Have Canadian PR , never lived in Canada

[jakklondon]

I do feel like immigration in Canada is more lenient toward professionals when it comes to RO enforcement. I dont know even a single case where they deported anyone who went out for education or professional career. I could be wrong. I feel like they are more strict toward elderly PRs who are in breach if RO as they have less chance to be able to support themselves in Canada and will be on social assistance. I dont know why someone who spent 10-20 years working in Canada on PR status and left for 3-4 years would be force to leave Canada on return while a citizen living and doing nothing here can go out for any amount of time. How are the snowbirds different in this sense?

All skilled immigrants qualified for PR are professionals by definition. Your assumptions could be wrong. My impression is that anyone of any age can be a subject of report for RO. I would assume they profile a lot of younger men (man, young, foreign looking = always a threat in the eyes of border agents, and also an easy target: you can't be accused of sexism if you target a man or of age discrimination if you target the young). They are especially drawn to those who appear of middle eastern origin (you are not quite white in their eyes, while you are not a member of distinguishable minority, which also leaves them off the hook, because this particular group is not protected under any laws, regulations or customs).

As others mentioned, with Covid and wide spread travel bans, the volume of travel had significantly reduced in the past year or so, and that could be a reason why we don't hear many stories of removals or reports for breach of RO.

 

[CaBeaver]

While it is true that the US offers better economic opportunities, comparing green card holders and Canadian PRs is not quite comparing apples to apples. Unlike Canada, you cannot self-sponsor (for the most part) for an employment-based green card. There is no points system. You have to have an employer willing to sponsor you. Because of this, the US already has immigrants that are more well suited to adjust to American life. They already have a job. There is no stepping into the great unknown where you don't know where your next paycheck is coming from. Also, because they already have American experience, a green card holder is in a better position to find a new job if he ever finds himself unemployed. On the other hand, Canadian PRs are pretty much dropped off in Canada and start from nothing. Anecdotally, I know of a Pakistani housewife who was a doctor in her home country. She came to the US by being sponsored by a family member. She remains a housewife to this day. I feel like family-sponsored GC holders are a better comparison to Canadian PRs as both sets of people come to their new country starting from scratch.

Canada and immigrants will do much better if Canada drops the point system, and adopt the employer-sponsor model. In this case, immigrants come with a job opportunity ready before they land, and the market find their candidates immediately from the immigrants coming. In the point system, current immigrants keep applying for jobs and get no responses, yet employers still say to the minister of immigration we cannot find employees, bring us more immigrants, which results in more and more immigrants who cannot find a decent job, and this occurs usually after immigrants sold everything in their home country, and sacrificed many opportunities and relationships to come to Canada. Having said this, immigration in Canada goes beyond economy. It's also about demography. The birth rate in Canada is below the average of 2 to sustain the population. In some regions, it's even below 1. Canada is increasing the immigration cap every year despite the fact that they are not all needed, economically speaking. I don't think Canada adds 400,000+ job opportunities every year.

 

[jakklondon]

Canada and immigrants will do much better if Canada drops the point system, and adopt the employer-sponsor model. In this case, immigrants come with a job opportunity ready before they land, and the market find their candidates immediately from the immigrants coming. In the point system, current immigrants keep applying for jobs and get no responses, yet employers still say to the minister of immigration we cannot find employees, bring us more immigrants, which results in more and more immigrants who cannot find a decent job, and this occurs usually after immigrants sold everything in their home country, and sacrificed many opportunities and relationships to come to Canada. Having said this, immigration in Canada goes beyond economy. It's also about demography. The birth rate in Canada is below the average of 2 to sustain the population. In some regions, it's even below 1. Canada is increasing the immigration cap every year despite the fact that they are not all needed, economically speaking. I don't think Canada adds 400,000+ job opportunities every year.

But that is very cynical, to solve country's demographic problem at the cost of misleading a potential immigrant, insinuating that they posses skills needed in Canada, only to see them coming to flip burgers and drive Uber, and punish those who run away from a career of a sales clerk at a local Walmart with an engineering degree.

And poor PRs are too scared to speak up (most, I suspect, come from countries where government is a God, to be feared and obeyed, but never criticized).

 

[Bloodrose]

That's an absolutely anecdotal statement. Even doctors coming into USA or UK for that matter have to undergo the same route as they would in Canada to get their physician license.

They do but the difference is neither of those countries will accept you as an immigrant doctor unless there is a simple registration route notably because self-sponsored immigration programs don't exist there. The same is true to some extent for Australia and New Zealand. A British trained physician can pretty much arrive in Australia and be practicing in a few weeks. They just need to register with the local health authority for that state.

Canada discriminates even against Canadians educated in different provinces, let alone other countries. Some physicians trained in the US can catch a break in certain provinces but in the majority of cases, people are forced to essentially repeat their entire medical schooling. That can't possibly be right.

Canada is the only developed country AFAIK that brings in highly skilled immigrants and then doesn't allow them to practice in the profession that got them through the door in the first place. So much skill, education and human potential is wasted in Canada and it's a real tragedy and that's before we even get into all that "Canadian experience" BS.

