24th Annual Immigration Law Summit 2016

[Pawshi]

Folks....well I am at 434 and waiting.......This number would be there till next September 2017. After that it will again drop by 5 points. Hope the score comes down to this level before september 2017.....or OINP opens up.

 

[Alexios07]

Look at the report alexios07 In the points to improve on section it is written that people with low core human capital i.e.300 points are going in because of job offers and high human capital i.e 400+ points holders are suffering because of them the scores have not gone down below 450. IRCC wants to cut those points which they have already done to put the downward pressure on scores. And in the last you can see that in long term Human capital will matter the most like Age, Education, Language etc there bubbles are big.

I am one of the first who posted that report here. Basically, the report showed that LMIA was one of the biggest loophole in the EE system which allowed many candidates, so they wanted to fix that in order to allow "candidates with high levels of human capital to receive invitations".

They didn't mention anywhere that they would lower the score to allow more people in, and they just wanted to lower the bonus points for LMIA. Therefore, you can see there were absolutely no changes in the human capital factors, except an increase in Canadian degrees in favor of CEC which were repeatedly pushed by the Education sector which is also one of the largest stakeholders. As a result, FSW candidates don't see any changes at all for them, but now they have even less advantages to compete with their CEC counterparts.

There are no stakeholders. Canada is not some kind of company where you can buy shares of.

Actually, there are many stakeholders, you just cannot see them. Ever heard of private fundraising parties?

But that for politics, in Express Entry, IRCC needs to take advises from many business sectors on how to properly "import" more foreign workers. These business owners, CEOs, bankers, University presidents are called stakeholders.

 

[nehasoni]

I am one of the first who posted that report here. Basically, the report showed that LMIA was one of the biggest loophole in the EE system which allowed many candidates, so they wanted to fix that in order to allow "candidates with high levels of human capital to receive invitations".

\
Can you post the link of the thread where you posted the report?

 

[Alexios07]

\
Can you post the link of the thread where you posted the report?

Potential changes in Express Entry in upcoming months (released by IRCC)

 

[mf4361]

There are no stakeholders. Canada is not some kind of company where you can buy shares of. There are only elected PPM or other responsible positions which were nominated by elected government of Canada.

Stakeholder means everyone who is being affected by the policy. Maybe you've confused with the word "Shareholder"

So at the very end it comes to the wishes of the majority of the voters. And that majority wants most of the time prosperous country, which comes in turn down to the Money income against Money expenses.
As Canada is getting older, they need to import fresh workers. But as the demand is so high they do have the right to choose. With that said they can sell the whole immigration offer as a business where you need to secure most points in order to be able to immigrate.
So they push on anybody that is not close to perfection and at the same time offering the ways how to increase those points.
And the most effective are to come to work canada on LMIA extempt (which creates more Money from taxes from those people) and ofcourse come to study in Canda.
With studying you will pay 20k+ for studies, then you get PGWP to catch up for that Money but all and all that will kind of lock you with Canada as with the place of preference to immigrate. Hence the big points reward.

I agree in-Canada applicants should be given a bigger boost (which is what it's been done recently). I still don't think the fact that merely holding a Canadian degree/diploma is enough of an advantage. Some more work experiences is much needed to prove to Canada that the person is capable of integrating to Canadian society. Hence the CEC program, except the FSW trumps it when its put under the CRS point system.

So as long as there will be enough people willing to invest time and Money to increase their points, there is no need to decrease CRS score (this is so called seller market, where Canada is "selling" the right to immigrate).

In reality the difference between somebody with 330 points and 450 is little to non existant (both can have bachelor degree, 6+ years of experience and very good 1 language), it is just that one was maybe studying in Canada with 1 year of canadian work experience after and was repeating IELTS in order to get the magical 4x9 cbl. The other one has studied in his country and has plenty of work experience, but he just so happens to be older and missed in one language score the needed CBL 9.
In work process in itself there will be very little difference between performance of these 2 candidates. (the FSW can have first 3 to 6 months slower start but then he or she catches up).

But the main difference for Canada is, that the first one already brought in more Money than the second one.
That is the reality.
So the talks about score dropping down (especially under 400) are more like mercifull lies to keep different candidates interested. Sooner or later most will find out how the realiy Works and they will either let Canada dream be or they will hunt more points.
As simple as that.

Technically IRCC doesn't control the points of each draw, it controls to size of each draw (# ITA to be sent) which is directly related to. The size of each draw is in turn roughly depicted by annual immigrants target, presented to the parliament each year. So rather than saying Canada should keep the intake applicants points high, its more realistic to say immigration demand from around the world is higher than ever.

On the other hand, a person with high points doesn't always mean a better economic prospect. A PhD could well be living under poverty line, an account could be squeezed out of the profession due to high supply, a college diploma entrepreneur and tradesperson could be much well off than the rest of the group

 

[Alexios07]

Technically IRCC doesn't control the points of each draw, it controls to size of each draw (# ITA to be sent) which is directly related to. The size of each draw is in turn roughly depicted by annual immigrants target, presented to the parliament each year. So rather than saying Canada should keep the intake applicants points high, its more realistic to say immigration demand from around the world is higher than ever.

On the other hand, a person with high points doesn't always mean a better economic prospect. A PhD could well be living under poverty line, an account could be squeezed out of the profession due to high supply, a college diploma entrepreneur and tradesperson could be much well off than the rest of the group

Most of the time, a candidate with higher human capital factor is better than a one with lower score. However, what IRCC needs to do more is to put a certain quota of some occupations, and limit the majors of Master's and PhD's to STEM only or only needed majors. For example, it's extremely easy to get a PhD degree in my home country, especially if you choose some silly major like PhD in the History of the Communist Party.

 

[fatani]

I am one of the first who posted that report here. Basically, the report showed that LMIA was one of the biggest loophole in the EE system which allowed many candidates, so they wanted to fix that in order to allow "candidates with high levels of human capital to receive invitations".

They didn't mention anywhere that they would lower the score to allow more people in, and they just wanted to lower the bonus points for LMIA. Therefore, you can see there were absolutely no changes in the human capital factors, except an increase in Canadian degrees in favor of CEC which were repeatedly pushed by the Education sector which is also one of the largest stakeholders. As a result, FSW candidates don't see any changes at all for them, but now they have even less advantages to compete with their CEC counterparts.

Actually, there are many stakeholders, you just cannot see them. Ever heard of private fundraising parties?

But that for politics, in Express Entry, IRCC needs to take advises from many business sectors on how to properly "import" more foreign workers. These business owners, CEOs, bankers, University presidents are called stakeholders.

I agree that they have not said it clearly that they will reduce the points as mentioned by mf4361 they dont have control over points they only have the control of draw sizes. So this is not the case that if at the time of the draw there are no applicants on or above 450 they will not conduct the draw.

They will obviously conduct the draw this will lead to scores going down so they cant say anythng about points reduction they can change the policies. It is clearly mentioned that by cutting the job offer points it will make huge DOWNWARD PRESSURE on the scores if they are using the term downward pressure so what we can understand with it that they wants the scores to go down because lots of 300 scoreres were beating people with high human capital of 400-500 range.

They have also mentioned that because of job offer points the scores have not gone below 450. They have used the score as well "450" and by saying 450 we can think that they think people with 400+ comes in good high human capital range and they also deserves a chance. Thats why OINP also made their criteria of 400 and named it HUMAN CAPITAL PRIORITTIES Stream it clearly shows that canadian govt thinks that people with 400+ are also needed either they are CEC FSW OR FST.

 

[RK117]

any information on this? Any update published on internet?