Two routes to the same outcome, with very different requirements.
Side by side
| Low-wage LMIA | Francophone Mobility | |
|---|---|---|
| Government fee | $1,000 | $230 |
| Advertising | Required | None |
| Labour market test | Yes | No |
| Unemployment rule | Not processed at 6%+ | Does not apply |
| Workforce cap | 10% | Does not apply |
| Permit length | 1 year | Typically longer |
| Location | Anywhere | Outside Quebec |
| Language | No requirement | Worker must speak French |
| Occupations | Most | All TEER, except primary agriculture 4/5 |
When the LMIA is the right route
Your candidate does not speak French. Your position is in Quebec. Or the role sits in a sector exempt from the current restrictions — primary agriculture, food processing, construction, healthcare.
When Francophone Mobility is the right route
Your position is outside Quebec and you can find a French-speaking candidate. That second condition is the whole question.
The condition employers misread
The job does not have to be performed in French. IRCC's own instructions say the language of work need not be French. The worker must meet the requirement; the role can be entirely in English.
What the comparison does not show
Neither route finds you a candidate. The paperwork difference is real, but the harder problem is sourcing someone who genuinely speaks French — and that is not solved by choosing a route.
FrancoBridge publishes your job to French-speaking candidates in six markets.
Rules change. This is not immigration advice. Consult a licensed immigration consultant or lawyer.