Why does IRCC ask about employment

[Citizenoftheworld]

Dear all,
I have a query that I was wondering about
If as everyone indicates, that employment or being employed or not doesnt impact the citizenshp application then why does IRCC ask about?
it has to be of relevance right?
Inviting seniors to give their insights @dpenabill @zardoz

 

[issteven]

ha, it is an honesty test, if you lie about your employment, you will be treated as fraud and be denied.

 

[Citizenoftheworld]

ha, it is an honesty test, if you lie about your employment, you will be treated as fraud and be denied.

I do know that and no one said anything about lying, I am just saying if being employed or not has no effect or in other words great effect on your application they why ask about it in the first place

 

[melito]

I do know that and no one said anything about lying, I am just saying if being employed or not has no effect or in other words great effect on your application they why ask about it in the first place

He is not accusing you of lying or fraud. He is just suggesting that if there is discrepancy between what you declare here and the information they already have and the further background checks they do, they could have grounds to refuse you. It also just makes everything else you declare seem untrustworthy. As in that could be one of the reasons they ask for employment history.

 

[Ohcanada!!]

He is not accusing you of lying or fraud. He is just suggesting that if there is discrepancy between what you declare here and the information they already have and the further background checks they do, they could have grounds to refuse you. It also just makes everything else you declare seem untrustworthy. As in that could be one of the reasons they ask for employment history.

Yes of course I didnt take it as that, and I am sorry if it came out that way.
So what i mean that it isnt really important per se as it just needs to be declared as an activity to determine truthfulness correct me if iam wrong

 

[melito]

Yes of course I didnt take it as that, and I am sorry if it came out that way.
So what i mean that it isnt really important per se as it just needs to be declared as an activity to determine truthfulness correct me if iam wrong

I am not privy to their processes but I believe that they basically ask you for employment history for background check purposes.
For example, you might declare that you didn't have to file taxes for 2018, and that you didn't file taxes for that year either, but if your employment history shows you worked during that time, odds are you might have needed to file taxes. Or if you declare in your history that you were working in Tanzania, but your physical presence calculator says you never left the country. Those things could make you ineligible for Canadian citizenship, in addition to what I've already mentioned above.

 

[omerhaha]

Dear all,
I have a query that I was wondering about
If as everyone indicates, that employment or being employed or not doesnt impact the citizenshp application then why does IRCC ask about?
it has to be of relevance right?
Inviting seniors to give their insights @dpenabill @zardoz

Although employment is not a condition to be eligible for Canadian citizenship someone will face a lot of troubles if he was unemployed during the whole eligibility period , he could simply get an RQ

 

[Citizenoftheworld]

Although employment is not a condition to be eligible for Canadian citizenship someone will face a lot of troubles if he was unemployed during the whole eligibility period , he could simply get an RQ

I dont really think its a must though,RQs were issued when they werent able to confirm presence. I think now they can and unemployment affects if it seems like you are having a good lifestyle while not being paid. They could simply question that but other than that if you have good savings and during unemployment you were spending from these savings I dont see why RQ would be issued

 

[dpenabill]

Dear all,
I have a query that I was wondering about
If as everyone indicates, that employment or being employed or not doesnt impact the citizenshp application then why does IRCC ask about?
it has to be of relevance right?

There is no employment requirement, to be eligible for a grant of citizenship. A PR's eligibility for citizenship does NOT depend on employment in Canada.

Employment history, like address history, is a key indicator of where a person was primarily located during the respectively reported period of time. They are both evidence relevant to the question of actual physical presence.

Employment in Canada is additionally considered a significant tie to Canada and thus in this respect is also indirectly relevant to actual physical presence in Canada. Ties in Canada tend to support claims (reports) of presence in Canada. Absence of ties in Canada will naturally invite questions about the extent of the individual's presence in Canada.


WHOLE PICTURE and CREDIBILITY CONSIDERATION:

Every item of information given in the application can be and in most respects will be considered in context and compared to all the other information . . . to all the other information provided in the application itself, all the other information IRCC has in the client's GCMS, and any other information IRCC might access and consider in evaluating the application.

On one hand, looming large, this is indeed about credibility screening. Consider-in-context-and-compare has been the most widely used tool for screening immigration applications of all kinds for a very, very long time. Until extensive and virtually pervasive fraud in citizenship applications was discovered in 2008 to 2010, it appears to have been the primary tool employed.

Basically that approach evaluated the internal consistency of every element of information provided by the applicant, and also evaluated the credibility, the believability, of the whole picture. If there was nothing triggering a reason-to-question-residence, CIC/IRCC largely relied on the applicant's information. Any reason-to-question-residence appeared from this assessment, then there was RQ.

This process almost certainly continues today with some additional cross-checking and further inquiries for collateral information. For example, GCMS checks can be done, now, for particular employers and addresses, to identify whether or not those have been identified as related to previous fraud cases. Open sources, like LinkedIn, may also be accessed and considered.

 

[Citizenoftheworld]

There is no employment requirement, to be eligible for a grant of citizenship. A PR's eligibility for citizenship does NOT depend on employment in Canada.

