Whether a family with children can enter Canada with expired PR Cards through US

[david1697]

1. The number of PRs who land then remain in Canada despite hardship/ survival jobs/ under/unemployment is significantly higher than that of those PRs who land then leave typically after a short time usually within 6 months (as per numerous case law decisions by the IAD and the FC) because they can't find a job commensurate to their education/ experience/expectations etc.

2. As far back as the Immigration Act and well prior to the IRPA enactment in 2002 successive FSW PRs have tried to sue the Canadian government without any success for 'lying' (to include legitimate expectations argument) to them about their employability in Canada based on their education/ work experience and landed in Canada only to struggle with finding 'suitable' employment which mostly affects those in regulated professions. Actually there is no such promise in the Acts, the regs, operational manuals or even any of the application forms.

3. The IRPA exempts RO breach for PRs working abroad for a Canadian employer on a temporary secondment type full time hours assignment subject to the employer and employee both meeting the strict legislative requirements (effectively locks out small type incorporations typically service providers and mom and pop type set ups purposely created to avoid the RO). This gives the employee some flexibility but mandates a Canadian connection that is also in Canada best interests in relation to the integrity of the immigration system.

Primarily for reason 1 backed up by 2 and 3 the chances of the Feds/ CIC ever giving PRs a pass on the RO because you couldn't make it to live in Canada for a mere 730 days every rolling 5 year period due to 'employment' reasons are virtually nil. The other insurmountable barrier to this to is that however way you put it to the politicians, the courts and the general (read voting) public it screams 'Canada is an insurance' policy that I have in my back pocket in case 'a/b/c' etc happens but some other place is better for me now until then'. Get your citizenship and get rid of the RO for good!

1. Poster above did not say anything about the number of PR who stay , vs those who leave due to difficulty finding a job Most importantly, that statistic is irrelevant to the subject matter, which is the fact that there is significant number of Canadian PR's who are forced to leave because they are unable to find jobs in Canada. And they are not the ones to blame for the fact that Canadian job market is hostile to newly landed immigrants. this is just how it is, no matter how you put it.
I can bet that there is not nearly as much percentage of PR's in US who are leaving the US for the same reason, having college education and not being able to find anything but a survival job.
Sydkadra suggests "in the end there shall be leniency". That's what he says.

I don't even say that, because when you say "Though shalt" people automatically react with negativity on emotional level, with reflexive and near automated "I don't owe you!" Instead, I ask: why all blame PR in Canada for not meeting RO , when job market is being so hostile and not accepting him or her to do anything but doing some minimum wage paying work that don't require even a high school education?

2. Nobody here suggested that we have a case to sue CIC or Canadian Parliament etc. That's not the point!
The point is , for example, I as a Canadian PR am not guilty of the fact that Canadian job market is so totally hostile to me. And I have hard evidence in my hand (hundreds of resumes sent out from my email address to hundreds of jobs, with my wife also having sent hundreds of resumes).
I can also show how many job applications it takes today in the US to get a phone call, and then an interview. 10 resumes (average) = 1 screening phone calls. 3-4 screening calls = one face to face interview. And from there it depends on your luck and how competitive the final stages are, so you can get an offer anywhere from 1st to 20th interview. But it's not a dead end. It's not like you email your resumes to a black hole. Something actually happens. Even when job market was here at its' absolute worse (and it was in such condition until recently), still it was nothing as hostile as what we experienced in Canadian job market. In Canada it's almost like the HR takes some malicious pleasure in rubbing it to your nose and letting you know that you mean nothing, so they wont even acknowledge that they received your resume.
Of course I understand nobody does this in purpose, it's just how economy is. But the point is: why a PR is supposed to be punished by this? Why face dilemma such as: stay in Canada , work for Walmart 6-8 years (total time it takes to get Citizenship), or we will strip you of your PR next time for failing to meet RO?
You see, no one is saying "Let's go sue Canada, they promised us honey and free milk and good jobs" and such nonsense.
We know we can't sue Canada from legal standpoint.
But why you think it's OK to punish PR's for something that is not of their own making? Is PR guilty of being gullible and believing that their skills were required and were in shortage? Are they further guilty for finding out that the only place where they have a shot to get a job is a burger flipping joint?
And is it their fault if they can't stay and meet RO, because they can be gainfully employed where they currently live, versus in Canada?

