But that would also be down to luck. Especially if, like in your example, 30 of those 100 people threw their meals away. This is what I find so irritating here - we know there are ineligible people who applied, because they didn't even organize that properly. If you are making food for 100 people, sure you want all the food to be used and not thrown away? Because this is what is happening here.
New Policy for International Students - April 12th, 2021
- Thread starter Mari_Anne17
- Start date
No, because if they resume FSW draws, then CEC applicants will have to compete with outland ones and the scores will skyrocket. Which was the main reason CEC-eligible (or soon eligible) people applied to the new stream. Nobody could risk that.
But I would like for you to be right about this!
I understand now. Your wife' situation is a bit tricky. But for the other people who complain about not having a spot for IELTS, it is not down to luck. They could have passed the test last year or at the beginning of this year (which is what I did).
I don't expect people to pay for medical exam and language test 'just in case' but this is a risk that they need to take if they really want to immigrate. I'm far from being rich so I know how stressful it was for me to pay for all of this without knowing if the government was going to resume the FSW draws. In the end, it payed because of this new program.
I also agree that they should have asked for the test results code (or whatever it's called) like it is the case to register for EE.
Anyway, I didn't mean to be disrespectful, I just wanted to share my opinion.
I agree. This is what I've been saying the whole time. They (IRCC) organized this sloppily. It is not about being skilled or not - I am not classist; I am glad that Canada finally recognized how important "unskilled" jobs are for the everyday functioning of a society. At the end of the day, those people are not in the same stream as my wife. I am not talking about any eligible candidate. I am talking about how bad they organized all of this. For example, they will receive so many ineligible applications because they didn't implement a check system for language test. As a result, many eligible people didn't get to apply. Etc. etc.
No, it is Ok. I feel we might have misunderstood each other or interpreted "luck" differently. I do feel that it is not fair for IRCC to have us pitted against each other when it's their sloppy handling of the whole thing that is causing the most issues here. My wife works in a skilled job, but graduates who work in C and D jobs couldn't even think about PR, and then this was announced suddenly. It was down to luck for them, too, who got to schedule a test, etc.
In the end, they will get so many ineligible applications and I don't see how this was in anyone's favour. I doubt all they wanted was to collect application fees. They miscalculated the chaos over the language test, I feel.
I see what you're saying but, correct me if I'm wrong, you probably know more about this than I do, even if they resumed FSW, they still need to do CEC draws, and most of the candidates, if not 99%, are inland applicants.
Also, their goal is to give 400k PRs per year (1.2million in 3 years), as of now, they've only given (again, correct me if I'm wrong) less than 100k. They still have to give out 300k PRs this year. Im confident that they will be more accessible with their next programs.
Again SatNight, I wish you and your wife the best, same for all of the other candidates as well.
Ha! But I didn't want to suggest a conspiracy theory. I do *not* think this was the idea behind it. I just feel they miscalculated all the chaos with the language tests. But it is true that they will get a lot of ineligible applications.
As things are going at the moment, there are CEC-only draws and the scores are low. However, when they resume FSW, all people will be in the same poll. CEC candidates competing directly with FSW, and not in a usual way, but against months and months of accumulated FSW candidates. The scores needed to get an ITA will skyrocket. This is my main concern. Without that, I wouldn't be worried.
That confuses me. I thought that we have to be employed only when we submit our application. If I knew this, I would try to get another contract earlier than this June :/
I don't think there is a requirement to be working at the time your application is approved. I know chatty lawyer talked about it, but they never mentioned it anywhere. The only post-application condition is to be in Canada when you are approved.
I gotta say, the chatty lawyer is what I thought he was, just another shady lawyer. A lot of info he was putting forth ended up being contradicted by the official checklist, and also I don't see how his $300 "course" could've helped anyone considering the checklist was released for everyone to see, and the 40,000 submissions were done in a day.
I am relieved. I couldn't see any condition about being employed during the processing times in the guide. However, as we all know, when the guide was initially released, there were inconsistencies like signing/not signing the IRCC forms. So, I am anxious about it.
I am fairly certain - if anyone can find anything to contradict this, please share. But I am sure the only place I heard about having to be employed at the time of approval was from chatty lawyer. It is not like IRCC contradicting themselves with signing or not signing forms. I am pretty certain that they never mentioned this. (Though I am not a lawyer so I might be wrong; don't take my words as 100% sure. But again, this is a detail I'd remember.)