Arranged Employment requirements

[DelPiero07]

Agreed with kryt0n, that is my understanding anyways.

PGWP or any open work permit do not count towards those 50 points.

 

[ashu1710]

Thanks for the answers.

Based on that I think I qualify no?
you have a valid work permit for a NOC 0, A or B job that is exempt from needing an LMIA, and you: I do

are currently working for an employer specified on the work permit I do
have one year of full-time work experience (or an equal amount of part-time work) for that employer I do

Meaning he has to have both requirements - having a work permit exempt and working for that employer for one year. I beleive I do as I have an exempt work permit issued 2 month ago and I have been working for this employer for more than 1 year

Another person in the exact same situation tried unsuccessfully to claim those points. The system wouldn't update them.

" I beleive I do as I have an exempt work permit issued 2 month ago and I have been working for this employer for more than 1 year"

How were you working for this employer for over a year if your work permit was issued 2 months ago? If you worked outside Canada, it probably won't count.

 

[DelPiero07]

" I beleive I do as I have an exempt work permit issued 2 month ago and I have been working for this employer for more than 1 year"

How were you working for this employer for over a year if your work permit was issued 2 months ago? If you worked outside Canada, that probably won't count.

He had a PGWP which he changed now to Mobilité Francophone.

 

[legyptiano]

I was working on an open work permit (post Graduate ) and when it expired I got a new one that is LMIA exempt (Mobilité Francophone)

 

[kryt0n]

I was working on an open work permit (post Graduate ) and when it expired I got a new one that is LMIA exempt (Mobilité Francophone)

Yup and you'll need to work for a year under your closed work permit and get a continuing job offer before you can claim the extra 50 points

 

[jes_ON]

Yup and you'll need to work for a year under your closed work permit and get a continuing job offer before you can claim the extra 50 points

Ministerial instructions:

"(iii) the foreign national holds a valid work permit issued under the circumstances described in paragraph 204(a) or (c) or section 205 of the Regulations, the offer is made by an employer who is specified on the work permit and the foreign national works for that employer and has accumulated at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent in part-time work, over a continuous period of work for that employer;"

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2016/2016-11-12/html/notice-avis-eng.php

Does not say that the work experience has to be on a named work permit; it only says that the job offer has to come from the employer named on the eligible work permit.

That would be like saying that someone with a PGWP who gets an LMIA has to work for another year with the LMIA before they become eligible. That is not the case.

But again, if you can provide a citation for your interpretation, I'd like to see it.

 

[ashu1710]

Yup and you'll need to work for a year under your closed work permit and get a continuing job offer before you can claim the extra 50 points

You sure about this? Technically, he DID work for that employer in Canada for over a year. The rules don't explicitly state the requirement having to work under the same work permit (just the same employer).

 

[ashu1710]

Ministerial instructions:

"(iii) the foreign national holds a valid work permit issued under the circumstances described in paragraph 204(a) or (c) or section 205 of the Regulations, the offer is made by an employer who is specified on the work permit and the foreign national works for that employer and has accumulated at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent in part-time work, over a continuous period of work for that employer;"

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2016/2016-11-12/html/notice-avis-eng.php

Does not say that the work experience has to be on a named work permit; it only says that the job offer has to come from the employer named on the eligible work permit.

That would be like saying that someone with a PGWP who gets an LMIA has to work for another year with the LMIA before they become eligible. That is not the case.

LMIA is different. We're talking about LMIA-exempt permits.

 

[kryt0n]

Ministerial instructions:

"(iii) the foreign national holds a valid work permit issued under the circumstances described in paragraph 204(a) or (c) or section 205 of the Regulations, the offer is made by an employer who is specified on the work permit and the foreign national works for that employer and has accumulated at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent in part-time work, over a continuous period of work for that employer;"

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2016/2016-11-12/html/notice-avis-eng.php

Does not say that the work experience has to be on a named work permit; it only says that the job offer has to come from the employer named on the eligible work permit.

That would be like saying that someone with a PGWP who gets an LMIA has to work for another year with the LMIA before they become eligible. That is not the case.

But again, if you can provide a citation for your interpretation, I'd like to see it.

"(iii) the foreign national holds a valid work permit issued under the circumstances described in paragraph 204(a) or (c) or section 205 of the Regulations, the offer is made by an employer who is specified on the work permit and the foreign national works for that employer and has accumulated at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent in part-time work, over a continuous period of work for that employer;"

I know that's how you are interpreting it but that's been the general consensus. You need a year working for an employer with their name on the permit. And yes, I'm saying that they need another year with that employer. It proves that the employer needs them.

 

[kryt0n]

Meh, whatever. None of us are lawyers.

 

[legyptiano]

Thank you everyone for your replies. It looks like its 50/50 lol I would think I am eligible but I will try to contact CIC in the next few days and I will post their answer here when I get it.

 

[DelPiero07]

Ministerial instructions:

"(iii) the foreign national holds a valid work permit issued under the circumstances described in paragraph 204(a) or (c) or section 205 of the Regulations, the offer is made by an employer who is specified on the work permit and the foreign national works for that employer and has accumulated at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent in part-time work, over a continuous period of work for that employer;"

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2016/2016-11-12/html/notice-avis-eng.php

Does not say that the work experience has to be on a named work permit; it only says that the job offer has to come from the employer named on the eligible work permit.

That would be like saying that someone with a PGWP who gets an LMIA has to work for another year with the LMIA before they become eligible. That is not the case.

But again, if you can provide a citation for your interpretation, I'd like to see it.

Here is the issue, look at the new questions regarding work experience:

Is ###### 's job offer from the employer named on the current work permit?

Has ###### been working full-time for the employer on their current work permit for at least one year? (Or for an equal amount of part time work?)

He can answer "Yes" to the first question but certainly he cannot say "Yes" to the second question.

I believe once he answers "No" to that question his points will not be reflected.

Cheers

 

[kryt0n]

Here is the issue, look at the new questions regarding work experience:

Is ###### 's job offer from the employer named on the current work permit?

Has ###### been working full-time for the employer on their current work permit for at least one year? (Or for an equal amount of part time work?)

He can answer "Yes" to the first question but certainly he cannot said "Yes" on the second question.

I believe once he answers "No" to that question his points will not be reflected.

Cheers

Ah, I almost gave up the fight there! Thank you

 

[DelPiero07]

Nah, i'm just stubborn trying to figure this out

 

[jes_ON]

LMIA is different. We're talking about LMIA-exempt permits.

SIGH. I realize that. It's called an 'analogy.'