It's also BAD for Canadians themselves to encourage so many PR's to stay in Canada despite poor job market conditions. The smart thing to do (to help bring back robust job market conditions) would be actually to ALLOW as many Canadian PR's to stay OUT of Canada as necessary to stabilize job market. And to further restrict any future intake of PR's unless there is a real need for more workers to come to Canada.
Who wins from this policy of overflooding Canadian job market with desperate PR's who then get either sad and depressed , flipping burgers or working at Walmart, or leave country and loose all the investment they have made and hardships endured to become PR's?
Aside from question of fairness, what is the rationale for this aggressive enforcement of RO?

 

[Msafiri]

1. I'm averse to making this topic a david1697 and msafiri ping-pong on the merits or demerits of the RO vis a vis the Canadian job market for immigrants but with all due respect you fail to realize the message I'm conveying. I responded to the OPs question on the issue of leniency. I provided 3 salient points why this leniency is unlikely to ever be granted.

2. You for some reason reverted back to the issue of the job market being a mismatch to the FSW programme. This been discussed on the forum to no end and you have expressed your views (many of which I concur with and are valid) on this repeatedly with the same US versus Canada comparisons not just on this section of the forum but in the General Immigration/ Settlement sections. The Feds have made some amendments to introduce schemes linking PR acquisition to having job offers in place thus reducing the FSW non job on arrival pool and for this they are to be commended.

3. However the core issue remains that the Feds have an overview of the economy and work off a GNP/GDP aspect where the total numbers of immigrants count given a population growth target in respect of an overall tax base. To summarize yes its an issue and most unfair that there is a skill/ employment mismatch post landing and sure PRs can take the view they are 'forced' to leave but the general public, the courts (based on extensive RO breach case law) and the Feds have no justifiable reason/sympathy to excuse the RO breach just because you couldn't get a 'suitable' job in Canada.

4. I propose we leave this and agree to disagree on the issue of RO leniency. Lets all wish the OP the best when he returns to Canada.

 

[david1697]

1. I'm averse to making this topic a david1697 and msafiri ping-pong on the merits or demerits of the RO vis a vis the Canadian job market for immigrants but with all due respect you fail to realize the message I'm conveying. I responded to the OPs question on the issue of leniency. I provided 3 salient points why this leniency is unlikely to ever be granted.

2. You for some reason reverted back to the issue of the job market being a mismatch to the FSW programme. This been discussed on the forum to no end and you have expressed your views (many of which I concur with and are valid) on this repeatedly with the same US versus Canada comparisons not just on this section of the forum but in the General Immigration/ Settlement sections. The Feds have made some amendments to introduce schemes linking PR acquisition to having job offers in place thus reducing the FSW non job on arrival pool and for this they are to be commended.

3. However the core issue remains that the Feds have an overview of the economy and work off a GNP/GDP aspect where the total numbers of immigrants count given a population growth target in respect of an overall tax base. To summarize yes its an issue and most unfair that there is a skill/ employment mismatch post landing and sure PRs can take the view they are 'forced' to leave but the general public, the courts (based on extensive RO breach case law) and the Feds have no justifiable reason/sympathy to excuse the RO breach just because you couldn't get a 'suitable' job in Canada.

4. I propose we leave this and agree to disagree on the issue of RO leniency. Lets all wish the OP the best when he returns to Canada.

1. Dear msfairi, just as you have points and post your opinion, so do I.
One of the recurring things I notice in online debates is that someone will post his or her opinion, you will share yours. And immediately they see an issue, because "this was debated over and over again".
Well, if you take this position and apply it to yourself, then you shouldn't be participating in this debate either.
After all,RO subject has been discussed over and over so many times (including perhaps by you), so what is the point of you stating what has already been said so many times in past?

Of course, I don't think that way and don't ever suggest anyone else when to chime into or refrain from a debate, and what portion of their opinion to share here, because I don't believe I have the authority to make such a decision on behalf of other individuals.
And I respectfully ask that you take the same, mutually considerate approach to others. I thank you in advance for your understanding and cooperation.

2 & 3. I guess there is some kind of misunderstanding, may be two of us have different things in our minds though we use the words implying we are speaking of the same subject.

