Air Flight and PR Card rule.

[abff08f4813c]

I don't handle flying well so I rarely fly into Canada.

I've done it twice, once with United and once with Porter.

United wanted me to scan both my US Passport and Canadian PR card when I was boarding when I checked in at the airport (I wasn't able to check in online due to some other issue.) Since PRs are suppose to enter Canada with their PR cards when traveling by air, this makes sense.

However, when I checked in online with Porter, they just needed my US passport. Not my PR card (even though I said my country of residence is Canada). It's odd that they wouldn't ask about the PR card. No one at the departing airport ever asked for it either, I didn't need to take it out until I got to the kiosk after the plane landed in Canada.

I wonder what would have happened if I had forgotten my PR card and left it behind before heading to the airport. I do have a copy of my eCOPR on my phone as well as pictures of the front and back of my PR card on my phone, but would that have made a difference?

Also found out that Porter only allows check-in online for international flights for US passport and Canadian passport holders, so maybe they do check it for other nationalities when checking in at the airport. Obviously, Canadian passport holders don't and can't have valid PR cards, so perhaps this is only applicable to US passport holders.

Anyone else have a similar experience?

 

[armoured]

Short form, yes, US passport holders are the exception to the rule that Canadian PRs must use PR cards to board a flight to Canada. (There's unfortunately no guarantee that the airlines will be aware of this, even though it is an official thing and you could show them the govt website that says this).

And yes, if you forgot your PR card you'd be let in at the border as a PR even without the card. They might send you to secondary, they might not care at all, etc.

 

[abff08f4813c]

Interesting. Would be interested to read about that if you have a link handy. I knew that US folks were special in being the only nationality not to require an ESTA or a visa to enter Canada.

I thought the exception wasn't for US passport holders traveling by air but for folks traveling from a land or sea border into Canada. (Most of such crossings are between Canada and the US, but in theory flying to Paris and then getting a flight to Saint Pierre and Miquelon and then entering Canada via the ferry to Fortune would also work.) In that case the exception isn't so much by nationality but by the ability to access the land or sea border to make the crossing (so someone with a visitor visa to the US could do it).

That said it kinda makes sense the airlines would be more paranoid about it in general - if someone got denied they are the ones who bear the cost of flying the person back, so they'd rather play it safe in unusual situations even if there's a chance that the border officials would let the person in. In that kind of case, I can see the border officials themselves being more lenient towards a PR who just lost the PR card. Probably easier for them to verify the person's status as well.

 

[armoured]

Interesting. Would be interested to read about that if you have a link handy. I knew that US folks were special in being the only nationality not to require an ESTA or a visa to enter Canada.

Basically these things overlap exactly. I have seen/have had the link somewhere but too lazy to find it right now.

I thought the exception wasn't for US passport holders traveling by air but for folks traveling from a land or sea border into Canada. (Most of such crossings are between Canada and the US, but in theory flying to Paris and then getting a flight to Saint Pierre and Miquelon and then entering Canada via the ferry to Fortune would also work.) In that case the exception isn't so much by nationality but by the ability to access the land or sea border to make the crossing (so someone with a visitor visa to the US could do it).

It is mainly arriving by air (note technically it is 'scheduled carriers' - which can include trains, boats, zeppelins, possibly buses [not sure], etc.) Those arriving in 'private vehicles' (planes, boats, cars - but mostly cars) - yep, they can avoid this requirement. The distinction is that once a PR physically arrives at a port of entry, they MUST be admitted (as long as the CBSA officer can be convinced that they are a PR, and as far as we can tell, they do not play fast and loose with this).

Just that of course 'by private car from USA' is 99% of this type of arrival. There are, obviously, other mechanisms by which planes and ocean-going vessels are controlled. (St. Pierre and Miquelon is a slightly different case because there is a special regime of some sort for who is allowed on the ferries - you may be right but I don't know)

There are of course occasional cases where someone with an ETA and a PR but no card gets on a plane - and they're admitted at passport control at the airport. (Note the mistake is they shouldn't have been issued a valid ETA). Mistakes of various kinds happen. It's a known fact, I believe, that PR records prior to some year have not been digitized, or fully entered into the databases, and some gaps in the records even in later periods; occasionally someone who was a PR in the 60s or so will land and they're admitted with no problem.

That said it kinda makes sense the airlines would be more paranoid about it in general - if someone got denied they are the ones who bear the cost of flying the person back, so they'd rather play it safe in unusual situations even if there's a chance that the border officials would let the person in. In that kind of case, I can see the border officials themselves being more lenient towards a PR who just lost the PR card. Probably easier for them to verify the person's status as well.

The airlines indeed will bear the cost if they mess up (in theory anyway), and they're cautious. Of course, sometimes the airlines also just mess up (with a bit of asymmetry as they want to avoid the costs).

But as far as actual PRs, the border officers are not being 'lenient' at least in terms of admitting them, they're required to admit them by law. (One can argue that they are quite lenient about non-compliance with the residency obligation, but that's separate from letting them in or not).

All in all Canada has a somewhat odd system where it outsources quite a bit of its enforcement to airlines, and has a rather large loophole that kind-of works because we've only got one landborder of any significance. (And the only practical maritime neighbours for individuals - St P&M and Greenland - are themselves quite isolated and small, and also from fairly well-run countries)