Canada’s Spousal Open Work Permit Policy Faces Criticism Amid New Restrictions

• Immigration lawyers Mark Holthe and Igor Kyryliuk expressed worries about the new limits, which went into force in January 2025.

• According to Immigration News Canada (INC), these changes are having an impact on families and job seekers.

Canada’s immigration system has come under fire following recent changes to its spousal open work permit (SOWP) policy.

Immigration lawyers Mark Holthe and Igor Kyryliuk expressed worries about the new limits, which went into force in January 2025.

According to Immigration News Canada (INC), these changes are having an impact on families and job seekers, prompting significant criticism of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s (IRCC) policy.

New limits on spouses’ open work visas

The spousal open work permit scheme has undergone significant adjustments as of January 2025. According to the new rules, spouses of overseas students may only apply if the student is enrolled in a specified program.

• Furthermore, foreign workers’ spouses in managerial or professional jobs (Tier 0 or 1), as well as some Tier 2 and 3 positions connected to labour shortages or government goals, are eligible.

• This marks a significant difference from prior policies that were more inclusive, limiting eligibility for spousal work permits to a small number of applicants.
• Holthe describes the policy changes as part of a larger immigration strategy to limit the number of temporary residents in Canada. Holthe also expressed concerns about how applications are processed, pointing out that some spousal open work permits are handled before or shortly following the lead applicant’s post-graduate work permit, which frequently results in refusals.

Impact on families and individuals

According to reports, revisions to the spousal open work permit policy will have a direct impact on families. Holthe tells the stories of families in whom one spouse, generally the principal breadwinner, has lost the right to work due to the rejection of a spousal work permit application. This has resulted in financial strain, compromising housing stability and essential living needs.

• Kyryliuk stated these changes have caused many families to reevaluate their intentions in Canada. Some have been forced to return home or face an uncertain future in Canada.

• Both lawyers described cases in which refusals coincided with the implementation of tougher guidelines, preventing applicants from adjusting their strategy.

Holthe described this pattern as “sharp practice,” which he believes is intended to reduce the number of temporary residents in Canada as part of Minister Miller’s broader immigration policy agenda.

The overall immigration policy shift

The recent adjustments to spousal open work permits reflect a greater trend in Canadian immigration policy.

• Historically, Canada has broadened open work permit eligibility to encourage family togetherness and economic integration. However, the new restrictions indicate a move toward limiting eligibility to specific populations.
• 
  Kyryliuk note these adjustments are in line with broader government aims aimed at addressing challenges like as population increase, housing constraints, and labor market alignment.

• The new policy is also seen as part of efforts to reduce the number of overseas students and make the path to permanent residency more difficult.

Holthe and Kyryliuk contend that popular perception of immigration has influenced policy shifts. As immigration becomes a political issue, the government may feel pressure to seem stricter, which has led to tougher enforcement techniques.

Navigating the new Spousal Open Work Permit System

Both lawyers provide strategic counsel to applicants seeking spousal open work permits under the new scheme. Holthe emphasized the need of receiving a work offer in a qualifying occupation before filing an application. He also suggests filing both post-graduate and spousal work visa applications concurrently to prevent potential refusals.

Kyryliuk recommends candidates to stay up to date on revisions to the list of approved occupations and seek legal advice as needed. He emphasizes the process’s intricacy, which necessitates meticulous attention to detail and an awareness of developing policy intricacies.

Both lawyers believe that seeking legal counsel is critical for navigating the current system, as the laws have gotten more complex and restrictive.

What to know:

The new system has prompted ethical concerns about fairness in immigration decision-making. Holthe and Kyryliuk argue that the timing of refusals and the planned sequencing of applications to meet policy aims impair fairness. Holthe also mentions that for those facing refusals, judicial review may be an option, however the procedure is lengthy and expensive.

Kyryliuk also addresses the new policies’ potential human rights consequences, focusing on the right to family life and non-discrimination in administrative judgments.

As Canada’s immigration regulations evolve, it is unclear how these changes will effect the country’s future temporary and permanent resident options.