Does being employed in different countries with same employer needs to be shown as a single employer

[Shivtoolika]

Hi,

I worked in US at an IT firm with its head office in US, on an H1b visa for few months but after visiting my home country India, my H1b visa stamping got refused by the US embassy and thus I continued to work with the same firm but in its Indian branch.

Thus in that case, in the work history section, do I need to repeat my employer with its Indian address separately even though the headoffice of the firm happens to be in US or I should show it as a single employer with my entire tenure with the company clubbing both US and Indian work experience and simply add the Indian address in Address history section for the corresponding work experience of India.

Please help. Thanks a lot!

 

[harirajmohan]

Hi,

I worked in US at an IT firm with its head office in US, on an H1b visa for few months but after visiting my home country India, my H1b visa stamping got refused by the US embassy and thus I continued to work with the same firm but in its Indian branch.

Thus in that case, in the work history section, do I need to repeat my employer with its Indian address separately even though the headoffice of the firm happens to be in US or I should show it as a single employer with my entire tenure with the company clubbing both US and Indian work experience and simply add the Indian address in Address history section for the corresponding work experience of India.

Please help. Thanks a lot!

Another row/entry in history section with same company name and different address/country name.
Surely it wont be called inc and it would have been named differently anyway in India for taxation purposes as pvt limited. So its a different entity anyway and logically different company. So separate entries for both.

 

[DEEPCUR]

Yes you need to repeat it. One entry per country is needed as this would automatically tie back to your personal history and it also needs to align with the address history. However if your employer would give only one letter, that's fine. Provide an explanation that they are all only one company hence single letter

 

[Shivtoolika]

Thanks a lot for the answers, its a big help.
But one more doubt/worry, that I received an ITA with the information where I showed employment as a single employer, with its US address only with which I had my H1b, so now making any change "after receiving an ITA " in work history section i.e. segregating the employer with US and India address respectively (which does make sense) would not amount to any malafide, even though my points remain unchanged?
Kindly advise. Thank you!

 

[DEEPCUR]

It is okay to change things while submitting the application. Just provide an explanation in the letter of explanation section that you have split your experience provided in express entry profile as per country, but that your points and tenure are unaffected because of that.

 

[Shivtoolika]

Thanks a lot for your clarification. And if I may also ask please, at what stage "the letter of explanation" is required as before submitting the application(post ITA) I dont quite see an option, except for filling the form, and if I understand correctly should they be asking the same while we have to submit all our documents and there is a section of any required "letter of explanation" or we need to submit it on our own additionally for "any & all the editions" in our file pre and post ITA?

Secondly, I did one more mistake, I would say blunder, with the form with which I got an ITA in the work history section, with the chronology of my 2 employers, I mistakenly put ending month of 1st employer as Oct 2012 and beginning of 2nd employer as Nov 2012, whereas the correct one was 1st employer ending in Aug 20th, 2012 and 2nd beginning immediately without a single day gap thereafter (and my H1b was effective from Oct 1st, 2012 with the 2nd employer and before that I worked on OPT). Projects had changed, and relying on memory I messed up the form.

Now, I am worried as 2 changes in the work history section even though explaining it further in "the letter of explanation" post ITA, might give an impression of misrepresentation. Well, its a mistake, not sure, how editions might fare up with CIC. Any advise sir...

Thanks a lot!