My previous observations were about drawing conclusions from what we know, including forum anecdotal reports.
I was not addressing the specific matter of whether or not, but if yes, then who, among those engaged in "essential services" might be getting invites and processed in priority order.
So, in regards to these posts:
I am not sure if "Decision Made" is the event that means the applicant has become a "candidate." If so, that would highly suggest you were in the next batch who will be scheduled for ceremonies, virtual or otherwise. But the number in queue in front of this group is likely many times the number who have gotten the virtual oath during the last three months. Hopefully IRCC will accelerate the process and it will not take so long for the next thousand let alone several thousand (remember, in a typical year there may be as many as four thousand taking the oath each week, week after week . . . it is hard to grasp just how much of a backlog is building).
If "Decision Made" is NOT the event that means the applicant has become a "candidate" (and frankly my sense leans in this direction, recognizing this is one of those details I do not know), what groups of applicants, what criteria is employed, to schedule after existing candidates (those who were, already, previously scheduled to take the oath at a subsequently cancelled ceremony) have taken the oath, is difficult to forecast.
ESSENTIAL WORKERS:
Why would a grant of citizenship be a compelling need for someone who currently has status and is able to work in the health and safety industry?
It appears that many have misinterpreted or taken this term out-of-context. And, moreover, rather broadened the scope of what constitutes "essential."
"Essential" basically refers to something or someone without which, or without who, things will not work.
Example, one of the first examples of a virtual oath ceremony was for an individual with specialized expertise needed in a laboratory with very limited, security-controlled access, apparently a clearance for which citizenship is necessary, and thus an "essential" service requiring the status of CITIZEN.
In the general sense, the work of nurses and doctors and other front line health industry workers (even those changing linens and cleaning hospital bathrooms) is indeed essential, and very much appreciated. But a grant of Canadian citizenship is not a reward for service. However honourable. If the work can be engaged without a grant of citizenship, citizenship has, basically, NOTHING to do with it. Applicants are NOT likely to get expedited processing because, say, they have been dutifully serving in an important and honorable way.
Additionally, UNLESS you have made a documented application for urgent processing, it is very unlikely your citizenship oath timeline will be accelerated compared to others in the same local office.
But the reference to "expedited" service . . . sometimes, in some contexts, referred to as "urgent" processing, warrants some further attention:
The invitations do appear to be directed to a rather selective group, but all within the larger group of those who were previously scheduled for an oath ceremony that was cancelled (with perhaps some exceptions . . . which are probably special cases).
Whatever the criteria for selecting them is . . . and OK, maybe it's a lottery (random), but that seems highly unlikely.
This criteria is barely applicable in the grant citizenship context.
Which is not to disregard the possibility of expedited processing in response to a duly made application for URGENT processing, including for citizenship applicants.
Until recently, IRCC appears to have all but shut down normal citizenship application processing. Its effort to resume operations appears, in initial phases, to focus on things like scheduling oath ceremonies for those who had already, previously, been scheduled for the oath. This makes sense. I have addressed this before: These are individuals who have been granted citizenship, who are no longer applicants but "candidates," so the government must make reasonable efforts to proceed with the formal consummation of that process. Many may not readily appreciate it, but most of the decision-makers in the government, including IRCC, have attained those positions because they take the mandate of law seriously and are conscientious in their efforts to execute the law. Contrary to some of the more unfounded rants in this forum.
BUT some endeavors are still time-consuming. Resuming any semblance of normal operations in the wake of the Covid-19 measures will, obviously, BE SLOW going. Signs of progress are good signs. But for those in the back seat chanting "are we there yet," the same old refrain is likely to be playing for a good while longer. "Not yet." (Should one say, "Not yet, kids?")
The gap between what is being delivered and forum expectations has almost always been rather wide. It tends to be especially wide during difficult transitions. I am not trying to argue that the way things work is above criticism. Not at all.
But the process is not capricious or arbitrary. The criteria is not random. It is going to go WAY SLOW still for a good while longer plus some. If history is any indicator, that offers little promise: it took CIC well into 2014 and even into 2015 to deal with the backlog of citizenship applications built up in 2011 and 2012. I hope they do far, far better with this.
I was not addressing the specific matter of whether or not, but if yes, then who, among those engaged in "essential services" might be getting invites and processed in priority order.