You write: "PRs can take the view they are 'forced' to leave but the general public, the courts (based on extensive RO breach case law) and the Feds have no justifiable reason/sympathy to excuse the RO breach".

But I NEVER EVER suggested , claimed or implied that the public, courts and the Feds have any sympathy and excuse for breach of RO by PR on the grounds of PR not being able to find a job. If you think I ever implied such a thing, please know that this is not so. To the contrary, I am keenly aware of punitive measures taken , with full wrath and ire of angry officers unloaded on PR's once they are caught at POE in breach of RO. Even mere suspicion of the breach of RO seems sufficient to wreak havoc and cause tremendous amount of agitation and anger on part of the border officers, who seem to feel like they are in possession of righteous damnation powers when it comes to admitting PR's suspected of staying out of Canada over 3 years.

Now, what I do is asking the following quesiton: Why Canada first floods the job marked with FSW's (remember, these are Skilled Workers allegedly brought into Canada due to shortage of individuals with the similar skills in Canadian job market) , and then punishes the same FSW when latter find themselves in breach of RO due to lack of opportunity in white collar job market where they have proven skills , education and experience to work?

I am a rational person and I always ask WHY such and such a thing is happening.

If I saw a traffic intersection where all 4 lights turned Red and then Green at the same time, with cars colliding and accidents happening, you bet I would also ask WHY is this happening so? What is the rationale and purpose behind it?

We live in a Democratic society, we are responsible for governing it, if not directly then through our representatives. People who work in government have sworn to be in our service, not vice versa.
We have to constantly think of these issues and ask ourselves such questions, so we can think of the ways to improve the way our society works, and as a result we can live in a happier, more harmonious society in future . Pushing these questions under the carpet , thinking "Well, those are big guys, they have big b-a-l-l-s, if they decided so then this is how it must be" doesn't sound quite right to me.
Even though I may not be able to do anything to change how things are working today, at very least I can raise these questions and hope others also think about it and ask what is the benefit of certain rigid policy, especially for native Canadians?

 

[Leon]

David, what do you want immigration to do for you? Do you want a leeway on the RO because you didn't find a job?

Like I have said a couple of times already, no country that I know of lets you keep your PR forever. PR is there to give certain rights to people who want to live in that country but are not yet citizens or not planning to. Other countries will revoke your PR too if you move away for a few years as far as I know. Why should Canada be different? Is it wrong of Canada immigration to enforce their own rules?

As for Canada immigration making it too easy for skilled workers in the past, then yes, they did but of course it is also on you to figure out if there is a job for you before you make such a move. In any case, they have changed the skilled worker program now and made it harder so you complaining about the past is currently not accomplishing anything towards changing things in the future because there has already been a change.

 

[david1697]

David, what do you want immigration to do for you? Do you want a leeway on the RO because you didn't find a job?

Like I have said a couple of times already, no country that I know of lets you keep your PR forever. PR is there to give certain rights to people who want to live in that country but are not yet citizens or not planning to. Other countries will revoke your PR too if you move away for a few years as far as I know. Why should Canada be different? Is it wrong of Canada immigration to enforce their own rules?

As for Canada immigration making it too easy for skilled workers in the past, then yes, they did but of course it is also on you to figure out if there is a job for you before you make such a move. In any case, they have changed the skilled worker program now and made it harder so you complaining about the past is currently not accomplishing anything towards changing things in the future because there has already been a change.

Leon, I am not so hopelessly naive as to expect to get a leeway from immigration Canada.
For all the practical purposes, I know my PR status in Canada is gone.
Even though I still have it, it's just a matter of me next time traveling to Canada before that status will be taken away from me.

What I am asking is: is it really fair to punish Canadian PR's for breach of RO, when it's obvious that it's not their fault they can't find a job(other than survival job) in a hostile job market in Canada, and forced to go somewhere else where they can be gainfully employed?
It's FSW we are talking about, not people who immigrated to Canada under any OTHER category.
FSW's are those who were selected based on their skills, education and experience , and specifically told there is a shortage in their field in Canada and need to employ them.
Why are they punished for the hostile job market conditions that are not of their making and are complete opposite of what they were supposedly selected for? And what benefit is there for Canada and native Canadians when such an enforcement measures are taken to bring as many PR's to stay inside Canada while job market is so hostile to PR's and flooded with the over-supply of skilled labor? This is my question. Can you answer the question I ask without getting defensive?
Your becoming defensive tells me you feel guilty and understand that it's wrong what Canada does, but you are just too emotionally attached, perhaps even working for Canadian government, so you can't possibly agree on conscious level with what your unconscious knows and understands too well.

