HRSDC response. Is that what they usually say?

[ukulele]

Hi everyone,

Here is what I got from HRSDC when I e-mailed them my duties and said that my lawyer thought my NOC code was 6313.

I thought they would be a bit more specific about that but instead they sent me this:

P.S. Can I really attach this letter to my CEC application?



-- do not edit --

Hello Uk Ukulele,

The following is the response to your request for assistance (reference #135330 ):

Based on the information that you have provided, the following National Occupational Classification (NOC) code may be appropriate for the occupation that you described. Please verify the link below to ensure that the education, main duties and employment requirements correspond to your occupation. You are in a better position to determine whether or not this NOC code reflects your job.

NOC code 6313 - Accommodation, travel, tourism and related services supervisors:
http://www5.hrsdc.gc.ca/noc/english/noc/2011/ProfileQuickSearch.aspx?val=6&val1=6313&val65=casino

We hope this response has answered your questions, if not, simply reply to this e-mail ensuring that your reference number remains in the subject line.

Thank you,


Enquiry Response Team | Équipe de gestion des demandes
Skills and Employment Branch | Direction générale des compétences et de l'emploi
Human Resources and Skills Development Canada | Ressources humaines et Développement des compétences Canada
Gatineau, QC, Canada K1A 0J9
noc@workingincanada.gc.ca | cnp@travailleraucanada.gc.ca
Telephone | Téléphone : 1-800-O-Canada (1-800-622-6232)
Facsimile | Télécopieur 1-819-997-5979
Teletypewriter | Téléimprimeur : 1-800-926-9105
Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada

 

[jsm0085]

Hi everyone,

Here is what I got from HRSDC when I e-mailed them my duties and said that my lawyer thought my NOC code was 6313.

I thought they would be a bit more specific about that but instead they sent me this:

P.S. Can I really attach this letter to my CEC application?



-- do not edit --

Hello Uk Ukulele,

The following is the response to your request for assistance (reference #135330 ):

Based on the information that you have provided, the following National Occupational Classification (NOC) code may be appropriate for the occupation that you described. Please verify the link below to ensure that the education, main duties and employment requirements correspond to your occupation. You are in a better position to determine whether or not this NOC code reflects your job.

NOC code 6313 - Accommodation, travel, tourism and related services supervisors:
http://www5.hrsdc.gc.ca/noc/english/noc/2011/ProfileQuickSearch.aspx?val=6&val1=6313&val65=casino

We hope this response has answered your questions, if not, simply reply to this e-mail ensuring that your reference number remains in the subject line.

Thank you,


Enquiry Response Team | Équipe de gestion des demandes
Skills and Employment Branch | Direction générale des compétences et de l'emploi
Human Resources and Skills Development Canada | Ressources humaines et Développement des compétences Canada
Gatineau, QC, Canada K1A 0J9
noc @ workingincanada.gc.ca | cnp @ travailleraucanada.gc.ca
Telephone | Téléphone : 1-800-O-Canada (1-800-622-6232)
Facsimile | Télécopieur 1-819-997-5979
Teletypewriter | Téléimprimeur : 1-800-926-9105
Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada

This is pretty standard. You can attach it, but it wont make a difference. The officer will compare your chosen NOC/duties to that of the NOC. If they don't agree, you will still be rejected. I don't know why people have started doing this - it's not gonna make any difference.

 

[CEC2013]

It may not JSM, but it looks as though you made an effort to do some research and I think it can only be positive. If the VO is doubting which NOC is appropriate, this may help swing it home. But I do agree with you on one...and it says that in the HRSDC communication...the ultimate authority and decision rests with CIC. So, no matter what HRSDC may send back, its still CIC's decision. But, like I said, it can only be positive and certainly doesnt hurt to include. You never know how the VO may look at it.

Oh and, the answer to your question is yes, thats pretty standard for HRSDC and I got the same reply (different NOC).

 

[jsm0085]

It may not JSM, but it looks as though you made an effort to do some research and I think it can only be positive. If the VO is doubting which NOC is appropriate, this may help swing it home. But I do agree with you on one...and it says that in the HRSDC communication...the ultimate authority and decision rests with CIC. So, no matter what HRSDC may send back, its still CIC's decision. But, like I said, it can only be positive and certainly doesnt hurt to include. You never know how the VO may look at it.

Oh and, the answer to your question is yes, thats pretty standard for HRSDC and I got the same reply (different NOC).

The very reason they don't say it's this NOC it because it's to the VO discretion.

When I did ICT I received a letter saying may be LMO exempt and it's because it's to the VO discretion.

It's far more beneficial for people to focus on getting the correct NOC and duties letter than to focus on getting this from HRSDC...

 

[CEC2013]

It's far more beneficial for people to focus on getting the correct NOC and duties letter than to focus on getting this from HRSDC...

Obviously I agree with you there....but I'm saying as a supporting document, something you add on, its not a bad thing to include. The applicants primary concern should of course be picking the right NOC and getting the reference letter (so forth). But, this could be a supporting enclosure....albeit, not a very strong one, but one nonetheless.

 

[jsm0085]

Obviously I agree with you there....but I'm saying as a supporting document, something you add on, its not a bad thing to include. The applicants primary concern should of course be picking the right NOC and getting the reference letter (so forth). But, this could be a supporting enclosure....albeit, not a very strong one, but one nonetheless.

I get where your coming form but I disagree. If it was in anyway beneficial it would be mentioned on the documents checklist. People should avoid providing what they believe to be a "supporting" document because it can be never ending and not really helpful. VO's have enough to do without going through paperwork that isn't helpful and tbh this one isn't, as the VO still has to make the same decision.

