By Leonora Angeles
Associate Professor of Community and Regional Planning and Women’s and Gender Studies, University of British Columbia
Never before has a well-documented study on Filipino immigrant professionals in Canada been done until this research by Kelly, Astorga-Garcia and Esguerra came up. What do we have before? Bleak-sounding clichés on deskilling, de-professionalization, and racialization of Filipinos in this part of the world and very little else, such as short sections tucked in broader studies on Filipino migration or labor market integration of visible minorities. Save for a few studies on health professionals, particularly Filipino nurses in Toronto, done by Bakan, Stasiulis and Damasco, most studies on Filipino professionals in Canada are piecemeal, provide only anecdotal evidence and speak of generalities, before asking readers to take the research in good faith.
Finally, we have a solid piece of analytical research backed by both quantitative and qualitative data that links deprofessionalization to the complexities of the distinctive avenues of immigration programs used by Filipino professionals to enter Canada, the Philipine class structure and class origins of such professionals in Philippine society, the process of social networking-based job searching, the problems related to credential assessment and professional regulatory bodies’ gate-keeping functions, and the cultural stereotyping of Filipinos. This study undertaken by York University professor in Geography Philip Kelly in collaboration with the Community Alliance for Social Justice (CASJ) researchers Mila Astorga Garcia and Enrico Esguerra has brought the debate on the Filipino immigration and labor market integration in Canada to new levels. While this study is largely focused in Metro Toronto, Ontario - home to about 25% of all Filipino immigrants in Canada - the research findings would resonate with the experiences of many Filipinos and other ethnic minorities in other major cities in other provinces. But what the research is arguing is the need to precisely examine the specific set of circumstances that prevent Filipinos from getting good-paying jobs, and to make policy recommendations grounded on the lived experiences of Filipino professionals.
The research is noteworthy for four reasons, features that have not been as well-explained in previous studies. First is the research’s examination of the sociology and geography of the “Survival Job” in the McJob economy, how it is perpetuated by the social networking-based process of job searching, and its contagious effect on the newcomer community, and overall racialization and cultural stereotyping of Filipinos. The sociology and geography of the “survival job” account for the downward mobility and deskilling of Filipinos, which could not be predicted solely on the basis of the immigration program that enabled them to come to Canada.
Second, the research does take into account the role of the Live-in Caregiver Program (LCP) in deskilling and cultural stereotyping of Filipino professionals, while avoiding the reductionist “blame the LCP” line. It does so for three reasons. One, it argues that though only one-fifth of Filipinos go through the LCP, its contagion effect on wider Filipino community is much greater in terms of cultural and job stereotyping and work force subordination. Two, it made clear that while the LCP is a major factor, the Program itself could not fully account for the role of personal referrals and social networks in the streaming of Filipino professionals - 80% of whom come through other means. Third, it explains that those who come through the LCP have in fact more complex post-caregiver occupations and life chances. In a small survey of post-LCP occupations, only 5 are still working as nannies and housekeepers, 13 as residential care aides 23 have diverse technical and professionals jobs as nurses, medical technologists, physiotherapists, clerks, and managers (see Table 12).
The third notable feature of this research is its analytical linkage of the class structure and class differentiation in the Philippines with the location and condition of Filipino professionals within those structures. Their location and condition, as well as experience of patronage and nepotism within those structures, explain their lack of financial assets and their willingness to downgrade their qualifications. Combined with the pressure to meet financial obligations for families back home, and hence need to find “survival jobs” which are easy to find because of the existing social network and personal referral systems.
Fourth, the study explains how and why that “black box” of accreditation of foreign-trained professionals is not only costly, time-consuming, and biased, but also unfair, arbitrary and ignorant of stringent professional regulations in the Philippines. The policy recommendations provided in the study, particularly for professional regulatory bodies, are good first steps to make these bodies more accountable, fair and transparent in their decisions.
The research should provide many good points of discussions for many Filipino-Canadian advocacy groups, non-profit settlement agencies, and academic and policy researchers interested in addressing the full economic and social integration of Filipinos in Canada. It is also an exemplary example of how research collaboration between university-based researchers and community activists and advocates can generate solid research findings and policy recommendations that in the course of research could contribute both to community capacity-building and university engagement.
source