Caregivers Journeys: Conditions of Precarity and Exploitation for International Domestic Workers in Canada

Background: In 2014, the Canadian government introduced changes to Canada’s temporary foreign worker program for domestic caregivers, previously known as the “Live-in-Caregiver Program”. The newly named “Caregiver Program” removed the long-contested “live-in” requirement for domestic caregivers who work with children, older adults and people with disabilities. Caregivers are the only group of temporary foreign workers who are classified as low-skill/low-wage AND who have the possibility of applying for permanent residence if they accrue the requisite 3,900 work hours. The majority of people working in the Caregiver Program are Filipina women who face long periods of separation from their own children and immediate family (Parrenas, 2005).

Purpose and Methods: This study explores how conditions placed on people working in Canada’s Caregiver program impacts their sense of well-being and vulnerability to exploitation and abuse. This study received guidance from a community advisory committee of immigration advocates, front-line workers, and caregivers. Peer researchers (people with lived experience as international caregivers) worked closely in developing the research design. Peer researchers worked closely with the authors to conduct a total of 21 in-depth individual interviews and two focus groups in Toronto and Calgary, which are two Canadian urban centres that have high volumes of temporary foreign workers.

The majority of interviews were conducted in English or Tagalog. All interviews were transcribed in their original language, then non-English portions were translated by bilingual staff. Translations followed Brislin’s (1970) translation method with decentering as described by Willegerodt and colleagues (2005) to enhance semantic and content equivalence. Data analysis of transcripts and field notes employed feminist discourse analysis methods. We focus on language as performative (Butler, 1990) and how meaning is relational and dialogic (Bakhtin, 1981a, 1986).

Results: Caregivers who participated in this study expressed concern that the new Caregiver Program retains the same power imbalance as the “Live-in-Caregiver” Program; workers continue to be “tied” to their employers through closed work permits. While the removal of the live-in-requirement improves the quality of life for people who can have “a life of their own”, some are forced to remain with abusive employers due to challenges of renewing their work permit.  Many caregivers form informal networks through their church or via social media.. These tight-knit communities, however, have limits for people who face extended periods of uncertainty in the program, long periods of family separation, and financial hardship associated with renewing their work permits. 

Conclusions and Implications:  This research contributes to a growing body of scholarship in Canada, that examines the social and psychological consequences of precarious immigration status (Goldring & Landolt, 2013). In this paper, we illustrate how government regulations and bureaucratic practices converge to deny international domestic workers’ basic human rights, including the right to mobility and family reunification. We also consider the complex role of informal networks and use of social media which serve to strengthen community and sense of belonging, while also exacerbating the stigma associated with precarious immigration status.