Some very useful info about making the move (or not) to Canada in this months issue, BUT, I must get on my high horse again now.
One of the articles is about a man who went over, passed the tests, then after sitting in a hotel for five weeks with no sign of a truck, went home, so according to the storyteller he’s a bad person.
The article is hearsay for starters (by Big Ron, told to Dougie Rankine), but where is the question about why a company would let you sit unpaid ,at your own expense in a hotel for a month because they didn’t have enough empty trucks?
The driver who left really does sounds like a bit of a knob, but has nothing changed at some Canadian companies (and it’s clear which company this is!) who bring lads over, but can’t have a truck ready when they have done all that is required of them?
Would you ship out to Spain, or even Watford with the promise of a job, then be happy to sit unpaid, at your own expense for five flippin’ months, and would it give you a good impression of the company?
The writer seems chuffed that the driver returns home after a bit of toing and froing to Canada with a much reduced bank balance, but seems more concerned that the company can’t recover their ‘investment’ in the driver!
Perhaps if they’d have allowed him to earn some money straight away they could have recouped some of their brass, i’m sure they needed it more than him.
Why do people continue to defend companies who operate she hite practices at the expense of temporary foreign workers?