Effective date of Bill C24

[screech339]

The party who signs has to take full blame. Not the association, but the politicians (at least in my eye). Standing against pressure is tough, but if it's the right thing to do, that's what I expect from the govt.

That's why I don't agree to sayings like "govt knows best" "govt is fair" "govt has no vested interests" "govt is not influenced by outside agencies" "govt is best in understanding the law and law making"

Politicians have been wrong in the past, they can be wrong now, they can be wrong in the future.

So hence, they could be very well be wrong in context to Bill C-24, and bring a poorly worded piece of legislation into a law.

So it's not the unions that brought changes to employment laws? So it's the politicians that deserve praise for bringing in employment law out of their heart and concern changes without union's influence?

 

[CanadianCountry]

There is no denying the fact that Canada is a land of opportunities. That's why people come here. But why put additional hurdles where there is no need.

As you said people claim to have experience but they don't, other immigrant countries face similar issues, but they don't put up such hurdles.

Interview is the screening process, screen people well there. Hire some good HR people who know their stuff.

Partially agree, I think that the problem resides that some people claim to have the experience/knowledge and they don't... So that's one reason why many companies ask for Canadian experience, at least you can show you know what you said.

I think that the opportunities are there, it is not easy, but for sure you can succeed. Canada is a land of opportunities.

 

[wilbur]

How do you know it is different in other countries? I don't think there is such a difference. Do you think Canada has a worse system? And you think that system is promoted by the politicians? Come on.

 

[CanadianCountry]

Captain of the ship (govt) is to be blamed or praised for the consequences of its actions, because it's the final authority. If they acted on good advice (employment law) both parties deserve praise. Unions for making it a cause and govt for acting on it.

Example:
If I (outside agency) give you (govt) bad advice and you act on it, am I to be blamed or you for not knowing it better. (And don't consider we are friends and assume I will acting in your best interest)

And if I give you good advice and you act on it, you might come back to thank my kindness. So I will get some praise coming my way.

So it's not the unions that brought changes to employment laws? So it's the politicians that deserve praise for bringing in employment law out of their heart and concern changes without union's influence?

 

[screech339]

Captain of the ship (govt) is to be blamed or praised for the consequences of its actions, because it's the final authority. If they acted on good advice (employment law) both parties deserve praise. Unions for making it a cause and govt for acting on it.

Example:
If I (outside agency) give you (govt) bad advice and you act on it, am I to be blamed or you for not knowing it better. (And don't consider we are friends and assume I will acting in your best interest)

And if I give you good advice and you act on it, you might come back to thank my kindness. So I will get some praise coming my way.

So the threat of being voted out of office has no bearing in it at all only if it in their best interests?

Hmmm, the recent Ontario election reminded me of something similar to what you posted.

 

[bambino]

The last I checked, no one elected the CBA to govern on behalf of the citizens of Canada. They, and their vested interests, are irrelevant to the political process.

I think we've all heard the phrase "kill all the lawyers", but few know that in Henry VI (where the quote is from), Shakespeare actually meant to portray lawyers as the guardians of the rule of law who stand in the way of those who want to corrupt it.

Regardless of their motives, the CBA, among others. raised very serious questions which should at least have been addressed. Instead, Minister Alexander dismissed them out of hand, calling the organization "shameful" and "attempting to drum up business by promoting the interests of convicted terrorists and serious criminals". He also called Rocco Galati a "disgraced lawyer" from the floor of Parliament where, conveniently, he enjoys absolute privilege when making defamatory statements.

This goes to show the troubling mindset of the people behind Bill C24, and that they had no intention whatsoever to engage in any type of good faith deliberative effort, which is what the "political process", as you call it, should be in a liberal democracy.

 

[CanadianCountry]

I know because I have lived in other countries. So I know through experience. System is "promoted" by the laws that are passed by politicians. Politicians could be externally influenced to pass laws. Also it doesn't mean that other countries have better politicians or political process. We are free to discuss the laws of the land except a few countries.