 

[Msafiri]

1. Dear msfairi, just as you have points and post your opinion, so do I.
One of the recurring things I notice in online debates is that someone will post his or her opinion, you will share yours. And immediately they see an issue, because "this was debated over and over again".
Well, if you take this position and apply it to yourself, then you shouldn't be participating in this debate either.
After all,RO subject has been discussed over and over so many times (including perhaps by you), so what is the point of you stating what has already been said so many times in past?

Of course, I don't think that way and don't ever suggest anyone else when to chime into or refrain from a debate, and what portion of their opinion to share here, because I don't believe I have the authority to make such a decision on behalf of other individuals.
And I respectfully ask that you take the same, mutually considerate approach to others. I thank you in advance for your understanding and cooperation......

Point taken and understood.

......Now, what I do is asking the following quesiton: Why Canada first floods the job marked with FSW's (remember, these are Skilled Workers allegedly brought into Canada due to shortage of individuals with the similar skills in Canadian job market) , and then punishes the same FSW when latter find themselves in breach of RO due to lack of opportunity in white collar job market where they have proven skills , education and experience to work?......

Historically immigration was purely Federal other than the Province of Quebec (QSW). Feds has a target number of immigrants driven by a "we need X hundred thousand PRs" admitted per fiscal year to enable population growth and with it an increase in the tax base - all demographics driven. In fact the CIC Minister had to present an annual report indicating target PR umbers and if these had been achieved. On paper a successful PR applicant was one matching in education/skill/work experience in Canadian employment sectors either demanding the PR skills and/or showing growth in the sector. Canada being a resource based economy had a strong shift/bias towards Engineers.

As you know this is a regulated profession. What the Feds didn't do is check the actual reality on the ground i.e. the stakeholders being employers never got involved in setting up the points matrix. The reality is that Canada hasn't had a shortage of say Mechanical Engineers but there is one of skilled trades e.g welders. On paper the points matrix passes the Mechanical Engineer but fails the Welder whereas in reality it should do the opposite since the welder has multiple job openings awaiting him/her. Add in to that soft skills are as integral to employment as the education/work experience so you have issues over language. The CIC FSW language benchmark was unrealistically low for working in many positions where fluency is required to maintain safe operations. Add to these the Feds reducing the point matrix from 75 to 67 and this just added a deluge of FSW PRS to the job market. Tie this into at least 2 recessions one each in the last 2 decades and it doesn't make for rosy reading.

The Feds have scrapped the old FSW. They introduced the PNP schemes as they let Provinces handle PR application knowing the nominee was likely to be productive as they had a suitable job. The government had good intentions in boosting the economy and tax base and in return offering PR status to several hundred thousand applicants on an annual basis. That they never checked the situation on the ground was a failure on their part but its seemingly not enough of a reason to waive the RO. That the Feds have made adjustments to the PR scheme makes the issue effectively moot.

 

[Leon]

Leon, I am not so hopelessly naive as to expect to get a leeway from immigration Canada.
For all the practical purposes, I know my PR status in Canada is gone.
Even though I still have it, it's just a matter of me next time traveling to Canada before that status will be taken away from me.

What I am asking is: is it really fair to punish Canadian PR's for breach of RO, when it's obvious that it's not their fault they can't find a job(other than survival job) in a hostile job market in Canada, and forced to go somewhere else where they can be gainfully employed?
It's FSW we are talking about, not people who immigrated to Canada under any OTHER category.
FSW's are those who were selected based on their skills, education and experience , and specifically told there is a shortage in their field in Canada and need to employ them.
Why are they punished for the hostile job market conditions that are not of their making and are complete opposite of what they were supposedly selected for? And what benefit is there for Canada and native Canadians when such an enforcement measures are taken to bring as many PR's to stay inside Canada while job market is so hostile to PR's and flooded with the over-supply of skilled labor? This is my question. Can you answer the question I ask without getting defensive?
Your becoming defensive tells me you feel guilty and understand that it's wrong what Canada does, but you are just too emotionally attached, perhaps even working for Canadian government, so you can't possibly agree on conscious level with what your unconscious knows and understands too well.

