Received AOR on 3rd of April; application got denied exactly a week later

[whymeee]

This sentence in the rejection email doesn't make sense to me

Work experience with COMPANYNAME from 21 Dec 2011 to 19 Feb 2013 is for a period less than 12 months (28.21 hours per week).

21 Dec 2011 to 19 Feb 2013 is more than 12 months, isnt it?

That's what I thought! Well I just sent an email to Sydney.. eager to see what they have to say. I should get a response from them & whoever is in charge of GCMS notes within 20-30 days. Then I can see what my next course of action will be, if Sydney's response is not favourable.

Fingers crossed.

 

[seab]

Yo mentioned that you were mvp. what was your job title/ NOC?

 

[seab]

Also did you take any months off work? would that be a reason that it 's not 12 months because I read on the CIC website that the average Can holiday/ vacation time is 2 weeks.

 

[shibinp]

just a side note to this discussion (it was already mentioned somewhere in this thread though..)

there are 2 OPs:

1) http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/op/op25-eng.pdf (for application received before Jan 2013)

2) http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/op/op25A-eng.pdf (applicable to the application received on or after Jan 2013)

 

[shibinp]

This sentence in the rejection email doesn't make sense to me

Work experience with COMPANYNAME from 21 Dec 2011 to 19 Feb 2013 is for a period less than 12 months (28.21 hours per week).

21 Dec 2011 to 19 Feb 2013 is more than 12 months, isnt it?

yes and no: there are more thank 12 months in that period, however, based on 28.21 X number of weeks between that period is not greater than or equal to 12 months of work experience (approximate 1564 hrs)

I am sorry for you..

I guess you were bit hurry and rushed you application, I would suggest everyone to wait until we have some extra months on our total experience to ensure that the total hours covered the requirement fully.

 

[winter_love]

yes and no: there are more thank 12 months in that period, however, based on 28.21 X number of weeks between that period is not greater than or equal to 12 months of work experience (approximate 1564 hrs)

I am sorry for you..

Just curious, how did you calculate that? 28 hours x 60 weeks = 1680. Even if it was only 1564, shouldn't he still be eligible as the requirement is 1560?

 

[shibinp]

Just curious, how did you calculate that? 28 hours x 60 weeks = 1680. Even if it was only 1564, shouldn't I still be eligible as the requirement is 1560?

yes, you are right if we calculate based on 30 hrs / week requirement. I didn't calculate exactly when I wrote my previous post, all I thought is to give a general idea.

I guess they calculated based on 35.7 hrs/week, if that is the case you can surely contact CIC and get it clarified. Mostly it might be a mistake from their end. Call or send an email asking explanation.

all the best.

 

[from_mumbai]

yes, you are right if we calculate based on 30 hrs / week requirement. I didn't calculate exactly when I wrote my previous post, all I thought is to give a general idea.

I guess they calculated based on 35.7 hrs/week, if that is the case you can surely contact CIC and get it clarified. Mostly it might be a mistake from their end. Call or send an email asking explanation.

all the best.

by the way it was 37.5 hrs not 35.7.

and they should have calculated the hours depending on when he applied..

whymeee, when did you apply? and which version of forms did u use? old or new?

 

[shibinp]

Thanks a lot shibinp. I already called CIC, but the lady said there's nothing she can help me with. Hopefully someone from Sydney will email me back sooner rather than later and get this whole situation clarified.

no problem,
I even read some other thread that, one of the applicants got a refusal letter quoting another applicant's AOR and some other mistakes too. Also the turnaround time is very surprising in your case (just a week after receiving AOR), so I guess there is something really went wrong. Don't give up, and update us how it goes.

all the best

 

[whymeee]

Yo mentioned that you were mvp. what was your job title/ NOC?

NOC 2242. Didn't take any time off whatsoever.

by the way it was 37.5 hrs not 35.7.

and they should have calculated the hours depending on when he applied..

whymeee, when did you apply? and which version of forms did u use? old or new?

They received my application on February 19th, 2013, and I used the new forms.

 

[from_mumbai]

They received my application on February 19th, 2013, and I used the new forms.

if that is the case, then I really cant understand what could be wrong!
I guess u can only wait for them to reply to your email and see what they've got to say..

 

[whymeee]

I guess you were bit hurry and rushed you application, I would suggest everyone to wait until we have some extra months on our total experience to ensure that the total hours covered the requirement fully.

Yes, because my PGWP was about to expire and I was eager to receive AOR so that I could apply for BOWP.

Quick question. If I reapply, will they take experience gained under implied status into account? (in which case I should have over 1700 eligible regular hours accumulated)

 

[yahoo7]

Yes, because my PGWP was about to expire and I was eager to receive AOR so that I could apply for BOWP.

Quick question. If I reapply, will they take experience gained under implied status into account? (in which case I should have over 1700 eligible regular hours accumulated)

Yes, the experience under implied status is also counted. You have to provide the necessary documentation to prove your legal status in Canada. Read the document checklist and this point is in there.

 

[Kozmoj]

I am sorry to hear that.

I want to give you guys an one more opinion thinking about the reason why whymeee's application got denied.

