit from that program are those who take the money and run, leaving Canadian taxpayers to fill the void.

Ya, and open discussion means what? Another 5-10 yrs of this bs program while some rigged study panel looks into the 'merits' of it while they're being paid off by the corporate filth who already benefit from it? That type of open discussion?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you say so. But still: Why is the quality of life of a Canadian more important than the quality of life of a non-Canadian?

I live in Canada, I'd like to help out our own before we can spread that around the world. What RBC has done here is simply add to the unemployment numbers if these people cannot find another job with a decent pay.
Link to post
Share on other sites

From OP article:

RBC said the work is being outsourced for cost savings and efficiency. “External suppliers with the right skills allow us to introduce new efficiencies, continually improve our service at reduced cost and reinvest in initiatives that enhance the client experience,” a statement from the bank read.

I guess Billions of dollars in profits quarterly is just not enough for the overpaid ceo's and executives of our banks.

If they were really trying for "cost savings and efficiency" then they should cut back on those obscene salaries and perks that come out of their customer's accounts.

This is just yet another example of how those with the ability to make the rules make them to suit themselves.

The bonuses and benefits paid to these elitists all comes out of our pockets. and while I won't begrudge anyone a decent wage for a job well done, this is just greed, pure and simple.

It used to be that you'd take your kid with his first ten dollars down to open a bank account in an effort to teach them fiscal responsibility, but these days you have to explain why those same dollars just seem to evaporate via service charges and fees.

Those 'service' fees keep going up and considering the last time I stepped into a bank instead of doing it myself (which the banks all said would let them REDUCE fees and improve 'Service', it just goes to show how greedy these institutions are.

One of the biggest pyramid schemes of all times. These institutions these days are all about moving money out of the average Joe's pocket and putting it into yet even more yachts and mansions for an already bloated bureaucratic old boy's club.

"initiatives that enhance the client experience" my ass! My bank account certainly hasn't been 'enhanced' by these gluttonous institutions.

Edited by CliffStir
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the quality of life of a Canadian more important than the quality of life of a non-Canadian?

Because we are in Canada?????????

And these are Canadian institutions that were built by Canadian money from Canadian citizen's?

I rather doubt that when these banks need assistance to survive an economic downturn or some other financial calamity that India's taxpayers will be donating to the cause.

Nope, the rich executives will be sitting on their yachts in the south pacific while our government uses our money to bail them out.

You already see it happening around the world and to think we are immune is just hiding our heads in the sand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the opposite of open ? Industries lobbying for policies that benefit themselves only, with the economic benefits not explained to the public before policies are enacted, and not measured during and after are some examples.

Yes, secretive meetings held behind closed doors, something you know damn well has been going on for years in Ottawa.

Yes, and all of this happened to me too, so I have perspective on it.

I have no doubt, but I still think you're full of crap. I stand to be corrected but I'm still betting you saw the writing on the wall and transitioned yourself into a job that involves screwing people out of theirs. I just don't buy this sudden dawning awareness act you're putting on for our benefit. You've put too much effort into dismissing or downplaying the seedier aspects of lobbying when apologizing for globalization for years now

I'm reminded of a bitter and jaded old skipper I had years ago; "Kid", he'd say, "you gotta screw people before they screw you if you want to get ahead in this world". I guess I really should have followed his advice, I'm his age now and probably bitter and jaded enough but I just don't know if I have it in me to screw people. My own perspective on being screwed is still too fresh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not inherently more important on a philosophical level, but it should be more important to the people making policy decisions for Canada. Nations should consider the security and prosperity of their own people first and foremost. If our government's goal was to give away Canada's wealth and bring up the world's average "quality of life" until the two equaled out, we'd be living in third world conditions pretty damn fast, and that is not something I want, nor I imagine do most other Canadians want that.

Some level of funding can and perhaps should be spent to help others, but if that is the recognized goal, then it should be classified and explained as such, rather than trying to pretend that something is a mutually beneficial trade agreement.

OK that's a pretty good answer, thank you.

