A few months ago I blogged about the changes to EI and 'appropriate' work. Jim Flaherty said, and I quote: "There are no bad jobs."
Turns out there are bad jobs
Turns out there are bad jobs, as defined by the government, at least for foreign workers.
From the National Post:
There are bad jobs and those jobs are strippers, escorts and massage parlour workers. At least for foreign workers - on the grounds that they will be exploited and trafficked. Canadian women can still engage in these legitimate professions.
Nothing to see here
Let's begin with the fact that these are legitimate professions in legitimate industries that have legitimate businesses. There is nothing inherently illegal about the industry, the professions or the professionals. Like any industry, there are those within it that would exploit and abuse the system, the employees and the clientele, but they are a persistent element in all industries, including natural resources, construction, mining and banking. If the government were truly concerned about exploitation, there are plenty of bigger fish to fry. But none of those fish pander to the right-wing base like these fish do.
Lots to see here
From the same article above: “Why would we grant visas to girls that we have a strong suspicion are going to end up under the thumb of a criminal gang being exploited and trafficked?” Mr. Kenney says. “We’re not going after the women — we’re protecting them from what they might not know will happen to them when they get to Canada.”
Consider the implications that the government "has strong suspicion[s]" that employers of strippers, escorts and massage parlour workers are "criminal gang[s]" that traffick in women. In fact, their suspicions have led them to simply eliminate the mere possibility that these women will ever be exploited. Is the government concerned that Canadians will be exploited?
It seems as though the government believes that by removing the foreign 'commodities' in human trafficking, that the human traffickers will suddenly give up and move on. The traffickers apparently will be so stymied that they won't consider trafficking in domestic commodities or funneling in foreign commodities in high-risk schemes.
Consider this: If there were only good massage parlours, escort services and strip clubs, there would be no need to deny anyone entry into that profession. There would be good jobs at good strip clubs. And yet in order to curb human trafficking, the government has seen fit to remove a small sub-section of the humans and not the traffickers.
The implication of this move by the government is that there are not any good massage parlours, escort services or strip clubs, which once again panders to the more orthodox Conservative base.
Economy and indulgence
Canada has money, or least parts of Canada have money. And disposable income is often spent on the indulgences of excess and debauchery. Where there's money, there's indulgent ways to spend it.
The point is that these jobs will be filled, regardless of who fills them.
It seems that this is a strange band-aid solution that will ultimately harm more Canadians, if the logic can be followed. Because the economy is attempting to stay the course, there are going to be more indulgences because there is more disposable cash. This is the nature of the beast. And so more women will be required for these types of professions.
If the government is truly concerned about exploitation, then crack down on the exploiters, not the victims. Not only does this further stigmatize legitimate professions and industries, but it also highlights the very definition of nanny state: We know better than you what's best for you. You can thank the government later.
These industries have been found guilty and must prove their innocence. This is not the Canadian way, or at least it wasn't until recently.
This is a moral attack on professions considered immoral by a Conservative government that knows better than you and will use its moral compass to ensure you are protected from yourself, as long as you're not Canadian. This attack will play well with the more conservative base, as it reinforces their views on an industry that they would rather see removed from the Canadian landscape.