 

[Bloodrose]

Canada and immigrants will do much better if Canada drops the point system, and adopt the employer-sponsor model. In this case, immigrants come with a job opportunity ready before they land, and the market find their candidates immediately from the immigrants coming. In the point system, current immigrants keep applying for jobs and get no responses, yet employers still say to the minister of immigration we cannot find employees, bring us more immigrants, which results in more and more immigrants who cannot find a decent job, and this occurs usually after immigrants sold everything in their home country, and sacrificed many opportunities and relationships to come to Canada. Having said this, immigration in Canada goes beyond economy. It's also about demography. The birth rate in Canada is below the average of 2 to sustain the population. In some regions, it's even below 1. Canada is increasing the immigration cap every year despite the fact that they are not all needed, economically speaking. I don't think Canada adds 400,000+ job opportunities every year.

The demographic issues could be eased by encouraging couples to have children. For a start the provinces could introduce better maternity, paternity and vacation leave regulations and lower the cost of living and barriers to home ownership. That's what keeps most young Canadian couples from procreating. When the average rent in Toronto or Vancouver is around $2000 per month, most young couples simply can't afford to have kids and by the time they do have some level of financial stability, nature has started to make it harder for them to start a family.

 

[Bloodrose]

All skilled immigrants qualified for PR are professionals by definition.

Not entirely accurate. Canada has two pathways to skilled immigration. The first is for skilled professionals (i.e. white collar) and the second is for skilled tradespeople (i.e. blue collar). The end result is the same but I think it's just to make sure that tradespeople are properly trained and also so things don't get skewed when it comes to points for education etc.

 

[CaBeaver]

The demographic issues could be eased by encouraging couples to have children. For a start the provinces could introduce better maternity, paternity and vacation leave regulations and lower the cost of living and barriers to home ownership. That's what keeps most young Canadian couples from procreating. When the average rent in Toronto or Vancouver is around $2000 per month, most young couples simply can't afford to have kids and by the time they do have some level of financial stability, nature has started to make it harder for them to start a family.

Maybe. Provinces offer different packages to help with the children to encourage having them, but it seems to me that having children is related to the level of services and aids a country can offer. In poorer countries, there is no governmental programs to help people when they struggle, and when they get old, they don't have senior homes. People there rely on children to help them bring enough food, and to take care of them when they get old. That's why you see families in poorer countries have more than 2 children on average.

 

[armoured]

The demographic issues could be eased by encouraging couples to have children.

Can you name a country that has successfully and significantly eased such demographic issues by the government measures you refer to?

I know of one that was touted as having done so successfully, for a few years - Russia. It's population is now shrinking quickly (again), and analysis has mostly shown that the demographic improvements were mostly from immigration anyway (and mostly low-skill except for some blips). It's debated at any rate, but hardly a proven case.

It does depend on your definition of 'eased' but as far as I'm aware, no advanced country has succeeded in changing demographics on any level remotely comparable with Canada's immigration programmes.

 

[jakklondon]

Not entirely accurate. Canada has two pathways to skilled immigration. The first is for skilled professionals (i.e. white collar) and the second is for skilled tradespeople (i.e. blue collar). The end result is the same but I think it's just to make sure that tradespeople are properly trained and also so things don't get skewed when it comes to points for education etc.

Skilled tradesman is not coming to Canada to flip burgers. He is coming to do skilled work, in his trade. Some blue collar jobs require more skills than PHDs possess. Anyway, these guys don't come to Canada with promise to drive an Uber or work as cashiers at local grocery store. Why bring skilled immigrants, at such rate, if no jobs exist that need their services?

 

[jakklondon]

The demographic issues could be eased by encouraging couples to have children. For a start the provinces could introduce better maternity, paternity and vacation leave regulations and lower the cost of living and barriers to home ownership. That's what keeps most young Canadian couples from procreating. When the average rent in Toronto or Vancouver is around $2000 per month, most young couples simply can't afford to have kids and by the time they do have some level of financial stability, nature has started to make it harder for them to start a family.

I couldn't care less about Canada's demographic problems. Many countries, including the US, have such problems. Those are not my problems. It doesn't mean I should be fooled and misled, to apply for a PR visa to end up with no job opportunity. And then penalized for not flipping burgers in Canada. This is wrong.

 

[canuck78]

After reading others' comments on re-entering canada and life after re-entering, here are my OWN experience that I would like to share. First, I have a visa exempted passport, therefore, all I need is just a plane ticket going to seattle and a friend picking me up and driving me back. On crossing the Canadian border, yes, as a PR, you should declare your status. But as a visitor/tourist, I simply used my passport and got back in. About declaring my PR status, I have no idea that I still had my PR since it was 20+ years ago and I came in visit as a tourist along with my family. Once I crossed the border, I found out that my PR status is still valid, therefore, I decided to stay for 2 yrs and fulfill the RO. (Hey, I did not break any law up to this point yet! Don't give me those moral lessons.) During the time, I applied for MSP, re-activited my SIN card, got my driver license, went to school while paying local fee, actually everything that a normal Canadian can have, besides voting. So, don't believe others' comments on how you cannot do this and that, I did it ALL.