If you think I feel somehow guilty about the policies of Canada immigration, you are reading me wrong. I do not work for immigration nor the Canadian government and never did.

I just don't share your opinion. For you, it's clear as day that FSW's were brought to Canada under false pretenses thinking they were needed when they weren't, not finding jobs through no fault of their own and being forced to leave and now they are being punished by having to lose their PR's because of that.

For me, it looks a bit different. I immigrated as a skilled worker myself. I never felt that I was selected for something or promised a job. It was up to me to make sure of that before I immigrated. If I didn't do that, tough luck for me.

However, I get the feeling that most of the people we see on this forum looking to sneak back in after not meeting the RO never seriously looked for a job in Canada. Sure we see some stories of people who looked for a job and didn't find one but I tend to see a lot more stories from people saying that they did a quick landing and never came back. Busy with their lives in their home country where it didn't turn out to be so bad after all or making big money in a Gulf country and not wanting to leave there. Or maybe working on a permit in the US, hoping for a green card and having applied for PR as a backup. Maybe sleeping on the fact that they have 3 years they can stay outside and still meet the RO while 3 years can pass quickly. But you know what the RO is when you immigrate. You choose not to meet it, you know what happens.

So I think we will have to agree to disagree on that.

 

[david1697]

If you think I feel somehow guilty about the policies of Canada immigration, you are reading me wrong. I do not work for immigration nor the Canadian government and never did.

I just don't share your opinion. For you, it's clear as day that FSW's were brought to Canada under false pretenses thinking they were needed when they weren't, not finding jobs through no fault of their own and being forced to leave and now they are being punished by having to lose their PR's because of that.

For me, it looks a bit different. I immigrated as a skilled worker myself. I never felt that I was selected for something or promised a job. It was up to me to make sure of that before I immigrated. If I didn't do that, tough luck for me.

However, I get the feeling that most of the people we see on this forum looking to sneak back in after not meeting the RO never seriously looked for a job in Canada. Sure we see some stories of people who looked for a job and didn't find one but I tend to see a lot more stories from people saying that they did a quick landing and never came back. Busy with their lives in their home country where it didn't turn out to be so bad after all or making big money in a Gulf country and not wanting to leave there. Or maybe working on a permit in the US, hoping for a green card and having applied for PR as a backup. Maybe sleeping on the fact that they have 3 years they can stay outside and still meet the RO while 3 years can pass quickly. But you know what the RO is when you immigrate. You choose not to meet it, you know what happens.

So I think we will have to agree to disagree on that.

Please read carefully what I write. I did not ask you to share my opinion. I never ask anyone to share my opinion, because it's self evident to me that everyone is entitled to their own.

Here is what I asked:
Why are they punished for the hostile job market conditions that are not of their making and are complete opposite of what they were supposedly selected for? And what benefit is there for Canada and native Canadians when such an enforcement measures are taken to bring as many PR's to stay inside Canada while job market is so hostile to PR's and flooded with the over-supply of skilled labor?

Can you answer the questions I asked directly, without beating around the bushes?

As to arguments you made in lieu of answering my questions, let's examine them:

1. No matter how you put it, PR's are punished for not meeting RO. Are you disputing that? Yes or No?
2. Is it not a matter of fact (not just my claim) that FSW's are brought to Canada based on pretense of shortage of labor in the given field, and their skills, education and experience to fill the shortage? Yes or No?
3. Is it not also a matter of fact that there is a real shortage of vacancies in Canada, and fierce competition to fill almost any skilled position (not to confuse with skilled trades, such as crane operator and etc., or with regulated professions, such as in medical or engineering field)? Yes or No?
4. Isn't above further aggravated by the fact that the entire experience, skills and education of Newly Landed Immigrant are ignored in a vicious cycle of "Though do not have Canadian experience" ? Yes or No?
5. Isn't it further a matter of fact that due to #3 and #4 (which contradicts #2) a considerable number of FSW's (Skilled, highly educated, selected for skills and experience PR's) are either working on so called survival jobs (flipping burgers, working as cashiers at Walmart, etc.) OR forced to leave Canada and seek better job opportunity somewhere else?

