It has long been recognized that language proficiency is crucially important for finding work. For this reason, there should be more opportunity for language training, especially at advanced levels. As of January 2000, newcomers in Alberta will be able to extend their language training to LINC 4, (note that in Ontario, immigrants are able to access LINC 5 as well). We commend CIC’s extension of language training to LINC 4, but recommend parity with Ontario. We also recommend that these higher levels not come out of the existing LINC budget. If no new money is invested in ESL, the effect of extended language learning opportunities to some will be restricted enrollments for others. We recommend federal programs that provide assistance to refugees be comparable across the country and that there be a greater emphasis placed on language and job training.
The adaptive advantages of compatriot communities commonly found in larger urban centres may be partly compensated for by greater emphasis on provision of culturally sensitive services in smaller centres. This is particularly important in Medicine Hat, where a majority of refugees reported having experienced discrimination.
There is a clear need for improved employment-related programs for refugees, both in terms of job training and job-finding. The unemployment rate for adult refugees interviewed in this study was 16%, more than twice as high as the provincial jobless rate. In Alberta, 18% of the working population has part-time employment, but for working refugees the average is 28%. Furthermore, 30% of currently employed refugees are working in temporary jobs, more than twice the national average. The refugees themselves reported a need for increased support in the area of employment. In all cities more effort must be put into assisting refugees to find satisfactory employment to enhance their economic and social integration. There should be provisions for additional job training for those whose skills are not immediately transferable to the Canadian context.
A skills assessment process that takes into account prior learning should be put into place to identify the areas where newcomers need to update their skills. This process would expedite training programs by eliminating repetition of content areas with which the newcomers are fully familiar.
We urge the provincial and federal governments not to restrict job training to those who are EI eligible. Newcomers are caught in an impossible situation because of this restriction.
There should be continued support for the host program, which matches refugees with Canadian-born residents. The majority of refugees who participated are satisfied with this program and maintain contact with their hosts.
Many refugees indicated that there were additional services that they would have appreciated, particularly language training, employment services and general information services. The fact that refugees in Edmonton and Calgary accessed services after the first year indicates that there is a continuing demand, and also potential benefits to Canadian society, if additional services are available. It is important that individuals be provided with the opportunities to best utilize the skills they have brought with them. An extension of Resettlement Assistance Program beyond one year would accommodate the small minority of refugees who have special needs. Extended living allowances could be considered on a case by case basis.
Settlement agencies are currently funded according to a complex formula. The nature of the formula is not clear to many service providers who believe that their funding is based only on the number of clients served, rather than taking into account the number of sessions provided. (Providers’ perceptions are based on the nature of the reporting form required by the funders.) This perception may make it problematic for agencies to provide the level of support necessary for those clients who have multiple barriers to integration. When asked what improvements are needed to services, the refugees noted that they needed more information in general. This task falls to settlement agencies that are already over-extended. We therefore recommend that the funding formula for settlement agencies be made transparent in terms of all the criteria used in the determination of funding level.
Refugees in Lethbridge (and those movers who left Lethbridge), more than any other group of refugees in the host centres under study, reported a high degree of dissatisfaction with the settlement services they received, both in terms of availability and quality. These problems need to be addressed. Lethbridge appears to have many advantages in that the unemployment rate is low, the community in general is welcoming, and it is large enough to offer many amenities. However, the level of unhappiness with the existing settlement services is such that some people feel compelled to leave.
The refugees who participated in this study were very concerned about the fact that many were unemployed, underemployed, and working in part-time or temporary positions. As noted in the recommendations above, they indicated that there is a need for more assistance finding jobs, and better job training opportunities.
Several refugees stated that although they were qualified for certain positions, they were not considered because they had no Canadian experience or Canadian references. We recommend that an employer-government cost-sharing program be reintroduced to provide paid work experience for refugees. Although many refugees volunteer to obtain Canadian experience, there is no formal mechanism in place to ensure that they are not exploited or that they are able to acquire the type of experience they need.
There is a pressing need for a policy that addresses the recognition of foreign credentials. A large proportion of adult refugees had post-secondary training and some kind of occupational credentials on arrival, but almost 60% of those employed stated that they were underemployed. The failure to recognize the credentials held by refugees represents an unnecessary and debilitating waste of human resources. This is not an issue that can be resolved by the settlement service providers; we therefore recommend that CIC take the responsibility to open up discussions about this issue with employers, along with professional organizations, unions, and academic institutions.
In the course of the interviews with the refugees, it became apparent that they had serious concerns about some of the costs that they are required to pay.
Several refugees stated that it is a hardship to be required within the first year of arrival to start paying back the travel loan that brought them to Canada. Furthermore, many refugees seemed to be unaware of the landing fee, and had therefore concluded that the travel loan (landing fees and airfare) was inordinately expensive. It is recommended that repayment not be required under any circumstances until after the first year. It is also recommended that refugees be given very clear information on the nature of these costs and their responsibilities. The people with whom we spoke had received contradictory information about their responsibilities. Shortly after the completion of this study, CIC proposed the elimination of the landing fee for refugees. We strongly endorse the proposal to eliminate this fee. We also recommend that under no circumstances should there be a requirement to start repayment of travel loans until after the first year.
There are clear differences in the cost of living, and especially housing, from one city to the next. We recommend that housing allowances be scaled in accordance with the actual living costs in a given city. This would require a change in the federal-provincial agreement regarding living assistance.
Many of the refugees indicated that they received conflicting information about federal assistance. Some people felt that they were being asked to go to work as soon as possible, despite the fact that they were in need of further language/job training, and despite the fact that they were still within their first year of arrival. It is recommended that refugees be given explicit information about the terms of sponsorship at the outset.
Most refugees want to become citizens of Canada as soon as they are eligible. However, a significant proportion are unable to obtain citizenship because they do not have enough money to pay the fees. It is recommended that these fees be waived for refugees.
The recommendations put forward here, if implemented, should facilitate the integration of refugees into the communities to which they are destined and into Alberta society. Refugees have already undergone tremendous disruption in their lives and are in need of support, especially in the areas of English language, employment-related services, and general settlement advice. Although these services are available in each city, the range and quality of programs vary. If the programs provided to refugees are improved, their lives and those of the people around them are likely to improve as well.