NEW DELHI - 2013 APPLICANTS.

[maverick.dexter]

Hi Watinforveva
you are right he did not use the word immigration but i posted two links today and yesterday from other forums where people are getting spouse visa.

Yup the only reason NDVO is not issuing pr visa is because they have a lotttt of student applications...as all of us know majority of student population is from India...
Last day for application of student visa is 1st August...I am sure most of student visas will be issued in next 2 weeks and they will be back to processing family applications

 

[Watinforeva]

Yup the only reason NDVO is not issuing pr visa is because they have a lotttt of student applications...as all of us know majority of student population is from India...
Last day for application of student visa is 1st August...I am sure most of student visas will be issued in next 2 weeks and they will be back to processing family applications

Hope you are right and we start to see 2013 applicants getting their prv soon

 

[Tdot2329]

PAFSO is filing a case on the treasury board now

http://www.scribd.com/doc/157272226/2013-07-31-News-Release-Bad-Faith-Bargaining-Complaint-Final-English-Only

 

[Watinforeva]

Coming to pafso demand equal pay for equal work these FC...s don't talk about the perks they get.they get mortgages at special rates ,they send their children to private schools, they can bring their car to any country they get posted for free, they get special status everywhere they go.these as..s should get back to work if not they should go and find another job if they are not satisfied.many people in Canada with same educational background will be more than willing to work with same pay and perks

 

[Watinforeva]

http://video.intelligencer.ca/search/all/source/kenora-daily-miner-and-news/foreign-service-greed/2572847494001

All people should watch this Video and see how much perks these as...es get.

 

[singh_j]

http://www.pafso.com/news_releases.php?newsID=161

In the wake of Treasury Board President Tony Clement’s refusal on July 26 to enter into binding arbitration to resolve its labour dispute with the Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers, PAFSO this morning filed a bad-faith bargaining complaint against the Government of Canada with the Public Service Labour Relations Board (PSLRB).

In its complaint, PAFSO asserts that the Treasury Board “knowingly and intentionally demanded conditions for binding arbitration that could not reasonably be accepted”. These conditions “would, if accepted, have pre-determined the arbitration decision” in Treasury Board’s favour. In doing so, the Government violated the duty to bargain in good faith prescribed by the Public Service Labour Relations Act.

In light of the severe and mounting losses this labour dispute is inflicting on the Canadian economy, PAFSO is asking the PSLRB to hear our case as quickly as possible. We are also asking the PSLRB to order both sides to enter into binding arbitration.

“Our 1,350 members are profoundly disappointed with the Government’s refusal to take the responsible way out of this dispute,” said PAFSO President Tim Edwards. “By rejecting our offer of arbitration, they seem intent on prolonging this strike – at enormous cost to Canadian tourism companies, educational institutions, airlines, and agricultural producers. Their course of action defies reason and common sense.”

“PAFSO has made every reasonable effort to resolve this situation, including accepting three of the six preconditions Minister Clement sought to impose on free arbitration,” said Mr. Edwards. “The Government has not done the same. We can only conclude that Treasury Board is acting with prejudicial intent toward Canada’s Foreign Service – behaviour that should be of serious concern to all Canadians. We are seeking judicial intervention to compel the Government to negotiate in good faith.”

PAFSO’s complaint was filed pursuant to Section 190(1)(b) of the Public Service Labour Relations Act (Failure to comply with Section 106: Duty to bargain in good faith). The PSLRB is an independent quasi-judicial tribunal responsible for administering collective bargaining and grievance adjudication in the federal public service and in Parliament.

For more information, contact media

 

[suban]

PSLRB....this is hero or villain? Does it do any good to resolve problem? Tony's response coming soon

 

[singh_j]

PSLRB....this is hero or villain? Does it do any good to resolve problem? Tony's response coming soon

http://pslrb-crtfp.gc.ca/intro_e.asp

The PSLRB is an independent quasi-judicial statutory tribunal that is responsible for administering the collective bargaining and grievance adjudication systems in the federal public service and in Parliament. As well, under section 396 of the Budget Implementation Act, 2009, the PSLRB is also responsible for dealing with pay equity complaints filed by, or on behalf of, groups of employees pursuant to the Canadian Human Rights Act.

We provide three main types of service:
adjudication – hearing and deciding grievances, complaints and other labour relations matters;
mediation – helping parties reach collective agreements, manage their relations under collective agreements, and resolve disputes without resorting to a hearing; and
compensation analysis and research – compiling, analyzing and disseminating information on employee compensation to support the collective bargaining and compensation determination processes in the federal public service.
Our commitment to resolving labour relations issues in an impartial manner contributes to a productive and efficient workplace that ultimately benefits Canadians from coast to coast through the smooth delivery of government programs and services.

