The last century has seen a huge number of regulations emerge to protect the rights of workers, but migrants can often be shut out of such regulations, either by a lack of awareness or a lack of applicability.

A new study from the University of Western Ontario explores how migrant workers in the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) fare in terms of access to information on a range of workers rights, including health and safety and employment standards.

The SAWP is designed to allow employers to recruit foreign workers on a temporary basis, and provides a range of worker protections in areas such as wages, working conditions and housing, with all participating employers required to abide by them.

“The program is set up a little naively—it assumes the employer can, and will, take care of all these things. But these individuals experience so many larger structural barriers to actually asserting those rights,” the researchers say.  “The things we espouse about these programs are not actually happening in practice.”

A fresh perspective

The researchers specifically wanted to explore how these regulations, and the application of them, are working from a workers’ perspective, and conducted a number of interviews to try and give voice to this under-represented group.

“It’s not just a stint of work—living and working on the farm is their life,” the researchers explain. “It’s one of the most hazardous occupations. Now, couple that with not speaking the language and no orientation to their legal protection as workers. They are not aware of (their rights) and, even if they are, there are a lot of risks.”

A number of barriers existed to prevent participants from accessing things they were entitled to, such as medical care.  These barriers included a lack of transportation, inadequate language skills or long work hours.  What was perhaps most pernicious however was the fear of losing one’s job, with many of the workers revealing that they were often told to ‘man up’ when they were struggling physically, with the threat of being replaced looming large.

“Many of these individuals feel like they have to normalize risk. And not just risk. They feel like they need to normalize the possibility they’ll get injured, normalize the possibility they could die on the job because of that need to keep this employment,” the researchers explain.

Unable to refuse

Despite often objecting to the conditions they faced at work, many of the people interviewed for the research felt distinctly uncomfortable complaining or refusing to work under them.  There was very much a desire to stay on the right side of the employer to ensure ongoing work was secured.

This means that workers are often placed into conditions that can be exploitative or hazardous, which may jeopardize their ability to secure work in future if they fall ill or obtain an injury.  As such, the onus should really be on the authorities to ensure the regulations are upheld rather than the workers themselves.

“Workers want Canadian agencies to play more of a role in carrying out unannounced inspections that can flag problematic workplace and living conditions,” the researcher explains.  “They want their employers to be more responsible to maintain workplace safety and protection.”