+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445
Client Portal

No businesses

  • Like
Reactions: Naturgrl
scylla said:
Yes, that's what it means.

But this isn't a new rule as far as I'm aware. All they have done is clarified the wording around this rule. That rule has always been in place from my understanding of the program.
Click to expand...
What they had was no high commissions, embassies, consulates or a particular set of businesses from subparagrpah 200(3)(h)(i) to (iii). On the public site, all they put was no high commissions, embassies or consulates. They never had anything else and now, as of this month, you see no businesses. Yet they want you to get a business number.

How do they expect elderly Alzheimer's sufferers to arrange these types of things especially if they have no family?
 
Hummingbird89 said:
What they had was no high commissions, embassies, consulates or a particular set of businesses from subparagrpah 200(3)(h)(i) to (iii). On the public site, all they put was no high commissions, embassies or consulates. They never had anything else and now, as of this month, you see no businesses. Yet they want you to get a business number.

How do they expect elderly Alzheimer's sufferers to arrange these types of things especially if they have no family?
Click to expand...

There was additional language around the program being for individual employers in the old verion. IMO this rule wasn't well written and that's why they've clarified it now. However the intent was always for this to be for individual employers (i.e. not agencies or anything else of that nature). The recent update was stated as a clarification by IRCC and not as a new rule or change.

Anyway, I'm not IRCC. So I really can't comment further, other than to say that my understanding is that this has always been the rule and nothing has changed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hummingbird89
scylla said:
There was additional language around the program being for individual employers in the old verion. IMO this rule wasn't well written and that's why they've clarified it now. However the intent was always for this to be for individual employers (i.e. not agencies or anything else of that nature). The recent update was stated as a clarification by IRCC and not as a new rule or change.

Anyway, I'm not IRCC. So I really can't comment further, other than to say that my understanding is that this has always been the rule and nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
I see. I know someone in one of these groups/forums/Telegram chats called IRCC directly and they told her that agencies were fine. Mind you, this may have been right before April 30, 2023.
 
Hummingbird89 said:
I see. I know someone in one of these groups/forums/Telegram chats called IRCC directly and they told her that agencies were fine. Mind you, this may have been right before April 30, 2023.
Click to expand...

You can't place any real relaince on what the IRCC help desk says (apart from basic questions and some limited application status questions). They aren't that good unfortunately and answer stuff wrong relatively frequently when the question is more complex (sometimes they even get simpler questions wrong). This is a more complex question. I personally wouldn't place any value on what they've said on this particular issue. And yes, it's sad they are this useless, but it is what it is.

I'm pretty sure we've already had at least two (maybe more?) refusals and / or PFLs on this forum related to having agencies as employers and IRCC not accepting this.

Anyway, I'm not sure I have much else to add to this conversation. I thought it was well known that employers had to be individuals (not companies, or agencies, or nursing homes) since the "individual employer" terminology was used under the old version of the rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kumud
The employer can't be an agency, it's clear since 2019 when HCCP/HSWP programs started. IRCC has denied/refused/returned many applications whose employers were agencies since then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Naturgrl and scylla
mr.preetsingh said:
The employer can't be an agency, it's clear since 2019 when HCCP/HSWP programs started. IRCC has denied/refused/returned many applications whose employers were agencies since then.
Click to expand...

Thanks for confirming. That's what I thought as well.
 
mr.preetsingh said:
The employer can't be an agency, it's clear since 2019 when HCCP/HSWP programs started. IRCC has denied/refused/returned many applications whose employers were agencies since then.
Click to expand...
That's interesting. Do you have any screenshots? Are they rejecting agencies with door-to-door caregivers and retirement homes mainly or?
 
Last edited:
Hummingbird89 said:
That's interesting. Do you have any screenshots? Are they rejecting agencies with door-to-door caregivers and retirement homes mainly or?
Click to expand...

It's clear here.

Where applicants do not have 12 months of eligible Canadian work experience at the time of their initial application for permanent residence (nor before an OROWP is issued – refer to the exemption), they must demonstrate that they have obtained a job offer which they are likely to accept that is

  • from a single Canadian employer
    • The employer cannot be a business, but rather must be a private individual(s) seeking to address their in-home care needs
    • The employer cannot be an embassy, high commission or consulate in Canada.
    • Although not a business, the employer is required to obtain a CRA business number
    • The employer can include more than one individual (for example, Pat Smith and Jamie Brown), but must constitute 1 single employer (that is, 1 single CRA business number)
  • for a position outside the province of Quebec
  • for full-time employment (full time means at least 30 hours of paid work per week)
  • non-seasonal
  • in a home child care provider or home support worker occupation
  • genuine and likely to be valid when the applicant is issued the initial OROWP


https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...application-selection-criteria.html#job-offer
 
mr.preetsingh said:
It's clear here.

Where applicants do not have 12 months of eligible Canadian work experience at the time of their initial application for permanent residence (nor before an OROWP is issued – refer to the exemption), they must demonstrate that they have obtained a job offer which they are likely to accept that is

  • from a single Canadian employer
    • The employer cannot be a business, but rather must be a private individual(s) seeking to address their in-home care needs
    • The employer cannot be an embassy, high commission or consulate in Canada.
    • Although not a business, the employer is required to obtain a CRA business number
    • The employer can include more than one individual (for example, Pat Smith and Jamie Brown), but must constitute 1 single employer (that is, 1 single CRA business number)
  • for a position outside the province of Quebec
  • for full-time employment (full time means at least 30 hours of paid work per week)
  • non-seasonal
  • in a home child care provider or home support worker occupation
  • genuine and likely to be valid when the applicant is issued the initial OROWP


https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...application-selection-criteria.html#job-offer
Click to expand...
In this entire post, I am referring to what it said before June 16 or April 30th. Many applications were sent in before this date, yet the decision criteria are retroactive. I know the page very well and it did not have that first bullet point.
 
Hummingbird89 said:
In this entire post, I am referring to what it said before June 16 or April 30th. Many applications were sent in before this date, yet the decision criteria are retroactive. I know the page very well and it did not have that first bullet point.
Click to expand...
This is applicable since the very first day HCCP/HSWP started. Every RCIC knows this.
 
Hummingbird89 said:
I went into the actual program law myself especially to find those subparagraphs and it never said anything like that.
Click to expand...
Well, Try filing an application with the agency as an employer and let us know the outcome.

All the best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hummingbird89
If there is anyone out there in the caregiver pilot program that has been rejected due to having an agency in the place of employer, please respond to this thread. I have done a thorough search on Google with site:www.canadavisa.com as the tail and there have been zero discussions on this. Zero rejections noted in the forum here.
Thank you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
OWP FOR PR SPOUSE OUTLAND QUESTIONS
Replies
3
Views
203
Family Class Sponsorship
Naturgrl
N