Booted Mexican farm workers sue Canada
TORONTO - Three Mexican farm workers who claim they were arbitrarily booted from Canada are suing the federal government and an Ontario company in a case that raises questions about the vulnerability of migrant labour.
In what could be the first such suit of its kind, the three argue their constitutional and contractual rights were violated when they were sent packing without cause or explanation.
Wayne Hanley, the national president of United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, said the case is "shamefully typical" of how the system treats non-unionized migrant workers as "disposable" commodities.
"Scores of workers are shipped back home each season on a moment's notice, while the federal government turns a blind eye," Hanley said in a statement Thursday.
"It's a ruthless system that is meant to keep workers in constant fear and under the thumbs of the agriculture industry."
The trio, Manuel Ruiz Espinoza, Salvador Reta Ruiz and Jose Ruiz Sosa, are seeking $50,000 each for breach of contract and their charter rights.
None of their claims have been proven in any court.
All three were granted a temporary work permit under the 45-year-old federal seasonal agricultural workers program.
Under the program, thousands of Mexican and Caribbean workers come to Canada each year to meet seasonal demand for agricultural labour when Canadians can't be found to do the work.
The trio were contracted to work under the program for Tigchelaar Berry Farms in Vineland, Ont., a family-run strawberry business, when they were sent home Aug. 30, 2010, according to their claim.
Two of them, hired to work from May to November, were on their third straight season with the Tigchelaar, while the third, hired to work April to December, was on his first stint.
The suit asserts the contract under which they were working only allowed them to be repatriated for "sufficient reason."
The plaintiffs say they don't why they were sent home.
"Tigchelaar did not inform any of the plaintiffs of the allegations against them, nor did Tigchelaar provide any of the plaintiffs with a meaningful or any opportunity to respond to the allegations made against each of them," the suit alleges.
The company also deducted the cost of travel back to Mexico from the men's wages even though they had already done that once, the claim states.
Tigchelaar could not be immediately reached for comment.
The federal government declined to comment because the matter is currently before the courts.
While bringing legal action on behalf of repatriated migrant workers is difficult, Toronto lawyer Michael Fenrick said the charter applies to the men.
"Anyone . . . who sets foot on Canadian soil is entitled to the protection of the charter where it is government action that's involved," Fenrick said.
In what could be the first such suit of its kind, the three argue their constitutional and contractual rights were violated when they were sent packing without cause or explanation.
Wayne Hanley, the national president of United Food and Commercial Workers Canada, said the case is "shamefully typical" of how the system treats non-unionized migrant workers as "disposable" commodities.
"Scores of workers are shipped back home each season on a moment's notice, while the federal government turns a blind eye," Hanley said in a statement Thursday.
"It's a ruthless system that is meant to keep workers in constant fear and under the thumbs of the agriculture industry."
The trio, Manuel Ruiz Espinoza, Salvador Reta Ruiz and Jose Ruiz Sosa, are seeking $50,000 each for breach of contract and their charter rights.
None of their claims have been proven in any court.
All three were granted a temporary work permit under the 45-year-old federal seasonal agricultural workers program.
Under the program, thousands of Mexican and Caribbean workers come to Canada each year to meet seasonal demand for agricultural labour when Canadians can't be found to do the work.
The trio were contracted to work under the program for Tigchelaar Berry Farms in Vineland, Ont., a family-run strawberry business, when they were sent home Aug. 30, 2010, according to their claim.
Two of them, hired to work from May to November, were on their third straight season with the Tigchelaar, while the third, hired to work April to December, was on his first stint.
The suit asserts the contract under which they were working only allowed them to be repatriated for "sufficient reason."
The plaintiffs say they don't why they were sent home.
"Tigchelaar did not inform any of the plaintiffs of the allegations against them, nor did Tigchelaar provide any of the plaintiffs with a meaningful or any opportunity to respond to the allegations made against each of them," the suit alleges.
The company also deducted the cost of travel back to Mexico from the men's wages even though they had already done that once, the claim states.
Tigchelaar could not be immediately reached for comment.
The federal government declined to comment because the matter is currently before the courts.
While bringing legal action on behalf of repatriated migrant workers is difficult, Toronto lawyer Michael Fenrick said the charter applies to the men.
"Anyone . . . who sets foot on Canadian soil is entitled to the protection of the charter where it is government action that's involved," Fenrick said.
No comments:
Post a Comment