I am not asking you to share my opinion, I am asking you pointed questions that require honest answers, and not evasive excuses to avoid them.

Best regards!

 

[david1697]

Add in to that soft skills are as integral to employment as the education/work experience so you have issues over language. The CIC FSW language benchmark was unrealistically low for working in many positions where fluency is required to maintain safe operations. Add to these the Feds reducing the point matrix from 75 to 67 and this just added a deluge of FSW PRS to the job market. Tie this into at least 2 recessions one each in the last 2 decades and it doesn't make for rosy reading.

msafiri, my spouse has US college education, from one of the top schools in her field of education in this country. She is not lacking soft skills. She works for international organization and delivers speeches in presentations abroad, in multiple languages, including the English.

The fact is Canadian job market is extremely hostile. Out of so many resumes she had sent ONE had called her and said "We will let you know if your candidacy is selected for further review" (They never called her again. When my spouse emailed, they replied that they didn't select her for further review). None of the others even bothered to call. It was generic "We found a better candidate" printout they would email at best. What kind of job market is this that no matter what she applied for there ALWAYS was someone so much better than her that she didn't ever get a chance for an interview, let alone a job offer? Wow! Are Canadian job applicants so much superior to professional , educated and experienced US workers that US worker with "exceeding expectations" track record have no chance of landing a job in Canada?

Or may be the issue is a lack of the jobs and , in some cases, hundreds of people applying for each open spot in white collar field? Which one do you think is more likely cause of such bizarre outcome?

The Feds have scrapped the old FSW. They introduced the PNP schemes as they let Provinces handle PR application knowing the nominee was likely to be productive as they had a suitable job. The government had good intentions in boosting the economy and tax base and in return offering PR status to several hundred thousand applicants on an annual basis. That they never checked the situation on the ground was a failure on their part but its seemingly not enough of a reason to waive the RO. That the Feds have made adjustments to the PR scheme makes the issue effectively moot.

Feds scrapped the old FSW after granting hundreds of thousands of PR's. Issue is not moot as long as those PR's exist.
They may have solved it for FUTURE generations of PR's (which we will have to wait and see. We don't know yet how will this new program work, and I am not sure why Feds keep bringing so many new immigrants when the PR's already brought in can't find jobs).
But they certainly didn't address the issue of old FSW's facing hostile job market conditions in Canada.
I bet the old FSW PR's condition will only aggravate with introduction of new program, and even more old FSW's will stay out of skilled jobs and reduced to survival jobs.

Again, here is what I ask in light of facts discussed:

Why old FSW PR's are punished for the hostile job market conditions that are not of their making and are complete opposite of what they were supposedly selected for?
And what benefit is there for Canada and native Canadians when such an enforcement measures are taken to bring as many PR's to stay inside Canada while job market is so hostile to PR's and flooded with the over-supply of skilled labor?

I hope someone can give me an honest answer here.

 

[Leon]

David, you never answer any of my questions either.

You want to say PR's are punished if they don't follow the rules. I don't really see it as a punishment. You get the PR under certain conditions. If you do not fulfill these conditions, you lose it again. Kind of like if you rent an apartment. If you don't pay the rent, you get evicted. Are you being punished?

You want to say that PR's were selected. I dispute that. PR's were not selected from a group of the best applicants. There was a points system and either you passed or you failed. You knew this off the bat before you applied. Unlike now where there is a selection where people apply and the top applicants get selected.

You want to say there is a shortage of vacancies. I really can not answer that. It depends on the time and places where you applied as well as the occupation. I met an engineer from Iran. He had immigrated to Toronto. After 6 months, he couldn't get a job and wanted to go home. Then he decided to try other provinces. He found a job in Alberta. If he had gone home and not looked further, he would probably be agreeing with you on this thread how unfair immigration is that they "selected" him for being an engineer when there were no jobs for him and now he is being "punished" by losing his PR.

 

[torontosm]

The smart thing to do (to help bring back robust job market conditions) would be actually to ALLOW as many Canadian PR's to stay OUT of Canada as necessary to stabilize job market.

