+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

residency obligation(Canada PR visa holder more than 3 years outside of Canada)

canuck78

VIP Member
Jun 18, 2017
53,066
12,802
IMHO, RO is a policy that works against free market forces. It's intelligent choice for PR not to stay in Canada if he can get a better job somewhere else. Not only it benefits PR, it benefits all Canadians, by making labor market less saturated and increasing wages of remaining Canadians. Why act against natural forces, why bring and keep so many people when prices are going up and well paying jobs are harder to find?
It seems like this leniency you describe is a temporary thing born out of pandemic, not related to market forces at all, and probably most benefiting those who breached RO during the pandemic (and not before).
A global workforce and more work being done remotely actually creates the need for longer ROs. If PRs or citizens didn’t have access to social programs, healthcare, education, etc. that are dependent on tax dollars then ROs wouldn’t be a big deal but that’s not the case. If people will have longterm access to various services funded by tax dollars you need people to remain in Canada as taxpayers for as many years as possible not working abroad and returning to retirement, post secondary education at domestic rates, when there is a need for healthcare, etc. Would also add that automation is often the solution when there are labour market shortages and not necessarily higher wages.
 

jakklondon

Hero Member
Oct 17, 2021
582
139
A global workforce and more work being done remotely actually creates the need for longer ROs.
I believe global/remote work eliminates a need for physical migration of workers to Canada, rather than bind them to it. As a side note, I personally do not like some of the outcomes observed, such as depreciation of wages in developed countries due to massive outsourcing, but it is what it is and there is not much we can do about it. It's that or we have to eliminate free trade (not possible).


If PRs or citizens didn’t have access to social programs, healthcare, education, etc. that are dependent on tax dollars then ROs wouldn’t be a big deal but that’s not the case.

But every new PR is in exact same spot as a returning PR. None of the new PRs lived, worked and paid taxes in Canada, yet they are eligible for all benefits from day one or within months. Do you feel the same about newly arriving PR's as those in breach of RO, and if not why?


If people will have longterm access to various services funded by tax dollars you need people to remain in Canada as taxpayers for as many years as possible not working abroad and returning to retirement, post secondary education at domestic rates, when there is a need for healthcare, etc.

I would agree to the extent that PRs should not be using and abusing Canadian PR status for selfish purposes , such as: coming to Canada as a PR in a young age, getting subsidized education and then fleeing away to benefit other countries (I would say they owe and should pay back whatever subsidy received as PRs, it's not fair for Canadian tax payer to be used to foot their educational bills); for similar reasons I am not advocating for PR to land in youth and never return to Canada until they get severely ill (so they can get free medical care), or until they retire (I am presuming that there is some kind of welfare that pays guaranteed minimum pension, regardless of your work status throughout the year. I might be wrong, but if such benefit exists this would be it). However, overwhelming majority of PRs don't fall into these categories. The great majority of RO breaches are due to lack of opportunity to settle in Canada under it's current economic conditions. You don't see similar economic conditions in the US. Extremely few immigrants in the US would be desperate to get same or less compensation than they would out of the US, therefore you don't see a lot of US PR holders leaving US and living abroad. These conditions are not permanent. Canadian economy was not always like and will not always be like that. There could be a time in future when all the skilled immigrants currently left on sidelines are genuinely needed. Why not let PRs return then? And why not let them begone until then, so remaining Canadians can have less competition on labor market?


Would also add that automation is often the solution when there are labour market shortages and not necessarily higher wages.
In theory yes, but in practice automation does not happen as market shortages occur (it may happen in future and take long time, by which labor force usually adapts, learns new skills and etc.). At least in short terms there will be improvement in labor market (we saw this happening during pandemic in some countries heavily relying on seasonal foreign labor, which closed off borders for most part of 2020, resulting in shortage of workers and increase in wages. There is not much automation going on in construction field or in farming, and a lot of truly skilled labor can not be automated due to complexity of the tasks that AI is not remotely able to approach).
However, if I take your argument for granted then why not simply automate instead of bringing more new PRs? Why keep bringing all the new PRs while existing PRs are desperate to find employment and leave country for lack of it?