You entered a few years ago and your PR was so old that it may not have been in the computer system. More recent PR cases are more likely to be flagged. There have also been new policies like asking for a valid PR card when reactivating your SINthat weren’t policies in 2019.

 

[canuck78]

Not at all. I generally have very critical view of things in the US and I don't think our country is headed in the right direction. But, first of all, this discussion is not about comparing Canada to US. There are many countries thousands of times worse than US and Canada, that would not justify a bad policy in either one. I think if Canadian policy concerning PR is deserving criticism, finding flaws in US policy would not in any way make it right.

But to be fair, I must say RO violation is not a wide spread issue here, you won't hear about it in forums, newspapers, Congressional hearings and etc. Because that particular problem does not resonate here. And the reason is - our economy provides better opportunities to US PR holders than they can have anywhere else. They might have pretty stressful lives, but overall, they won't earn more and get better suited job for themselves outside of the IS. So, there is no need to threaten PRs with loss of status and to force them stay here - very few leave US for more than a week or two in a year, and most don't leave for a day in decades.

As to groups you mention, I know we have a serious problem with Indian immigrants. US does not entirely ban immigration from India, but it has certain limit on number of people of Indian origin who can obtain PR here, As a result, many of them toil in abusive, terrible working conditions holding nonimmigrant visas (H1B), and stay in that status for a decade or more while waiting for their turn to get a PR status. I never supported this policy. I think no country should put anyone under such strains. If US is not willing to take more than X number of nationals from any given country, then it should not issue more than that number of H1B visas , so it can permanently accommodate anyone holds H1B status and who wishes to stay here permanently. Although H visas are dual intentional and not everyone on H visa intends to stay here as a PR, but still, bringing a lot of H visa holders from India while allowing only a fraction of them to get PR status creates those conditions where people make enormous sacrifices for very long period of time and feel extremely resentful at the end. As I said above, I never supported such policies. But I don't know how criticizing certain things or policies related to US immigration policies can justify and make right the wrong things done in Canada.

People follow the strict rules of green cards because the US enforces the residency requirements. It has nothing to do with jobs. If Canada enforced the ROs in the same fashion as the US most would also meet the RO requirements.

 

[canuck78]

I couldn't care less about Canada's demographic problems. Many countries, including the US, have such problems. Those are not my problems. It doesn't mean I should be fooled and misled, to apply for a PR visa to end up with no job opportunity. And then penalized for not flipping burgers in Canada. This is wrong.

People immigrating can easily search the job opportunities in Canada or the requirements to get licensed in Canada in certain professions. I have communicated with so many IMGs who are totally unaware and naive about how difficult it will be to get licensed in Canada and even after being informed and suggesting better options they are determined to immigrate to Canada. Canada can’t prevent people from immigrating if they are determined to do so. Canada has provincial immigration programs that try to target the skills that are in need. There also are other programs that target skills needed like tech jobs. Canada also has programs trying to help foreign trained professionals, like doctors, find opportunities in Canada. This isn’t the 70s or 80s. IMGs aren’t driving taxis for decades after working as physicians in their countries. Although not perfect, many professionals get jobs in their profession when they arrive in Canada or after they get licensed in their field in Canada.

 

[canuck78]

I do feel like immigration in Canada is more lenient toward professionals when it comes to RO enforcement. I dont know even a single case where they deported anyone who went out for education or professional career. I could be wrong. I feel like they are more strict toward elderly PRs who are in breach if RO as they have less chance to be able to support themselves in Canada and will be on social assistance. I dont know why someone who spent 10-20 years working in Canada on PR status and left for 3-4 years would be force to leave Canada on return while a citizen living and doing nothing here can go out for any amount of time. How are the snowbirds different in this sense?

RO compliance enforcement is not influenced by a persons profession.snowbirds can only spend a certain amount of time outside of Canada. They remain Canadian tax payers which is the most important. Yes it is frustrating that someone can obtain citizenship after no contribution to Canada and return to retire in Canada and benefit from all social programs. One of the reasons that I think residency requirement to receive citizenship should increase and that PRs should have yo remain in Canada before they receive citizenship. Given that remote work is becoming more common and that healthcare is becoming more expensive it is important that people remain taxpayers for as long as possible.

 

[canuck78]

I really didn't intend my post to serve as an advertisement of US green card, or to say "US green card is better than Canadian". I see issue with strict RO enforcement in Canada that goes against natural desire of individuals to find gainful employment. No such issue in the US exists.

I was also curious how the policy currently enforced.

I really didn't intend my post to serve as an advertisement of US green card, or to say "US green card is better than Canadian". I see issue with strict RO enforcement in Canada that goes against natural desire of individuals to find gainful employment. No such issue in the US exists.

I was also curious how the policy currently enforced.

Canada has very lax enforcement of RO. The majority of people not meeting their RO are going back to their home country to continue the job they had before getting PR or going home for family reasons. Most are not meeting RO because after living in Canada for at least a year and being licensed in Canada (if necessary), they were only able to secure jobs abroad.