Licensed nurses are blocked from working in BC — and many are forced to leave

While BC faces a shortage of nurses, qualified nurses are being prevented from working here — and in many cases pushed out of the province.

Even after passing the same NCLEX-RN licensing exam used across Canada, the United States, and internationally, applicants without recent work experience face lengthy, costly assessments. This process can take many months, often more than a year, followed by re-entry programs that may take another year — often with limited seats and additional wait times to even get in, which could add even a third wasted year to the process.

For many, the result is simple: leave BC to gain experience elsewhere — and often never return.

Good enough to work in the US — not eligible in BC

Nurses who pass the NCLEX-RN exam and obtain a US license can begin working in the US immediately.

Applicants applying to transfer their RN license to BC without enough work hours are not good enough for BC, while perfectly qualified for the US.

• Without enough hours of recent work experience applicants must undergo a costly and lengthy assessment process that takes many months, sometimes over a year.

• In all cases we are aware of, the outcome has been the same — re-entry program, typically a year-long.

Same qualification. Completely different outcome.

If a nurse is trusted to begin working in the US healthcare system, why are they not trusted in BC and why internationally recognized NCLEX-RN tests are not honoured?

How the process works

1. An RN licensed outside of BC must have enough hours of recent work experience as an RN in the jurisdiction where the RN is licensed.
   

2. Without enough hours of recent work experience must undergo a costly and lengthy assessment which may take over a year.
   

3. The outcome of the assessment in all cases we are aware of is the same — re-entry program:
   

   • typically full-time

   • incompatible with full-time employment, depriving applicants of income

   • most people cannot combine it with even part time meaningful employment

   • high costs of tuition and other associated costs of those programs

   • very lengthy, typically a year

   • often redundant making nurses feel they go through irrelevant or overlapping material they already proved knowing by passing NCLEX-RN exams.

   • Potential loss of existing employment or seniority

4. Even if the nurse choose stress, expense and humiliation of a re-entry program:

   • re-entry programs have very limited seats

   • admission is competitive and not guaranteed

   • some programs require Canadian experience, which creates another barrier

   • wait times to get accepted can be months or even a year

   • this can add a third year of delay on top of a year for the assessment and another year of the re-entry program itself

5. Without re-entry program applicants are forced out of BC. Many of them are already employed as LPNs or as other health care professionals. So once the person relocates to the US where their wages are much higher, taxes are significantly lower, less bureaucracy and less hurdles and the cost of living is a lot lower - the result is that BC would lose not only a potential of gaining a qualified RN, but actually lose already qualified LPN or another health care professional.

Experience can be gained by working. Here in BC nurses recently licensed in other jurisdictions are required to actually stepping away from work entirely.

Re-entry Programs Do Not Increase Capacity — They "Steal" It

Re-entry programs do not create new nurses.
They use ("steal" and "waste") existing education capacity.

Each seat occupied by a re-entry applicant is a seat that could have been used to train a new nurse entering the profession.

In a system already facing a shortage, this creates a second-order effect:

• fewer new nurses entering the system

• longer delays for nurses licensed out of BC

• reduced overall workforce growth

In effect, the system is not only delaying qualified nurses — it actually limiting the number of new nurses being trained.

This issue is compounded by capacity constraints in the education system itself.

In April 2026, Vancouver Community College paused its nursing intake for fall 2026 due to financial pressures, despite ongoing staffing shortages.

This highlights a critical contradiction:

• the system depends on education programs to train new nurses.

• the system is clogged by wasting seats on re-entry programs

• the system gets overloaded which hurts everybody: the new applicants, the re-entry applicants and the general public, hence seems to be against public interest which is supposedly against BCCNM's very mandate.

Recent Practice Hours DO NOT PROVE Competency

BCCNM (the BC regulator) requires “recent practice hours” to demonstrate competency.

But hours alone are only a proxy it seems to be a logical fallacy.

Just hours at a random employer at any position with whatever duties might have been (which vary) do not measure:

• what type of work was performed

• level of responsibility

• clinical complexity

• actual knowledge or skill level

• actual competency

But nurses who have passed the NCLEX-RN — a standardized competency exam — and are already licensed in other jurisdictions are still required to demonstrate recent hours or to be sent back to school for a re-entry program.

This creates a clear inconsistency.

If hours worked elsewhere are accepted as sufficient to demonstrate readiness,
why are those same hours not allowed to be gained through supervised employment in British Columbia?

The system accepts experience gained outside BC,
but does not provide a practical way to gain that same experience inside BC.

This creates a direct contradiction:

• Experience is required

• Access to license and therefore to employment is restricted

• Without employment, experience cannot be gained

If the goal is public safety and workforce readiness,
a supervised practice pathway through a provisional license would allow:

• real-world evaluation

• direct oversight

• contribution to the healthcare system

• income for the applicant

Instead, the current approach often requires:

• long delays

• red tape

• illogical, inconsistent, and unclear in our view requirements

• long and costly additional assessments

• full-time re-entry programs

• More stress for the participant, more stress for the public system

• But more "employment" for the bureaucratic machine at the regulator, and therefore more costs to the public and higher fees that nurses are charged for licenses and renewals.