On the philosophical side: If nations "should consider the security and prosperity of their own people first and foremost", then should provinces do the same? Should Albertans be upset that Newfoundlanders are stealing their jobs?

On the practical side: After many years of policies favouring outsourcing, temporary workers, high immigration (~250,000/year), it is obvious to me that Canada's "quality of life" is increasing and is amongst the highest in the world. There are costs and benefits to Canada in these policies. The costs have been pointed out throughout the thread but not the benefits, here are two:

-Lowering some labour costs allows Canadian companies to be more competitive and increase other jobs. For example, without temporary workers or some outsourcing a company my not be able to justify investing an investment that would add new jobs to Canadians. Or perhaps if labour costs become too high then entire companies would shut down and instead of "loosing" a few jobs to outsourcing/temporary workers, Canada would loose more jobs.

-Business is relationships. Undoubtedly immigration, outsourcing and temporary workers increase relationships between Canadians and non-Canadians and should increase trade and lead to new business for Canadian companies and new jobs for Canadians

The fact that the net results for Canadians have been positive with the current policies suggest that they are working - it would need some strong evidence to convince me that without temporary workers and fewer immigrants Canadians would have a higher quality of life. There is certainly room for improvement. I would look at increasing immigration and temporary workers and improving the selection process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a Canadian gets that job, he starts paying taxes and stops claiming EI or whatever. He starts buying goods and services and some of the money he's earning will spin off to the benefit of other Canadians.

All other things being equal, it's simply better for me if that work is being done in Canada. Selfish, maybe, but "rational self interest" is a primary tenet of those who are advocating on behalf of the outsourcers in the first place.

-k

In some cases yes - a job lost is a job lost. However, in some cases, if a non-Canadian gets the job another Canadian gets a better job. In some cases 1000 Canadians lose their job due to temporary workers, but even more Canadian jobs would have been lost without temporary workers. Perhaps in some cases 100 temporary workers created 50 new jobs for Canadians?

Our relatively low unemployment rate suggests to me that our current policies are in line with our own self-interest.

Edited by carepov
Link to post
Share on other sites

How does working at a Tim Horton's qualify as a "temporary job" Those are permament jobs with temp workers used as cheap labor. Temp wokers make sense in seasonal work, or other temporary situations. With ongoing jobs we should be hiring Canadians. If Canadians aren't applying for those jobs, that means the pay's too low and needs to be raised. That will give Canadians more spending power meaning more jobs created in Canada, instead of those wages going back home with the temp worker. Temp workers should only be used for temporary needs. Actors, high skill people working on a temporary project or farm workers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our relatively low unemployment rate suggests to me that our current policies are in line with our own self-interest.

I tend to agree, that our policies are generally sound. And our policies, in fact, prohibit replacing Canadian employees with temporary foreign workers. The banks are using a loophole in these rules to do precisely that. That was the original reason I started the thread, not to rage against outsourcing in general, but to specifically point out this particular practice, which is both unethical and in contradiction to the spirit of Canadian law and policy regarding temporary foreign workers. It is not the government and its policies that I am condemning, but the banks and these particular actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes absolutely stopped. Why? Because it serves CANADIANS no purpose other than to drag our wages down. The only ones who benefit from that program are those who take the money and run, leaving Canadian taxpayers to fill the void.

I'm thinking of the farm labour situation here, where labourers are brought in at harvest. I think that this is the original purpose of the program - would you keep those ?

Ya, and open discussion means what? Another 5-10 yrs of this bs program while some rigged study panel looks into the 'merits' of it while they're being paid off by the corporate filth who already benefit from it? That type of open discussion?

Ok - well, I can see that you have your mind made up. Maybe we should nationalize these businesses if 'filth' is running it, instead of we the people ? What do you think ?
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK that's a pretty good answer, thank you.

On the philosophical side: If nations "should consider the security and prosperity of their own people first and foremost", then should provinces do the same? Should Albertans be upset that Newfoundlanders are stealing their jobs?