 

[singh_j]

http://pslrb-crtfp.gc.ca/decisions/summaries/2010-53_e.asp


Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers v. Treasury Board

document icon
Full Text
2010 PSLRB 53
Before: Michel Paquette
Decision Rendered: April 8, 2010
Original Language: English
Subject terms: Classification – Policy grievance
Policy grievance – Conversion to new classification standard – Pay rules – Retroactive period – “line down” concept inapplicable
The Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers (“the bargaining agent”) filed a policy grievance against the Treasury Board (“the employer”), alleging that the conversion of FS-02s to the new FS-03 level following the introduction of the new classification standard was not done in accordance with the pay rules set out in article 46 of the collective agreement – the collective agreement was agreed to in June 2005, and the conversion of positions was to take place the following month – the adjudicator held that the employer’s interpretation did not lead to an absurd result – article 46 did not apply, as it applied only to the retroactive period, and the conversion was to be effected after the close of that period – also, the conversion was not listed as one of the specific events to which article 46 applied – the conversion in question was not a promotion – the language of the Pay Note in the collective agreement made it clear that clause 46.03 did not apply – the “line down” or proximity concept favoured by the bargaining agent was an exception to the primary calculation method, which is the numeric concept – there was no issue of retroactivity in this case since the conversion was implemented on a going-forward basis, so the principles in Lajoie v. Treasury Board (Revenue Canada – Taxation), PSSRB File Nos. 166-02-20731 and 20732 (19910813), and Buchmann v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, 2002 PSSRB 14, did not apply.

Grievance denied.

 

[Namachii]

Friends, some one got a call from NDVO recently.

Hi Everyone,

Just wanted to share some good news with everyone. My wife received a call from NDVO yesterday asking her if she can travel to canada by august 20th. She was told they are sending the passport asap and that she should get ready to leave for Canada. Also august 20th is the date the medical was received by NDVO last year and hence would be expiring after a year. (Actual medicals were done on August 8th last year)

I was very disappointed hearing about the strike but it seems NDVO is still processing cases although at a slower pace. I know its hard but try to stay positive. I would suggest contacting your local MP as I feel it really helped.

 

[star001]

Hi all, my fellow 2013 applicants....

I think I am the latest person who has applied for the sponsorship...
my husband mailed the application just 2 days back....

After reading all your posts, etc..... i realize that you all have gone thru alot...
and now its me and my husbands turn to go thru this stress and anxiety...

and specially with the on going strike... i duno what shocks/surprises are in store for us...

BTW does anyone know if the Mississauga office is on strike as well ?

Thanks.. ;D

 

[jk45]

Hi all, my fellow 2013 applicants....

I think I am the latest person who has applied for the sponsorship...
my husband mailed the application just 2 days back....

After reading all your posts, etc..... i realize that you all have gone thru alot...
and now its me and my husbands turn to go thru this stress and anxiety...

and specially with the on going strike... i duno what shocks/surprises are in store for us...

BTW does anyone know if the Mississauga office is on strike as well ?

Thanks.. ;D

No they are not strike so dont worry ur spouse will get the sponsorship approval....by the time he will get the approval this strike may get over...

make sure you guys get the AOR ( confirmation email from CIC Mississauga) with in 2-3 weeks of application received and sponsorship approval in next 4-6 weeks after the AOR.


Good luck....

 

[im281213]

Hi All,

Is the AOR always emailed and does it make a difference if I'm living in Canada( will they mail it out)? At what point do I get a file number once the application has been mailed out?

Thanks

P.S. I just mailed out the application a few days back

 

[bhar]

Hello,

Could someone please help me with GCMS notes. I just received mine today.
I could find following sections :
1. Eligibility - Recommend Passed
2. Security - Not started
3. Criminality - Not Started
4. Medical - Passed

I don't see any section related to background checks. Is it same as security/criminality?

Thanks

 

[gupta417]

Hello,

Could someone please help me with GCMS notes. I just received mine today.
I could find following sections :
1. Eligibility - Recommend Passed
2. Security - Not started
3. Criminality - Not Started
4. Medical - Passed

I don't see any section related to background checks. Is it same as security/criminality?

Thanks

mines due for tomorrow.. anyways, this will be my second notes... in my first which I got almost a month before, first 3 were not started and only medicals was with status Passed... btw, did they mention anywhere that your interview is recommended to be waived??? For me, I didn't find any thing regarding interview in my first notes... lets see whats stored in my next GCMS notes that I may get tomorrow...

- Gupta