The Alberta Chambers of Commerce (the umbrella group for the
local Chambers) has recently released a study: Alberta businesses share their stories: A survey on the impact of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program in Alberta and recent changes.
Before delving into the content of the study, a quick look
at its methodology worthwhile. There is no clear explanation of the methodology
used in the Chambers’ study but it looks like the 26,000 businesses associated
with local Chambers of Commerce were asked to fill out an online survey.
Responses came from 47 communities.
The decision to collect feedback from anyone interested
(rather than a random sample of businesses) creates the spectre of respondent
bias. Basically, those who responded are likely to be different from the
overall population (specifically, they are likely to be those businesses most
affected by the program and changes in the program). What this means is we
should be skeptical that the data and comments reflect the experience of all 26,000
Chamber members.
This matters because the survey uses language like “58% were
either very likely or somewhat likely to reduce their hours of operation”. The
survey very carefully indicates that this result reflects the views “of the
businesses surveyed” but this nuance (i.e., that these businesses’ views likely don’t
reflect all the views of all businesses) is never really explained and is easily lost to causal readers. The take-away
becomes “58% of businesses are going to shorten hours”.
We should be further skeptical because the Chambers provides
no information about how many businesses responded (47? 470? 4700?) and
no information how they selected the comments they reproduced. Are these comments
representative of the (non-representative) responses the Chambers received? Or
were the selected to support the Chambers’ views on temporary foreign workers?
There is no way to tell.
To be fair, sometimes circumstances mean one has to use the
data that is easily available. That is not the case here. The Chambers is a
sophisticated organization with the resources (~$30k) to do a proper
survey that would give representative results. The lousy methodology and
absence of info about the study means we should likely disregard this study
altogether—it is basically garbage.
Turning to the results, the gist of the comments is that
businesses cannot attract enough workers who are Canadian residents and,
without access to more TFWs, their businesses are in jeopardy. This may well be
true.
At the risk of sounding heartless, is that a bad thing?
Access to workers basically comes down to wages and working
conditions. Raise wages and/or improve working conditions enough and workers
will come—either from other businesses or from the ranks of people who were
previously uninterested in working.
Not every business can afford to do this. But, in a free
labour market, a business that cannot afford the cost of inputs (e.g., labour)
goes out of business. That is unfortunate, but that’s how it goes. This frees
up the workers from the defunct business to take employment elsewhere.
Yes, we may not be able to get a burger or coffee on every
corner and in every hamlet at 3 am on Sunday morning. But I expect life will go
on regardless.
Mostly this report is part of a broader narrative that
employers are trying to create that advocates for government intervention to
suppress wages by loosening the labour market via easier access to foreign
workers. Given how poorly done it is, we should simply ignore it as more partisan lobbying by employers to grind workers' wages.
-- Bob Barnetson
No comments:
Post a Comment