In the U.S., demand for cheap labor has sucked millions of illegal immigrants across the border. Not incidentally, the influx has spurred some criminal spin-offs -- counterfeiting, fraud, human trafficking, and drug smuggling, to name a few.
Illegal immigration is not a problem in Canada to the extent that it is, in the U.S. However, voracious taxation practices by Canada's municipal, provincial, and federal governments have created an enormous underclass of people who work "off-the-books." They are most often honest, hardworking individuals made criminal by the marketplace.
The villains of the piece are not so much the employees as the employers. Off-the-books,sub-contracting, even relegating workers to casual labor status, has many attractions for an employer. Ten come to mind immediately:
- No unions, therefore no work interruptions and no costly negotiations
- No medical plans, no paid sick leave
- No pension or unemployment insurance costs
- No mandatory paid vacations
- Reduced workplace safety costs
- Far less tax-related paperwork
- Lower overall insurance costs
- Higher proportion tax credits
- Lower wage levels
- Competitive pricing
Employers argue they have no choice. Indeed, that may be true now, but in many respects they are the authors of their own misfortunes. They were gung-ho for free trade and cheaper goods, and for governments picking up a share of employee benefit costs.
Fortunately for employers in both countries, the illegal practices have become so rooted and so prevalent that, like jaywalking, prosecution is simply not cost effective, and is no deterrent anyway.
Employees who are forced to accept work off-the-books or "under the table"still enjoy some benefits. Universal health and education costs are picked up by the government. The downside to that is beginning to emerge, however -- higher health and education costs for the taxpayer and reduced quality of health care and education.
Whether due to illegal immigration or an underground economy, depressed wage levels for relatively unskilled labor have other debilitating social effects.
Take dead-beat dads in Canada, for example. They can work off-the-books, collect social assistance (because on the record they are unemployed) and not pay support or alimony. Or, take single parents. Their wages in an off-the-books or casual job barely cover child daycare costs. These costs fall back to government in the form of supplemental incomes.
Of course each case is individual. Small business employers rarely have more than a few jobs for workers. Each employee is an individual too. So what's the big deal? Multiply each employer by a few tens of thousands, multiply each employee by a few hundreds of thousands.
Or, in the U.S., what's a few illegal immigrants? Multiply the few by millions. Entire economic sectors -- agriculture and textiles, manufacturing in the U.S., for example -- would be crippled without them. The same would be true for many Canadian service industries if they were required to put their labor on their books.
Does this reliance make the practices any less criminal or, in this instance, is the law "a ass?" as Charles Dickens mused through one of his characters. For now, they are criminal, and, like most criminal activities, at end, they serve no benefit to society.