The existing approach seems to be against best public interest and against the very mandate of BC regulator they supposed to uphold. As shown above, the logic proves that the barriers are not about competency or standards, if they can be bypassed by simply "recent work hours". Then what is it about and why not let nurses gain the same hours in BC as the regulator accepts from outside of BC? Where is common sense? All of this while BC faces shortage of nurses.

What this means for BC

This is not just a delay. It is a loss.

Qualified nurses choose to work elsewhere instead of waiting and being deprived of income for an extended period.

Some leave BC to gain experience and do not return.

BC loses not only potential RNs and LPNs, but in some cases existing healthcare workers.

We have received recent off-record feedback from a fingerprinting agency indicating that they are seeing a significant number of nurses — both LPNs and RNs — completing fingerprinting for US employment and licensing requirements. This is typically one of the final steps required for work visas and state licensing in the United States, meaning these nurses are past the stage of considering their options. They are leaving BC for the US now.

Even for those willing to comply and enroll in re-entry programs, access is not immediate. Limited seats and long wait times can add another year before training even begins, extending the total delay to two or more years without income.

A system meant to support healthcare capacity may be contributing to its reduction.

So is the system acting against the best public interest?

BC spent at least $5 Million on advertising in the US

Question: why does BC spends millions of our taxpayers dollars on advertising in the US trying to attract US doctors and nurses while qualified competent nurses proven though NCLEX-RN exams and already licensed in other jurisdictions are already right here, ready and willing to work, yet denied licenses? Where is common sense?

Why BC spends millions of dollars, then neglecting those who are already here, competent, ready and willing?

Also, a math question. After spending at least $5 Million of our taxpayer's dollars, according to CTV News in March 2026, only 414 health professionals accepted positions in BC. Let us say the most optimistic ratio of 50% of those could be directly attributed to such an advertising campaign. It means BC has spent at least $5 Million dollars to attract 207 health professionals (both doctors and nurses). It means BC spent over $24,155 to attract each health professional. To put it in perspective, while BC spent $5 Million dollars attracting a little over 200 professionals (both nurses and doctors), BC was short of 4,500 nurses alone. Yet BC is neglecting those who are already here, competent, ready and willing to start working immediately. Would it make more sense to grant them provisional licenses and allow them supervised employment? Instead of paying over $24,155 in advertising to attract one nurse while neglecting the ones already here? Isn't it cheaper, better and far more effective to let these nurses integrate in our healthcare workforce, even under a provisional license and under the supervision?

What is in the best public interest?

If the goal is to gain practical experience, why must it be done through a full-time academic program instead of supervised employment through a provisional license in BC?

BCCNM already has the ability to issue provisional licenses in other contexts.

If experience is required, should it not be possible to gain that experience while working?

Smoke And Mirrors?

If the outcome is re-entry in all cases we are aware of:

• Why does the assessment process take months or more than a year?

• Why is it so expensive?

• What difference does it really make?

• Is it in the best public interest?

• Why does a process that appears to lead to the same outcome take so long?

• Why are costs so high relative to the outcome?

• What value is being added during this time?

Even if an applicant chooses to take a re-entry program, access to those programs is not guaranteed.
Seats are limited, admission is competitive, and wait times can add another year before training even begins. BCCNM is well aware of it. But do they care about that or about what is best overall for public interest?

If the goal is to build a workforce, why is the path so long by design, costly, and uncertain? Or, as many believe, certain in the most negative way.

If the US trusts nurses to gain their first experience, why BC does not?

If the goal is to gain practical experience, why must it be done through a full-time academic program instead of a provisional license in BC - a mechanism that BCCNM already has. Why not allow freshly licensed RNs a supervised employment in BC via provisional license, keeping them in BC. Isn't it more efficient to keep them than running advertising campaigns and spending millions of dollars trying to attract them from the US?

Public announcements vs actual outcomes

In May 2025, the Province announced a streamlined process stating that U.S. nurses could begin working in BC within days.

The Province also invested in recruitment efforts targeting healthcare workers from the United States.

However, applicants report a different experience:

• Assessments are still required

• Assessments take months or over a year

• Requirements to obtain experience outside BC or complete re-entry programs, typically a year-long

There appears to be a gap between what was announced and what applicants experience in practice.

Class action?

Why has there not yet been a class action against BCCNM?

From what we are hearing from applicants and members of the public, many believe the current process may not align with the obligation to act in the public interest.

Some applicants have already reached out to legal counsel.

It remains to be seen whether a coordinated legal challenge will be pursued.

If you have already started legal action, we would like to hear from you.

If you have consulted a lawyer, your insight may help others.

If you are a lawyer interested in these cases, you are welcome to reach out.

What you can do

If you are directly affected, you can file a complaint with the BC Ombudsperson.

This is one of the few formal channels that can review whether processes are fair, reasonable, and consistent with the public interest.

Focus on:

• Delays in being allowed to work

• Inability to gain experience through employment in BC

• Lengthy and costly assessment processes

• Lack of clear or consistent outcomes

Individual complaints may not have an impact on their own.
Repeated, consistent complaints create a record that must be reviewed.

BC Ombudsperson Complaint Form