FSW WORLDWIDE

[wonderbly]

It is very funny you hold hostility against international students and temporary residents who are already in Canada.

It is also funny you "extracted" the info that CEC will be deleted just from the fact that the minister didn't mention it during an informal interview.

First, the minister was answering questions raised by international students. Do you think he meant to strike another blow to those who are concerned about expiring WPs or to mollify them instead? If it is the latter, wouldn't it be more likely that he misspoke and actually meant FHS instead of FSW?

Secondly, international students and TRs who have already had a job in Canada and been paying taxes are more successful than other groups. This has been reported repeatedly. Not to mention that this is about the whole education industry -- if CEC no longer exists and the vast mojority of international students have to leave Canada after WPs expire, how many foreign students would come to Canada for study in the first place? How much income loss will universities/colleges suffer?

Thirdly, if you look at the mandatory letter the PM issued to the minister, it requires new pathways for international students and TRs, not for FSW applicants. If they are of a lower priority like you said because they "bought" a WP, why the new pathways are for them? Why I don't see new pathways for FSW applicants?

In the lastest memo https://www.cicnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/cicnews.com-IRCC-Express-Entry-Memo-March-17-2022.pdf, do you see any implications about deleting CEC?

If CEC ever gets deleted, that is only because there is a new mechanism that is more fridendly to international students and TRs being invented.

Sorry but you are not seeing things straight.

What is your point exactly? The poster you quoted did not say CEC is deleted, they said CEC ONLY draws is dead and gone. Which is true, from all indications. CEC ONLY draw was an interim, stop-gap measure during covid and restrictions. Restrictions have now been remove and life is largely returning to normal, therefore the EE draws are expected to return to what it was pre-covid, i.e. is ALL-PROGRAMS draw, which includes CEC.

How is that hard to understand? Why are CECs clamouring for the continuance of something that was never the norm, and never should have existed save for COVID?

 

[powerssdd]

What is your point exactly? The poster you quoted did not say CEC is deleted, they said CEC ONLY draws is dead and gone. Which is true, from all indications. CEC ONLY draw was an interim, stop-gap measure during covid and restrictions. Restrictions have now been remove and life is largely returning to normal, therefore the EE draws are expected to return to what it was pre-covid, i.e. is ALL-PROGRAMS draw, which includes CEC.

How is that hard to understand? Why are CECs clamouring for the continuance of something that was never the norm, and never should have existed save for COVID?

Sorry I might misunderstand, but isn't "ALL-PROGRAMS draw, which includes CEC" equal to deleting CEC?

Analogy:
If you put labels on eggs to differentiate them, but then they are sold under exactly the same category and at exactly the same price, would it be any different from not labeling them in the first place?

BTW, CEC is not temporary. It was introduced in 2008 according to https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-statistics/evaluations/canadian-experience-class/intro.html
It has been 14 years.

 

[Alysson]

Sorry I might misunderstand, but isn't "ALL-PROGRAMS draw, which includes CEC" equal to deleting CEC?

Analogy:
If you put labels on eggs to differentiate them, but then they are sold under exactly the same category and at exactly the same price, would it be any different from not labeling them in the first place?

BTW, CEC is not temporary. It was introduced in 2008 according to https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-statistics/evaluations/canadian-experience-class/intro.html
It has been 14 years.

CEC is included in all program draws. High human capital CEC will continue to receive ITA. I have zero sympathy to low scoring CEC. CEC receive more points than FSW by working in Canada, so they already are benefiting from their contribution to the economy, as well as having higher chance for PNP nominations.
So once again, CEC *ONLY* draws are dead. Worthwhile CEC will continue to be invited on all program draws, like intended by the program. CEC exists for years but CEC *ONLY* draws happened only as a temporary policy due to covid. If low human capital people were swindled into buying a work permit, with the promise that they would get guaranteed PR thanks to a temporary policy that benefited them during a worldwide pandemic, then that is their problem.
Also, your labeling analogy is pure idiotic, because the labeling wasn’t created to provide different draws to each. It was created to provide different routes into the pool. You either enter the pool with foreign experience or with Canadian experience, once in the pool, you are the same. That is how the program was intended. The correct analogy would be receiving eggs from 2 different sources and mixing them together in the same batch, if your supermarket doesn’t Care for batch numbers to track future issues from the source.

