The analysis proposed here defends the necessity to operate a shift in the terms that seem to dominate, at present, the thinking on new forms of slavery or servitude, in order to fully integrate gender relations as production and exploitation social relationships. In this regard, based on two field studies performed with domestic and agricultural workers subjected to the Canadian immigration programs, we must try to see how the work relations amalgamated under the concepts of “modern slavery” and “unfree labour” give rise not only to a working class that is excluded from the canonical wage-earning class, but also and simultaneously to a racialized, intrinsically sexual workforce: “non-nationals” who are also male workers and female workers whose bodies are put to work, exploited and branded differently.

This article explores the inequality inhering to low-wage migrant labour and critically evaluates the current capacity of human rights law to account for and address this inequality. This article uses two recent human rights tribunal decisions as case studies through which to conduct this examination: PN v FR, 2015 BCHRT 60, and OPT v Presteve Foods Ltd, 2015 HRTO 675. While these cases establish the positive role of human rights law in accounting for the wider context in which inequality impacts on migrant labour, this role is also inherently limited by the purpose, scope, and function of the Tribunals. This article will identify and discuss issues illustrated in the cases that are reflective of deeper systemic and structural inequalities attending low-wage migrant labour, including: the underlying reasons motivating low-wage labour migration; the legal regulations governing migrant workers’ status and employment conditions; and, the racialization of migrant workers.

The article considers the temporary labour migration program in Canada, which catapults workers from the global South into work and wider relations in the global North, in the context of debates swirling around Anglo-American labour law. There is widespread consensus that labour law is experiencing a sustained moment of crisis in the face of neoliberal globalization. Not widely considered is how this crisis relates to temporary labour migration and the global South-North relationship and, in turn, how this relationship may impact emergent approaches tasked with transforming or transcending the field. Critical interventions seeking to confront the “southern question” within the socio-legal imaginary have gone largely unnoticed by labour law scholars. Transnational labour law may hold potential for an alternative account of the racialized production of unfree migrant labour. But only if its adherents can truly confront the dynamic unfolding through temporary labour migration—that of the “South of the North.”