The easiest thing to do would be to stop all immigration until the market has stabilized and there are sufficient jobs for new immigrants.

 

[david1697]

The easiest thing to do would be to stop all immigration until the market has stabilized and there are sufficient jobs for new immigrants.

Of course, the employment based immigration must halt (or sufficiently reduced) until the job market is stabilized. No doubt about it.

Instead, hundreds of thousands more immigrants are being brought in , and those who can't find a job and forced to leave are stripped of PR status (thus forcing the remaining PR's to stay, or else face the same consequences).

 

[david1697]

David, you never answer any of my questions either.

You want to say PR's are punished if they don't follow the rules. I don't really see it as a punishment. You get the PR under certain conditions. If you do not fulfill these conditions, you lose it again. Kind of like if you rent an apartment. If you don't pay the rent, you get evicted. Are you being punished?

You want to say that PR's were selected. I dispute that. PR's were not selected from a group of the best applicants. There was a points system and either you passed or you failed. You knew this off the bat before you applied. Unlike now where there is a selection where people apply and the top applicants get selected.

You want to say there is a shortage of vacancies. I really can not answer that. It depends on the time and places where you applied as well as the occupation. I met an engineer from Iran. He had immigrated to Toronto. After 6 months, he couldn't get a job and wanted to go home. Then he decided to try other provinces. He found a job in Alberta. If he had gone home and not looked further, he would probably be agreeing with you on this thread how unfair immigration is that they "selected" him for being an engineer when there were no jobs for him and now he is being "punished" by losing his PR.

Leon, what specific question you asked which I did not answer? Please tell me so I know what you refer to.

You have so far dodged every single question I asked, instead you make some interpretations of facts I state, and then debate those interpretations at length, once again refusing to give me straightforward answers on questions I ask.

And what exactly are you disputing? Wasn't point system based on A) Alleged economic needs of Canada of B) Certain skilled immigrants , with certain education, work experience, age and knowledge of languages? Wasn't it a selection in itself, just as colleges select students based on their performance on the SAT , GRE, GMAT, LSAT and other tests? Someone designed those tests to select individuals who are fit to immigrate. Otherwise you would have anyone who sent app. within a time window qualify, regardless of points, skills, education, work experience and etc.
Your dispute is moot, Sir.

Next. Emperor Justinian once upon a time issued an order to his subjects which obligated them, under the penalty of severe punishment (up to execution) to pass gases in public and in presence of each other. As ridiculous as the order was, still everyone had to obey, because Emperor said so and sealed his order.
I am sure there were then people like you who argued along the lines of "Well, this is an order from Emperor,a rule we, as subjects, must all obey, so we all must pass gases and make every place smell foul".

Of course in times of Emperor Justinian no one could question such order without a risk to their lives.

But, luckily, we live in Democracy and it's not an Emperor, but elected Parliamentarians who make the law. This gives us all the more reason to question the rationale behind any law they pass, which is precisely what I am doing.

You see, I am not disputing that RO as a law exists. I am not saying that PR's who breach RO can go to court and sue CIC for granting them PR status and not providing them with jobs. I don't even say that PR's are entitled to leniency (as the other poster said).

But what I am doing is questioning the rationale behind such aggressive enforcement of RO at times when hundreds of thousands of PR's are brought into Canada while job market is so hostile to Landed Immigrants.

I pointedly ask what benefit is there for Canada and native Canadians when such an enforcement measures are taken to bring as many PR's to stay inside Canada while job market is so hostile to PR's and flooded with the over-supply of skilled labor?

And why old FSW PR's are ones who must carry the full weight for the hostile job market conditions that are not of their making and are complete opposite of what they were supposedly grated a PR for?


Again, I am asking what is rationale and purpose behind it? Unlike in times of Justinian, we have a control over those whom we elect and we have every right to question why our elected officials make one or another law.
While no one disputes that law in effect is a law in effect, still, we have every right to question the reason why certain thing is a law to begin with.

DO you still not understand what my point is?