If the VO has a doubt about the NOC this document doesn't help as it's saying it's possible, not that it is...

Just my opinion.

 

[CEC2013]

I get your point of view....but understand that there are those of us whose application may not be as clear cut/dry as yours or someone elses, and so giving them this response is not a ploy to bury them in paperwork (its 1 paper), but rather to maybe give the VO something to think about, instead of just refusing my file, if they have doubts. And I know exactly how it seems....VOs are rarely compassionate, since its pass or fail, but considering the fact that the "burden of proof is with the applicant," I'd rather make the attempt than just say....I hope I'm lucky enough that the VO is nice.

Anyway, my point being....yes, you dont want to send them anything and everything, but 1 piece of paper from an official gov agency will not delay them any longer than other required paperwork. In the end, it may not work, but I dont have to think....oh, what if I had give that 1 one piece of paper.

Plus, my background is in public service....so I know that they will look at it, as its the process. Whether it makes an impact....completely different story! Just my opinion.

 

[jsm0085]

I get your point of view....but understand that there are those of us whose application may not be as clear cut/dry as yours or someone elses, and so giving them this response is not a ploy to bury them in paperwork (its 1 paper), but rather to maybe give the VO something to think about, instead of just refusing my file, if they have doubts. And I know exactly how it seems....VOs are rarely compassionate, since its pass or fail, but considering the fact that the "burden of proof is with the applicant," I'd rather make the attempt than just say....I hope I'm lucky enough that the VO is nice.

Anyway, my point being....yes, you dont want to send them anything and everything, but 1 piece of paper from an official gov agency will not delay them any longer than other required paperwork. In the end, it may not work, but I dont have to think....oh, what if I had give that 1 one piece of paper.

Plus, my background is in public service....so I know that they will look at it, as its the process. Whether it makes an impact....completely different story! Just my opinion.

CEC, I do get what your saying but I think we have an obligation to new comers to keep things in perspective. Firstly, I wouldn't say my case is that clear cut. Secondly, this isn't supporting evidence.

Let us look at what they are actually saying: -

"Based on the information that you have provided, the following National Occupational Classification (NOC) code may be appropriate for the occupation that you described."

There are several reasons why this wont make a difference to the VO: -

1) The response is based on info provided by e-mail. CEC has no way to confirm that the info provided to HRSDC is the same information provided to them. It was also provided by the applicant and not the employer, so it doesn't prove skilled work experience.

2) They don't say "is"... they say "may". Huge difference. So if a VO has a doubt about your NOC vs job - this really makes no difference. They still need to make their analysis based purely on the NOC detail vs the information they have in front of them. HRSDC saying that based on the info you have provided you may match this noc doesn't help them make the assessment - at all.

 

[jes_ON]

A few thoughts for discussion -

1) Because of recent changes in the CEC program, the HRSDC assessment may be less useful than before. VOs used to be a little more flexible on the NOCs; it appears to now have much greater importance in decision-making and at least some VOs appear to be using the NOC as a bureaucratic weapon. In many ways the more thorough evaluation is good, but sometimes it does seem that they have lost sight of the fact that assigning an NOC is not an exact science, that employers, lawyers, and even HRSDC can interpret them differently, and expecting the applicant to "get it right" in spite of these alternative opinions (esp. one on a work permit) is hardly fair.

2) Understand that HRSDC uses the NOCs to issue Labour Market Opinions. For this purpose, erring on the side of a higher skilled NOC will "weed out" applicants. For CIC, evaluating "down" to a lower skilled NOC "weeds out" applicants.

So - don't expect it to help you if you're trying to "enhance" your Skill Level C/D experience and make it look like a skilled NOC. HRSDC might accommodate you, but CIC won't.

3) If you plan to ask HRSDC, do not ask "is XXXX the right NOC?" The standard "maybe" response is not terribly helpful. Instead, simply provide the job duties and ask them what NOC they would suggest. The response will be much the same, "Maybe it's XXXX," but you'll feel more confident if they suggest the same NOC.

Although I would not recommend adding the HRSDC response as a common practice, it may benefit those few applicants whose job combines NOCs or doesn't have a strong match.

 

[CEC2013]

Valid argument, however, I will say again that the burden of proof is with the applicant. As for newcomers, they should follow the CIC checklist, and if they feel that there is anything else relevant to their file, then include it. Also, why should we be the people that stifle someones ideas/hopes.

Further, in the checklist it says "additional supporting documents MAY include" which by default implies that there is no set standard as to what a supporting documents is. And yes, CIC cannot assume the information provided to HRSDC is the same, which is why I included my initial request to them. On another note, their responses include a reference number, which would imply that one is able to request information on a particular request, if so necessary.

Regardless, the point stands that this is not detrimental nor particularly beneficial to ones application. Its also only 1 piece of paper and may/may not help during the assessment....if VOs dont consider it, no particular effort went into acquiring it and CIC will not be bogged down with paperwork. Therefore, it is only logical to say that those who want to include can, but do not have to. Simple as that!

 

[CEC2013]

@ Jes

"Although I would not recommend adding the HRSDC response as a common practice, it may benefit those few applicants whose job combines NOCs or doesn't have a strong match."

Agreed! I wouldnt make the habit of this....but for those who do not have a clear cut application (like mine) where its not necessarily one NOC and while the duties match to a certain degree, they may not match in wording - including an HRSDC response may provide some clarity as to the purpose of choosing this NOC. Its only to provide context on NOC rationale.

 

[jes_ON]

No disagreements