Only if a mandated government policy to pay out of province workers less than Albertan's existed.

On the practical side: After many years of policies favouring outsourcing, temporary workers, high immigration (~250,000/year), it is obvious to me that Canada's "quality of life" is increasing and is amongst the highest in the world. There are costs and benefits to Canada in these policies. The costs have been pointed out throughout the thread but not the benefits, here are two:

-Lowering some labour costs allows Canadian companies to be more competitive and increase other jobs. For example, without temporary workers or some outsourcing a company my not be able to justify investing an investment that would add new jobs to Canadians.

It's already proven to be more practical to import cheap labour so why would the new jobs go to Canadians? You're suggesting "Canadians only need apply" in job advertisements?

Or perhaps if labour costs become too high then entire companies would shut down and instead of "loosing" a few jobs to outsourcing/temporary workers, Canada would loose more jobs.

So instead you figure the government should prop up companies on the backs of Canadian workers? Perhaps if losers are allowed to lose naturally the stronger winners will soon replace those positions.

-Business is relationships. Undoubtedly immigration, outsourcing and temporary workers increase relationships between Canadians and non-Canadians and should increase trade and lead to new business for Canadian companies and new jobs for Canadians

The fact that the net results for Canadians have been positive with the current policies suggest that they are working - it would need some strong evidence to convince me that without temporary workers and fewer immigrants Canadians would have a higher quality of life. There is certainly room for improvement. I would look at increasing immigration and temporary workers and improving the selection process.

Well, as I said before, the TFW program is allowing local resorts where I live in BC to ignore resident Canadian's applications for full time positions to the extent that families eventually have to break up and live in separate towns and provinces to make ends meet. Is this really what you consider to be a positive outcome?

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, secretive meetings held behind closed doors, something you know damn well has been going on for years in Ottawa.

Right - and looking at industry, government as monsters by calling for the peasants to take up pitchforks and torches ensures that we're treated like... uh... well peasants I guess.

I'm stretching the analogy but what I'm trying to say is that treating Canadian people like children helps the status quo, which includes government and business discussing "what's best for us" behind closed doors.

I have no doubt, but I still think you're full of crap. I stand to be corrected but I'm still betting you saw the writing on the wall and transitioned yourself into a job that involves screwing people out of theirs. I just don't buy this sudden dawning awareness act you're putting on for our benefit. You've put too much effort into dismissing or downplaying the seedier aspects of lobbying when apologizing for globalization for years now

First of all, that's not very nice. I don't think "screwing people over" is something any nice person wants to do, and I most certainly don't want to do that, nor do I do it. Just because we don't agree on this issue doesn't make me a different person than you, ie. immoral or unethical.

It's more of a realization that the world is closing in on us, and that putting up economic fences or complaining with rhetorical attacks on the wealthy won't help anybody.

I'm reminded of a bitter and jaded old skipper I had years ago; "Kid", he'd say, "you gotta screw people before they screw you if you want to get ahead in this world". I guess I really should have followed his advice, I'm his age now and probably bitter and jaded enough but I just don't know if I have it in me to screw people. My own perspective on being screwed is still too fresh.

You're still getting by, though. I lost what I had. Not to say that I know your situation but it seems to me you're still hanging in there, and good for you.

Why don't you guys get together and put together a press package to send to some press outlets - I'm sure they'd be sympathetic. Better yet, I can set you up with some PR people who might be able to help you pro bono. Message me if you're interested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree, that our policies are generally sound. And our policies, in fact, prohibit replacing Canadian employees with temporary foreign workers. The banks are using a loophole in these rules to do precisely that. That was the original reason I started the thread, not to rage against outsourcing in general, but to specifically point out this particular practice, which is both unethical and in contradiction to the spirit of Canadian law and policy regarding temporary foreign workers. It is not the government and its policies that I am condemning, but the banks and these particular actions.

Well you may be right in principle on this issue, however:

-Isn't it only 45 jobs?