 

[wonderbly]

Sorry I might misunderstand, but isn't "ALL-PROGRAMS draw, which includes CEC" equal to deleting CEC?

Analogy:
If you put labels on eggs to differentiate them, but then they are sold under exactly the same category and at exactly the same price, would it be any different from not labeling them in the first place?
BTW, CEC is not temporary. It was introduced in 2008 according to https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-statistics/evaluations/canadian-experience-class/intro.html
It has been 14 years.

Canadian Experience Class (CEC) is a program for skilled workers who have Canadian work experience (studied in Canada and afterwards, gained minimum of 1 year work experience in a recognised NOC level). It is 1 of the 3 federal programs managed through Express Entry (FSW, FST, CEC). The "Canadian experience" gives you extra points and increases your CRS points. That's the difference (besides the faster processing time).

Prior to 2020 and COVID, there were no separate CEC draw. Due to covid, IRCC ran EE draws but only inviting CEC candidates. The CEC ONLY draws were meant to be temporary, so that they can meet their target numbers for 2021, which thanks to the 75 points draw, they did.

Now that the whole world is recovering from Covid, IRCC is going to return to their original scheduled programming (EE draws for all programs) once they clear most of their backlog.

Therefore, by all indications, CEC ONLY draws are dead.

PS: You totally lost me on the 'label on eggs' analogy. I really don't know what to make of it.

 

[oinkario]

Sorry I might misunderstand, but isn't "ALL-PROGRAMS draw, which includes CEC" equal to deleting CEC?

Analogy:
If you put labels on eggs to differentiate them, but then they are sold under exactly the same category and at exactly the same price, would it be any different from not labeling them in the first place?

BTW, CEC is not temporary. It was introduced in 2008 according to https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/reports-statistics/evaluations/canadian-experience-class/intro.html
It has been 14 years.

FSW and CEC are eligibility channels. That’s entirely different from having exclusive advantage like in CEC-ONLY draws that goes against the “high-skilled” part in Federal High Skilled.

75ers (or 300ers) didn’t deserve ITA. Just because Mendicino made it happen doesn’t mean it ought to stay. Not to mention the outcry from those people for exclusive advantage — totally unjustified. The idea of “student status (almost alone) <-> immigration” is simply misaligned with the FHS program and absurd for any country.

 

[Alysson]

FSW and CEC are eligibility channels. That’s entirely different from having exclusive advantage like in CEC-ONLY draws that goes against the “high-skilled” part in Federal High Skilled.

75ers (or 300ers) didn’t deserve ITA. Just because Mendicino made it happen doesn’t mean it ought to stay. Not to mention the outcry from those people for exclusive advantage — totally unjustified. The idea of “student status (almost alone) <-> immigration” is simply misaligned with the FHS program and absurd for any country.

Not to mention the misrepresentation of someone going as a student with already the intention of becoming a PR in the future.

 

[Deleted member 994371]

No, don't. Each form version has some expiry date. Just add sheets as mentioned in the instructions.

The fuck, man. I thought I had found the solution.

I am going to do as you say (because I don't want to fuck up), but you got a source for what you are saying? Even IRCC's website still links to that older version of the form:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=140&top=18 and the webpage was last edited in 2021-09.

 

[powerssdd]

CEC is included in all program draws. High human capital CEC will continue to receive ITA. I have zero sympathy to low scoring CEC. CEC receive more points than FSW by working in Canada, so they already are benefiting from their contribution to the economy, as well as having higher chance for PNP nominations.
So once again, CEC *ONLY* draws are dead. Worthwhile CEC will continue to be invited on all program draws, like intended by the program. CEC exists for years but CEC *ONLY* draws happened only as a temporary policy due to covid. If low human capital people were swindled into buying a work permit, with the promise that they would get guaranteed PR thanks to a temporary policy that benefited them during a worldwide pandemic, then that is their problem.
Also, your labeling analogy is pure idiotic, because the labeling wasn’t created to provide different draws to each. It was created to provide different routes into the pool. You either enter the pool with foreign experience or with Canadian experience, once in the pool, you are the same. That is how the program was intended. The correct analogy would be receiving eggs from 2 different sources and mixing them together in the same batch, if your supermarket doesn’t Care for batch numbers to track future issues from the source.

