So is that within the last 3 years - July 2022 onwards with at least 6 months of experience. Do not think so.
Did not receive ITA despite have CRS above cut-off
- Thread starter Jay_112
- Start date
> eligible foreign national is not a member of the category ... if the work experience ... was not accumulated within the three-year period preceding the date the officer receives their application for permanent residence.
Wow. That's news to me, that the experience has to be within three years. When did this start, and why?
Then you never read the category draw requirements as it was always like this. This was part of the announcement when the category draws were introduced. This is not new at all.
Ah, yes that makes sense. I got ITA back in 2019 and successfully applied in 2020. Meanwhile, doing some digging (from the folks who host this forum no less) reveals that category draws started in 2023 (source: https://www.canadavisa.com/news/ircc-category-based-express-entry-draws.html & https://www.canadavisa.com/eecategories.html ) - hence I wouldn't have dug into the details at the time. Good to know.
Heading a bit off-topic, but there are times when I question if Canada/IRCC is really implementing the best policy here. We have a shortage of healthcare professionals, but aren't willing to invite a person who took a break from the field more than 2.5 years ago ... a field where burnout - especially those in the trenches during the worst of covid - is widespread.
In fact, my recollection is that mid 2022 or so to 2023 is where the world slowly started getting back to normal, so perhaps we're just now hitting the three year mark on those who got burned out at the last moment.
(Actually, even saying "left the field" may be going too far, as this may well be a professional who left a highly skilled occupation simply to work in a lower skilled and less well-paid job while still remaining in healthcare, or working in the same location, or both.)
Wouldn’t say there is a pharmacist shortage in most of Canada. Salaries went down in many regions over the past 20ish years and they have not seen a steady increase over time that most working professional have seen. Also a lot of smaller pharmacies who also have questionable ways of staying in business. For example Ontario has a known billing fraud issue yet ODB/OHIP refuses to do anything about it.
That's fair. I'd say a similar but different argument would apply to, for example, software developers. (In software development the pace of change can be dizzyingly fast. So much so that in some specializations - like JavaScript frameworks - someone who takes a complete break from the field might easily become obsolete in a mere few years.)
But for those roles in healthcare where we do have real shortages and where such skills wouldn't be obsoleted so quickly (thinking of nurses, GP docs, etc here), the current rules seem a tad more ... unnecessarily strict.
Which is why various IT jobs have been removed from STEM draws. Have issues with healthcare draws which will result in many who worked as PSWs and pharmacy assistants and will never work in the field again getting selected. I agree those who have healthcare professions that are likely to continue to work in healthcare should be prioritized or a % should be in place for the amount of PSWs and pharmacy assistants can make up each draw.
And my point is that the three year rule doesn't do that.
I think - assuming there is a shortage of such folks - it makes more sense to spin off a separate category for these, for fewer spots. Though if we instead have a surplus, perhaps these should be removed from the draws altogether....
The three year rule doesn't help much with this either. Though, thinking it over, if we're talking about folks who were on the front lines during the worst of COVID in Canada, then - considering the risks and sacrifices that these people made - I'd be willing to allow for an exception here. I feel like this is a group that by and large has already paid all their debts to society. (Yes, including social workers - https://academic.oup.com/sw/article-abstract/68/1/69/6835786 - and pharmacy folks - see https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canadian-pharmacists-under-pressure-1.6295783 )
OP would have been covered under this case, incidentally,
Um, ouch. This thread keeps blindsiding me.
Most of those who worked during the height of Covid have already received ITAs and many are already PRs. Most trying to secure PR these days have much more recent job experience.
Well, I mean, we are barely three years removed from the end of COVID.
Agreed. I also don't know OP's full story regarding why there was such a delay. But I wouldn't be surprised if the story turns out to be similar to mine (i.e. the delay was outside of OP's control and caused by a COVID impacted IRCC).