Let's not jump to extremes and say Canada has worse system. There are some unnecessary hurdles put into place for no reason and we are just discussing about them.

How do you know it is different in other countries? I don't think there is such a difference. Do you think Canada has a worse system? And you think that system is promoted by the politicians? Come on.

 

[CanadianCountry]

Threat of being voted out looms on Tories this time as well. I think they play the odds as like any other in power. As it seems their calculations tell them they are super.

So the threat of being voted out of office has no bearing in it at all only if it in their best interests?

Hmmm, the recent Ontario election reminded me of something similar to what you posted.

 

[CanadianCountry]

@ bambino,
Could not have said it better. Kudos!!

Instead of discussing the questions raised by stakeholders, what this govt did, they put a time limit on discussions to avoid further questions. This is steamrolling a law.

I think we've all heard the phrase "kill all the lawyers", but few know that in Henry VI (where the quote is from), Shakespeare actually meant to portray lawyers as the guardians of the rule of law who stand in the way of those who want to corrupt it.

Regardless of their motives, the CBA, among others. raised very serious questions which should at least have been addressed. Instead, Minister Alexander dismissed them out of hand, calling the organization "shameful" and "attempting to drum up business by promoting the interests of convicted terrorists and serious criminals". He also called Rocco Galati a "disgraced lawyer" from the floor of Parliament where, conveniently, he enjoys absolute privilege when making defamatory statements.

This goes to show the troubling mindset of the people behind Bill C24, and that they had no intention whatsoever to engage in any type of good faith deliberative effort, which is what the "political process", as you call it, should be in a liberal democracy.

 

[screech339]

Threat of being voted out looms on Tories this time as well. I think they play the odds as like any other in power. As it seems their calculations tell them they are super.

You mean the union never used their dues and spent it on election campaign, advertising, to prevent the ontario tories from forming government over fear of losing jobs?

The point I'm making is that you seems to blame the politicians only as if they had no outside influence whatsoever. Every politicians will be influenced by what the public wants. Bill C-24 is what apparently want the majority of people seems to want.

Again goes back to the engineer trademark law. The engineering association (union in disguise) brought in that trademark law by making politicians of the day sign it into law.

 

[greeki78]

Exactly, the other thing I want to add my 2 cents are all new immigrants were ask, "Do you have Canadian experience", like seriously? If an engineer, doctor or a software developer has good experience and they want to settle down to better place, why they are discriminated by this killing sentence which ended them choose to do labor jobs and sabotage their dreams what they ever seen

So, this is a called capitalism, huh.

Just so that you know..There is something might might be interested in reading on "Canadian Experience"

Google OHRC,once you enter their site type "Removing the Canadian experience barrier"

 

[MUFC]

... Every politicians will be influenced by what the public wants. Bill C-24 is what apparently want the majority of people seems to want.
...

If that is the case, than the newcomers can ask themselves "Is Canada still a welcoming country to live when we know that the majority of the people is willing the newcomer to struggle much more and longer than them."

 

[screech339]

If that is the case, than the newcomers can ask themselves "Is Canada still a welcoming country to live when we know that the majority of the people is willing the newcomer to struggle much more and longer than them."

And yet immigrants seems to be flocking to Canada in numbers. Doesn't seems to stop them. Bill C-24 is not going to stop immigrant numbers from growing.

If Canada seems unwelcoming to them, the numbers would drop by now. But it hasn't.

Canada seemed unwelcoming when the PGP was paused for 2 years. Did they stop the immigrants from coming? Nope. Still coming. Still coming with the 5000 cap put on it.

 

[MUFC]

Look at the countries from which they are coming from.... predominantly Asian struggling countries... where are the immigrants from other developed countries who already posses a passport that gives them the same perks.

 

[greeki78]

Ok here's "the news" after one of my friend called CIC.

Bill C-24 is applicable to everyone,past present and future citizens.

The only Clause which is not effective is "4 out of 6 years" for existing Applications or those application that arrived in CIC before Jun 01 ,2015.