What Counts as a ‘Valid Job Offer’?

[bds09]

Hi all,

I recently received an ITA under the CEC and I’m preparing my eAPR. I have 3 years of Canadian work experience with the same employer (NOC TEER 2). I’m currently on a PGWP which expires soon, and my company has already applied for a C20 LMIA-exempt closed work permit to extend my status. As part of the C20 application, my employer provided a letter stating they wish to continue my employment for 2 more years under the same conditions, salary, and duties (same NOC). In my Express Entry profile (pre-ITA), I selected "No" for valid job offer (arranged employment). I am now wondering:

1. Should I keep it as "No" in my eAPR, or change it to "Yes" since I now have the C20 application in progress?

2. If I change it to "Yes," what specific documents are required beyond the offer letter? Does the letter need the specific "valid for one year after PR" clause?

3. Since the IRCC has removed CRS points for job offers, and as a CEC applicant I am already exempt from proof of funds, is there any benefit to saying "Yes"?I am inclined to keep it as "No" to keep the application as clean as possible and avoid the arranged employment documentation requirements, but I want to ensure this isn't seen as a contradiction since I am clearly working for the company under the same conditions.

Thanks in advance for the help!

 

[CanGoldDigger]

Don't complicate it and answer NO. You will need less documentation.

 

[bds09]

Don't complicate it and answer NO. You will need less documentation.

My only concern was to not get flagged as misrepresentation/ inaccurate. But I am going to say No and explain in the LOE that the job offer is not valid for express entry.

 

[scylla]

My only concern was to not get flagged as misrepresentation/ inaccurate. But I am going to say No and explain in the LOE that the job offer is not valid for express entry.

What's the misrepresentation? You are on a PGWP and there's no approved LMIA. This means you do not have a job offer per EE definitions.

 

[CanGoldDigger]

My only concern was to not get flagged as misrepresentation/ inaccurate. But I am going to say No and explain in the LOE that the job offer is not valid for express entry.

Sure but no need to explain anything. There's no misrepresentation here.

 

[bds09]

What's the misrepresentation? You are on a PGWP and there's no approved LMIA. This means you do not have a job offer per EE definitions.

By the time I submit the documents I will be on maintained status, but that too I believe follows pgwp conditions so I think you're right

 

[bds09]

Sure but no need to explain anything. There's no misrepresentation here.

I will anyways have to explain my maintained status right? So I can add a statement regarding having a job offer but not claiming it as it's not valid

 

[CanGoldDigger]

I will anyways have to explain my maintained status right? So I can add a statement regarding having a job offer but not claiming it as it's not valid

You don't have a valid job offer, you don't need to address or explain that, just skip it and say np. No further action required.

 

[bds09]

You don't have a valid job offer, you don't need to address or explain that, just skip it and say np. No further action required.

Okay, thank you for your suggestions! Really appreciate it.

 

[scylla]

By the time I submit the documents I will be on maintained status, but that too I believe follows pgwp conditions so I think you're right

But you still won't have an approved LMIA or an approved LMIA-exempt work permit. This is really straightforward. The answer is a no. This isn't a future looking response.

 

[scylla]

I will anyways have to explain my maintained status right? So I can add a statement regarding having a job offer but not claiming it as it's not valid

No, you don't have to explain your implied status.

 

[bds09]

Undersrood, thanks @scylla