Migrant workers and the Trans-Pacific partnership

The opinions and recommendations in this report, and any errors, are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funders of this report. [...] While it is possible the economic impacts of the TPP’s tem- porary entry chapter will be small — at least in the short term — it is clear the TPP will limit the democratic and legislative capacity of governments to shape migration and labour policy into the future. [...] For example, CETA highlights the “mutual objective to facilitate trade in services and investment by allowing temporary entry”4 while NAFTA recognizes the need for parties “to protect the domestic labor force and permanent employment in their respective territories.”5 Instead, the temporary entry chapter in the TPP jumps straight into the scope, or limits, of the temporary entry provisions. [...] The USTR must now “ensure that trade agreements do not require changes to the immigration laws of the United States or obligate the United States to grant access or expand access to visas.”23 The USTR’s inability to make temporary entry commitments put it in a unique position in the TPP negotiations. [...] To be eligible, a worker must have been continuously employed by the com- pany for “one year within the three-year period immediately preceding the date of the application for admission,” while also meeting the definition of one of the ICT sub-categories.