-If the jobs are going to be outsourced anyway does it really matter how or where the foreign workers are trained?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And we need a proper industrial strategy that works on keeping manufacturing jobs in Canada as best as possible. We can't compete for lowest wages, so we should compete for productivity and quality instead.

Wages are one of the primary factors in productivity. If you're not competing on wages, you aren't going to have much luck competing on productivity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if a mandated government policy to pay out of province workers less than Albertan's existed.

It's already proven to be more practical to import cheap labour so why would the new jobs go to Canadians? You're suggesting "Canadians only need apply" in job advertisements?

So instead you figure the government should prop up companies on the backs of Canadian workers? Perhaps if losers are allowed to lose naturally the stronger winners will soon replace those positions.

Well, as I said before, the TFW program is allowing local resorts where I live in BC to ignore resident Canadian's applications for full time positions to the extent that families eventually have to break up and live in separate towns and provinces to make ends meet. Is this really what you consider to be a positive outcome?

There are many different sitations using TFW, here are two examples that I had in mind when I opined that the TFW is a net bennefit to Canadians:

-A new mine is being propsed, potentially creating 1000 jobs. With 800 TFW, the project is feasible and the investment is made, 200 Canadian jobs are created.

-A manufacturing company is bidding on a new contract for product to export to the US. A plant expansion would be required creating 300 new jobs. To quote a competive price 200 TFW are needed, 100 Canadian jobs are created.

Do these examples help you understand my position?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought to add to this discussion:

What if they weren't "temporary" workers.

What if RBC simply hired an immigrant to do the work at a much lower wage - what would our take on this be then ?

If the immigrant is one that has already achieved permanent residency (or citizenship) in Canada, then they're the same as a Canadian (our immigration systems and its merits and failings are a completely separate topic). On the other hand, if they've been brought in as an immigrant specifically to take the job at a low wage, then "our take" would be the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the immigrant is one that has already achieved permanent residency (or citizenship) in Canada, then they're the same as a Canadian (our immigration systems and its merits and failings are a completely separate topic). On the other hand, if they've been brought in as an immigrant specifically to take the job at a low wage, then "our take" would be the same.

Isn't there a program today that allows companies to bring in immigrants as sponsored to take jobs in Canada ? How do you determine when you allow the immigrant in and when you don't ?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you may be right in principle on this issue, however:

-Isn't it only 45 jobs?

-If the jobs are going to be outsourced anyway does it really matter how or where the foreign workers are trained?

Are the jobs going to be outsourced anyway? Who says? If the practice was prohibited and RBC needed that work done, what would be their options? Keep the employees in house, outsource to company in Canada that uses Canadian nationals and landed immigrants (rather than TFWs), or outsource to India without first having the workers trained in house. Without the ability to do years of in house training at the expense of Canadian employees, that decreases the relative competitive advantage of the outsourcing to India option. Therefore, they may elect to keep the jobs in house, or to outsource to a company that uses Canadian employees. So yes, it potentially does matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How does working at a Tim Horton's qualify as a "temporary job" Those are permament jobs with temp workers used as cheap labor. Temp wokers make sense in seasonal work, or other temporary situations. With ongoing jobs we should be hiring Canadians. If Canadians aren't applying for those jobs, that means the pay's too low and needs to be raised. That will give Canadians more spending power meaning more jobs created in Canada, instead of those wages going back home with the temp worker. Temp workers should only be used for temporary needs. Actors, high skill people working on a temporary project or farm workers.

Maybe canadians aren't applying for those jobs because the incentives to remain unemployed are too high. Who would apply for a job at tim hortons when they are making double on EI? Or can make as much on welfare + selling drugs/counterfeit merchandise/pirated media?

Fyi tim hortons will not operate at a loss. Higher wages does not mean more spending power, it means higher prices.

The problem with our economy isn't the "fatcats" and corporations.. It's pseudo-economists like yourself who think they know what's right for the economy and buy into populist BS because they read some threads on reddit and watched some youtube videos and looked at some funny meme jpgs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...