"You either enter the pool with foreign experience or with Canadian experience, once in the pool, you are the same."

You are right. I didn't fully understand the 3 programs. Thanks for pointing that out.

However, you omitted all my 4 points and just repeated your hostility again TRs, your "personal" interpretation of the launch of CEC-only draws, and your anticipation (or hope) of its termination without providing any official proofs, evidence or clues.

I have no intent to be surrounded by FSW applicants in this FSW-dedicated forum section, but based on the 4 points I mentioned above, once again I predict that even if CEC-only draws will be dead, there will be new pathways/mechanisms to promote CEC applicants.

Eventually, it will be the same.

That is the info I extracted from the 4 points I mentioned above, not from some potential misstatement in an informal interview.

 

[wonderbly]

The fuck, man. I thought I had found the solution.

I am going to do as you say (because I don't want to fuck up), but you got a source for what you are saying? Even IRCC's website still links to that older version of the form:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=140&top=18 and the webpage was last edited in 2021-09.

I just checked the one I filled in May 2021 - the date on the form is 06-2019.

 

[Deleted member 994371]

The fuck, man. I thought I had found the solution.

I am going to do as you say (because I don't want to fuck up), but you got a source for what you are saying? Even IRCC's website still links to that older version of the form:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=140&top=18 and the webpage was last edited in 2021-09.

Nevermind, I found my own answer:

http://imgur.com/XOKWxgN

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/application/application-forms-guides.html

The older version of the form is supposed to be used by refugees or sponsorship applications only.

 

[wonderbly]

"You either enter the pool with foreign experience or with Canadian experience, once in the pool, you are the same."

You are right. I didn't fully understand the 3 programs. Thanks for pointing that out.

However, you omitted all my 4 points and just repeated your hostility again TRs, your "personal" interpretation of the launch of CEC-only draws, and your anticipation (or hope) of its termination without providing any official proofs, evidence or clues.

I have no intent to be surrounded by FSW applicants in this FSW-dedicated forum section, but based on the 4 points I mentioned above, once again I predict that even if CEC-only draws will be dead, there will be new pathways/mechanisms to promote CEC applicants.

That is the info I extracted from the 4 points I mentioned above, not from some potential misstatement in an informal interview.

As a result, it will be the same.

Before you go, please tell me: why do CEC applicants need more promoting now, all of a sudden? They already get 50 points extra for the experience. That's how it's been since FOREVER, when it was introduced. Why do you think CECs suddenly now need special treatment?

 

[Deleted member 994371]

I just checked the one I filled in May 2021 - the date on the form is 06-2019.

I can barely fit half of the name of my institution, I am going to fill the fields in the original table and in the last row of the table, I am going to write "See added page 4 full name" and in the added page I am going to rewrite the entire table again but with every name in its entirety.

 

[wonderbly]

I can barely fit half of the name of my institution, I am going to fill the fields in the original table and in the last row of the table, I am going to write "See added page 4 full name" and in the added page I am going to rewrite the entire table again but with every name in its entirety.

You can do that, but I honestly don't think it's necessary. I faced the same issue and I simply wrote short forms of institution names. Same thing for my job titles. It wasn't an issue at all.

 

[PRANIT01]

I can barely fit half of the name of my institution, I am going to fill the fields in the original table and in the last row of the table, I am going to write "See added page 4 full name" and in the added page I am going to rewrite the entire table again but with every name in its entirety.

I send them a webform just now ,total fuck up man.
The worst thing is both the form looks exactly the same

 

[Deleted member 994371]

You can do that, but I honestly don't think it's necessary. I faced the same issue and I simply wrote short forms of institution names. Same thing for my job titles. It wasn't an issue at all.

Oh, but with my luck I rather not take the chance. I do everything like I am going to fight it off in court one day when it comes to dealing with AIY-ARE-CEE-CEE.