 

[Sydkadra]

Hi David and All
The Immigration system runs on bringing the annual quota of people totaling around 250,000 or so which includes family, refugees, FSW, so on and so far categories to Canada which needs people for all its cities, towns and villages. The economy of a country depends of number of people, its participation and productivity and hence Canada needs people to occupy houses, consume the utilities and food, manage healthcare etc.. so that the economy runs and prosper and in this process it is not looked that whether these people generate money for themselves to pay for all the expenses to run the economy. The real estate being the major part of the economic growth and hence the people are needed to prop up this industry and the industry grows and is becoming out of reach as the people who needs it can not afford it as their income is limited and they don't get the jobs commensurate with their qualifications and this forms a bubble and which will likely to burst when there is prolonged economical slowdown the one the world is witnessing. The recent immigration process which is linked to employers requirement of skilled personnel has slowed down the immigration as it will be hard for employers to justify the new employee from abroad as they are already flooded with many skilled PRs and citizens. The skilled workers' immigration has dropped down in 2015 as the employers are bound to take that PR who is coming on his formal request and those who genuinely require and don't get (presumably say like this though not true) local candidates can only validate the requests for immigration thereby limiting to the immigration to the needs only. However, the previous PRs are left in the lurch as they have to compete the new arrivals ( as the employer is inclined to request for would be immigrant only) and temporary workers and the situation will become more dire for those PRs.
So it will be good to revoke the RO requirement for the previous PRs and allow them to return if they make themselves self sustainable by getting employment abroad if they prefer that than to stay and do the survival jobs.

 

[Leon]

Leon, what specific question you asked which I did not answer? Please tell me so I know what you refer to.

You have so far dodged every single question I asked, instead you make some interpretations of facts I state, and then debate those interpretations at length, once again refusing to give me straightforward answers on questions I ask.

And what exactly are you disputing? Wasn't point system based on A) Alleged economic needs of Canada of B) Certain skilled immigrants , with certain education, work experience, age and knowledge of languages? Wasn't it a selection in itself, just as colleges select students based on their performance on the SAT , GRE, GMAT, LSAT and other tests? Someone designed those tests to select individuals who are fit to immigrate. Otherwise you would have anyone who sent app. within a time window qualify, regardless of points, skills, education, work experience and etc.
Your dispute is moot, Sir.

Next. Emperor Justinian once upon a time issued an order to his subjects which obligated them, under the penalty of severe punishment (up to execution) to pass gases in public and in presence of each other. As ridiculous as the order was, still everyone had to obey, because Emperor said so and sealed his order.
I am sure there were then people like you who argued along the lines of "Well, this is an order from Emperor,a rule we, as subjects, must all obey, so we all must pass gases and make every place smell foul".

Of course in times of Emperor Justinian no one could question such order without a risk to their lives.

But, luckily, we live in Democracy and it's not an Emperor, but elected Parliamentarians who make the law. This gives us all the more reason to question the rationale behind any law they pass, which is precisely what I am doing.

You see, I am not disputing that RO as a law exists. I am not saying that PR's who breach RO can go to court and sue CIC for granting them PR status and not providing them with jobs. I don't even say that PR's are entitled to leniency (as the other poster said).

But what I am doing is questioning the rationale behind such aggressive enforcement of RO at times when hundreds of thousands of PR's are brought into Canada while job market is so hostile to Landed Immigrants.

I pointedly ask what benefit is there for Canada and native Canadians when such an enforcement measures are taken to bring as many PR's to stay inside Canada while job market is so hostile to PR's and flooded with the over-supply of skilled labor?

And why old FSW PR's are ones who must carry the full weight for the hostile job market conditions that are not of their making and are complete opposite of what they were supposedly grated a PR for?


Again, I am asking what is rationale and purpose behind it? Unlike in times of Justinian, we have a control over those whom we elect and we have every right to question why our elected officials make one or another law.
While no one disputes that law in effect is a law in effect, still, we have every right to question the reason why certain thing is a law to begin with.

DO you still not understand what my point is?

Well, I think I understand what your point is. You immigrated to a country without checking the job market, then blame immigration. Then somehow want immigration to give you a pass on the RO to keep the PR you can't / don't want to use because you couldn't find a job. Am I right?

As for lengthy posts, I think you are the one who writes the lengthy posts.

Canada immigration did not "bring" people to Canada. They made some rules that opened the door for people to apply. The requirements were low and a lot of people came. They couldn't all find jobs and then blamed immigration. Hmm.