proof of funds

[oyfili]

Hello do people on open work permit applying under CEC in Express Entry need proof of funds?

 

[ONLYMISSR]

yes ...http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/skilled/funds.asp

 

[pziegler1986]

Another example of the CIC screwing non-LMIA work permit holders...ummm what if we are already working in Canada? How is there no exception for this particular situation?

 

[oyfili]

yeah it sucks

 

[doubleym]

Another example of the CIC screwing non-LMIA work permit holders...ummm what if we are already working in Canada? How is there no exception for this particular situation?

It is peculiar that CIC differentiate between Open permit holders and LMIA-supported TFWs in this way when both could be employed for the same duration. Especially considering you are filing for PR, the end result being that you are able to work anywhere in the country for anyone...

I'd think a more logical approach would be that anyone currently working in Canada, with a valid work permit while they're waiting for their PR application to process wouldn't need to prove that they have the funds to settle...when they're already 'settled' with employment, housing etc. It makes sense for anyone applying from overseas who would need to find a place to live, secure employment etc.

But then again, that might be too logical...

 

[kateg]

Another example of the CIC screwing non-LMIA work permit holders...ummm what if we are already working in Canada? How is there no exception for this particular situation?

Let's check the official CIC manual:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/perm/econ/fsw/selection.asp

Pursuant to R76(1)(b)(ii), applicants are not required to have settlement funds if the applicant is authorized to work in Canada and has been awarded points for arranged employment in Canada, as defined in R82(1), under R82(2)(a), (b) or (d).

So, let's take a look at the definitions of arranged employment:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/perm/econ/fsw/employment/index.asp
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/perm/econ/fsw/employment/may4.asp

That gets us:

* Bridging open work permit
R82(2)(a): Working on a work permit based on LMIA in type 0, level A or B of the NOC
R82(2)(b): Working on a work permit based on LMIA exempt due to NAFTA, Canada Provincial/Terrotorial agreement, and intra-company transferees
R82(2)(d): Working for a different employer (or on an open work permit) and a job offer was made based on a LMIA.

So, the exception is there, sort-of. If you get a LMIA (for the job you are already working in), then you don't need proof of funds.

This ties in with this page:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/skilled/funds.asp

You do not have to show that you have these funds if:
you have a valid offer of arranged employment in Canada AND you are currently working or authorized to work in Canada.

So, LMIA means no need for proof of funds.

 

[kateg]

It is peculiar that CIC differentiate between Open permit holders and LMIA-supported TFWs in this way when both could be employed for the same duration. Especially considering you are filing for PR, the end result being that you are able to work anywhere in the country for anyone...

The LMIA is intended to prove that no qualified Canadian could be found. So, the person working on an open work permit may have taken the job from a Canadian. The person working on a LMIA permit presumably did not.

The government sees immigration as a necessary evil, and because it is an evil, they want as little of it as possible without hurting Canadian competitiveness abroad. In that sense, it's easier to understand why they make this so hard for immigrants to come, and so hard on employers to help. If there's a Canadian that's qualified - any Canadian, they want the job to go to that person, even if the immigrant would do a better job.

 

[pziegler1986]

Let's check the official CIC manual:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/perm/econ/fsw/selection.asp

So, let's take a look at the definitions of arranged employment:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/perm/econ/fsw/employment/index.asp
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/perm/econ/fsw/employment/may4.asp

That gets us:

* Bridging open work permit
R82(2)(a): Working on a work permit based on LMIA in type 0, level A or B of the NOC
R82(2)(b): Working on a work permit based on LMIA exempt due to NAFTA, Canada Provincial/Terrotorial agreement, and intra-company transferees
R82(2)(d): Working for a different employer (or on an open work permit) and a job offer was made based on a LMIA.

So, the exception is there, sort-of. If you get a LMIA (for the job you are already working in), then you don't need proof of funds.

This ties in with this page:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/skilled/funds.asp

So, LMIA means no need for proof of funds.

That's not the point to be honest.

I'm questioning the logic behind candidates who are already living in Canada, have a job and are 'settled' having to prove funds vs a candidate who has never set foot in the country before.

 

[mf4361]

It is indeed a bit strange for people who are already working under LMIA-exempted permit to differentiate from those LMIA-based.

I guess it's because, under EE, a job without LMIA supported is not considered as a "permanent job" per CIC (*1), maybe they consider that source of income as "not sustainable forever". Many would disagree (including myself) but they don't care and in fact they are indeed making open work permit people's life harder and harder because they think it's the reason why Canadian jobs are exploited.

*1 since open work permits are bounded to end at a certain date, either let it expire, extend to LMIA-based TFW, or proceed to PR