Employment history, like address history, is a key indicator of where a person was primarily located during the respectively reported period of time. They are both evidence relevant to the question of actual physical presence.

Employment in Canada is additionally considered a significant tie to Canada and thus in this respect is also indirectly relevant to actual physical presence in Canada. Ties in Canada tend to support claims (reports) of presence in Canada. Absence of ties in Canada will naturally invite questions about the extent of the individual's presence in Canada.


WHOLE PICTURE and CREDIBILITY CONSIDERATION:

Every item of information given in the application can be and in most respects will be considered in context and compared to all the other information . . . to all the other information provided in the application itself, all the other information IRCC has in the client's GCMS, and any other information IRCC might access and consider in evaluating the application.

On one hand, looming large, this is indeed about credibility screening. Consider-in-context-and-compare has been the most widely used tool for screening immigration applications of all kinds for a very, very long time. Until extensive and virtually pervasive fraud in citizenship applications was discovered in 2008 to 2010, it appears to have been the primary tool employed.

Basically that approach evaluated the internal consistency of every element of information provided by the applicant, and also evaluated the credibility, the believability, of the whole picture. If there was nothing triggering a reason-to-question-residence, CIC/IRCC largely relied on the applicant's information. Any reason-to-question-residence appeared from this assessment, then there was RQ.

This process almost certainly continues today with some additional cross-checking and further inquiries for collateral information. For example, GCMS checks can be done, now, for particular employers and addresses, to identify whether or not those have been identified as related to previous fraud cases. Open sources, like LinkedIn, may also be accessed and considered.



Thanks for replying back to the inquiry.
I totally agree, and I remember reading before a post by you were you mentioned that unemployment in relation with the whole context is what matters. for example unemployment AND travelling at that same time is something that triggers questioning. Also unemployment and supporting a high life style might also trigger questioning unless the applicant shows that he has enough savings to do so. Correct me please if I got something wrong or if i misunderstood anything.
Also as I mentioned isnt it now way easier for IRCC to check the presence of the applicant specially through CBSA ? by implementing the exit/entry program?

 

[Citizenoftheworld]

There is no employment requirement, to be eligible for a grant of citizenship. A PR's eligibility for citizenship does NOT depend on employment in Canada.

Employment history, like address history, is a key indicator of where a person was primarily located during the respectively reported period of time. They are both evidence relevant to the question of actual physical presence.

Employment in Canada is additionally considered a significant tie to Canada and thus in this respect is also indirectly relevant to actual physical presence in Canada. Ties in Canada tend to support claims (reports) of presence in Canada. Absence of ties in Canada will naturally invite questions about the extent of the individual's presence in Canada.


WHOLE PICTURE and CREDIBILITY CONSIDERATION:

Every item of information given in the application can be and in most respects will be considered in context and compared to all the other information . . . to all the other information provided in the application itself, all the other information IRCC has in the client's GCMS, and any other information IRCC might access and consider in evaluating the application.

On one hand, looming large, this is indeed about credibility screening. Consider-in-context-and-compare has been the most widely used tool for screening immigration applications of all kinds for a very, very long time. Until extensive and virtually pervasive fraud in citizenship applications was discovered in 2008 to 2010, it appears to have been the primary tool employed.

Basically that approach evaluated the internal consistency of every element of information provided by the applicant, and also evaluated the credibility, the believability, of the whole picture. If there was nothing triggering a reason-to-question-residence, CIC/IRCC largely relied on the applicant's information. Any reason-to-question-residence appeared from this assessment, then there was RQ.

This process almost certainly continues today with some additional cross-checking and further inquiries for collateral information. For example, GCMS checks can be done, now, for particular employers and addresses, to identify whether or not those have been identified as related to previous fraud cases. Open sources, like LinkedIn, may also be accessed and considered.

Thanks for replying back to the inquiry.
I totally agree, and I remember reading before a post by you were you mentioned that unemployment in relation with the whole context is what matters. for example unemployment AND travelling at that same time is something that triggers questioning. Also unemployment and supporting a high life style might also trigger questioning unless the applicant shows that he has enough savings to do so. Correct me please if I got something wrong or if i misunderstood anything.
Also as I mentioned isnt it now way easier for IRCC to check the presence of the applicant specially through CBSA ? by implementing the exit/entry program?

 

[omerhaha]

I dont really think its a must though,RQs were issued when they werent able to confirm presence. I think now they can and unemployment affects if it seems like you are having a good lifestyle while not being paid. They could simply question that but other than that if you have good savings and during unemployment you were spending from these savings I dont see why RQ would be issued

I assure you 99% if you was unemployed or even self employed for the three years , you will get a RQ

 

[Citizenoftheworld]

I assure you 99% if you was unemployed or even self employed for the three years , you will get a RQ

maybe for the 3 years, but what i meant is a year or so out of the 3

 

[smash1984]

I assure you 99% if you was unemployed or even self employed for the three years , you will get a RQ

Does that also happen to wives who are homemakers?

 

[Das67]

Does that also happen to wives who are homemakers?

I personally know a wifehouse, a friend of mine she never worked during her eligibility period and she travelled out of canada during her eligibility period. She is canadian now and her process took 10 months with no delay.