My opinion is this.

In the old rules, they mentioned that "For the Canadian Experience Class full-time equivalence, or 1,950 hours of paid employment over a period at least of 12 months WILL ALSO BE CONSIDERED.", beside the definition of work experience, "Experience can be calculated by ADDING UP THE NUMBER OF WEEKS OF FULL-TIME WORK, i.e. 37.5 hours per week in one job or A TOTAL OF AT LEAST 37.5 HOURS PER WEEK IN MORE THAN ONE JOB, in one or more of the NOC categories."

That means, ORIGINALLY, "only" at least 37.5 hours work per week can be considered as a full-time work. And the experience could be calculated by adding up the number of WEEKS, not the sum of the work HOURS. But, as they include one exceptional option, total work hours (1,950) ALSO had been considered as a full-time equivalence.

But, in the new rules, the sentence about the total work hour has been deleted in some reason. I think we have to think this carefully. I am not sure it really does have meaning or not at the moment. But, if they removed that sentence on purpose, that means they are not going to give us the exceptional option any more (Sum of total work hours; since they mentioned this option with an work, "ALSO"; also be considered).

When we calculate the work experience with this concept, I can show you the examples.

If someone has worked
25 hours / week for a week and
30 hours / week for 50 week and
35 hours / week for a week for a perion of an year (52 weeks).
In this case, total work hours can be calculated as 1,560 hours (average 30 hours/week for 52 weeks). This calculation makes you eligible for CEC application with old rule. But in this case, number of weeks of full-time work is 51 weeks, which gives you less than 12 months (52 weeks) of work experience. This calculation makes you ineligible for CEC applicatino under new rule.

Example 1
25 hours X 1 week = 0 week full-time work,
30 hours X 50 weeks = 50 weeks full-time work,
35 hours X 1 week = 1 week full-time work
-> 51 week of full-time works -> insufficient!!!

Example 2
25 hours X 1 week = 0 week full-time work,
30 hours X 51 weeks = 51 weeks full-time work,
35 hours X 1 week = 1 week full-time work
-> 52 week of full-time works during their 53 weeks of period -> sufficient!

So, in my understanding, if someone want their work experience to be considered as a full-time equivalent with the part time job, they should work more than 30 hours per week in MORE THAN ONE JOB for 52 weeks to make it full-time equivalent work experience. (Number of weeks, which they have worked more than 30 hours per week, should be higher than 52.)

Does this make sense?

 

[pmpm]

I am sorry to hear that.

I want to give you guys an one more opinion thinking about the reason why whymeee's application got denied.

My opinion is this.

In the old rules, they mentioned that "For the Canadian Experience Class full-time equivalence, or 1,950 hours of paid employment over a period at least of 12 months WILL ALSO BE CONSIDERED.", beside the definition of work experience, "Experience can be calculated by ADDING UP THE NUMBER OF WEEKS OF FULL-TIME WORK, i.e. 37.5 hours per week in one job or A TOTAL OF AT LEAST 37.5 HOURS PER WEEK IN MORE THAN ONE JOB, in one or more of the NOC categories."

That means, ORIGINALLY, "only" at least 37.5 hours work per week can be considered as a full-time work. And the experience could be calculated by adding up the number of WEEKS, not the sum of the work HOURS. But, as they include one exceptional option, total work hours (1,950) ALSO had been considered as a full-time equivalence.

But, in the new rules, the sentence about the total work hour has been deleted in some reason. I think we have to think this carefully. I am not sure it really does have meaning or not at the moment. But, if they removed that sentence on purpose, that means they are not going to give us the exceptional option any more (Sum of total work hours; since they mentioned this option with an work, "ALSO"; also be considered).

When we calculate the work experience with this concept, I can show you the examples.

If someone has worked
25 hours / week for a week and
30 hours / week for 50 week and
35 hours / week for a week for a perion of an year (52 weeks).
In this case, total work hours can be calculated as 1,560 hours (average 30 hours/week for 52 weeks). This calculation makes you eligible for CEC application with old rule. But in this case, number of weeks of full-time work is 51 weeks, which gives you less than 12 months (52 weeks) of work experience. This calculation makes you ineligible for CEC applicatino under new rule.

Example 1
25 hours X 1 week = 0 week full-time work,
30 hours X 50 weeks = 50 weeks full-time work,
35 hours X 1 week = 1 week full-time work
-> 51 week of full-time works -> insufficient!!!

Example 2
25 hours X 1 week = 0 week full-time work,
30 hours X 51 weeks = 51 weeks full-time work,
35 hours X 1 week = 1 week full-time work
-> 52 week of full-time works during their 53 weeks of period -> sufficient!

So, in my understanding, if someone want their work experience to be considered as a full-time equivalent with the part time job, they should work more than 30 hours per week in MORE THAN ONE JOB for 52 weeks to make it full-time equivalent work experience. (Number of weeks, which they have worked more than 30 hours per week, should be higher than 52.)

Does this make sense?

Totally...so the point is the weeks when whymee worked less than 30hours were not considered at all?? ....Sad