So, in regards to these posts:
If you were NOT already scheduled for the oath BEFORE Covid-19 cancellations, it appears UNLIKELY you will be scheduled for a Virtual Oath soon. It appears that almost all those so far scheduled for the virtual oath are actually citizenship "candidates," no longer "applicants," and more specifically already had been scheduled for a ceremony that got cancelled.
I am not sure if "Decision Made" is the event that means the applicant has become a "candidate." If so, that would highly suggest you were in the next batch who will be scheduled for ceremonies, virtual or otherwise. But the number in queue in front of this group is likely many times the number who have gotten the virtual oath during the last three months. Hopefully IRCC will accelerate the process and it will not take so long for the next thousand let alone several thousand (remember, in a typical year there may be as many as four thousand taking the oath each week, week after week . . . it is hard to grasp just how much of a backlog is building).
If "Decision Made" is NOT the event that means the applicant has become a "candidate" (and frankly my sense leans in this direction, recognizing this is one of those details I do not know), what groups of applicants, what criteria is employed, to schedule after existing candidates (those who were, already, previously scheduled to take the oath at a subsequently cancelled ceremony) have taken the oath, is difficult to forecast.
ESSENTIAL WORKERS:
Why would a grant of citizenship be a compelling need for someone who currently has status and is able to work in the health and safety industry?
It appears that many have misinterpreted or taken this term out-of-context. And, moreover, rather broadened the scope of what constitutes "essential."
"Essential" basically refers to something or someone without which, or without who, things will not work.
Example, one of the first examples of a virtual oath ceremony was for an individual with specialized expertise needed in a laboratory with very limited, security-controlled access, apparently a clearance for which citizenship is necessary, and thus an "essential" service requiring the status of CITIZEN.
In the general sense, the work of nurses and doctors and other front line health industry workers (even those changing linens and cleaning hospital bathrooms) is indeed essential, and very much appreciated. But a grant of Canadian citizenship is not a reward for service. However honourable. If the work can be engaged without a grant of citizenship, citizenship has, basically, NOTHING to do with it. Applicants are NOT likely to get expedited processing because, say, they have been dutifully serving in an important and honorable way.
Additionally, UNLESS you have made a documented application for urgent processing, it is very unlikely your citizenship oath timeline will be accelerated compared to others in the same local office.
But the reference to "expedited" service . . . sometimes, in some contexts, referred to as "urgent" processing, warrants some further attention:
Reminder: even if we are not acquainted with the criteria employed, it is very unlikely it is "random."
The invitations do appear to be directed to a rather selective group, but all within the larger group of those who were previously scheduled for an oath ceremony that was cancelled (with perhaps some exceptions . . . which are probably special cases).
Whatever the criteria for selecting them is . . . and OK, maybe it's a lottery (random), but that seems highly unlikely.
The BIG reminder is that this information about prioritizing applications is about ANY and ALMOST ALL applications, not just grant citizenship applications. It is NOT specifically about who is currently being scheduled for virtual oath ceremonies. It is very likely MORE ABOUT applications for travel documents to facilitate travel to Canada and otherwise more about various immigration applications. It lists "citizenship" applications as well, but this also includes applications for citizenship certificates by persons who are already citizens (see other topics where there is no shortage of timeline complaints for these applicants).
This criteria is barely applicable in the grant citizenship context.
--Canadians trying to return to Canada may need a travel document or passport (depending on whether they are a PR or citizen). No grant of citizenship needed to do that.
-- Vulnerable persons may need the protection of status in Canada or some other services provided by IRCC. Here too, a grant of citizenship is not needed for this.
-- People who perform or support essential services is, probably, largely about processing status for them to engage in the work . . . which, except in very limited cases, does not necessitate a grant of citizenship . . . except in a case like what might have been the first virtual oath, someone with sophisticated medical science expertise who needed a citizenship level security clearance for the position he was highly sought to take
Which is not to disregard the possibility of expedited processing in response to a duly made application for URGENT processing, including for citizenship applicants.
Until recently, IRCC appears to have all but shut down normal citizenship application processing. Its effort to resume operations appears, in initial phases, to focus on things like scheduling oath ceremonies for those who had already, previously, been scheduled for the oath. This makes sense. I have addressed this before: These are individuals who have been granted citizenship, who are no longer applicants but "candidates," so the government must make reasonable efforts to proceed with the formal consummation of that process. Many may not readily appreciate it, but most of the decision-makers in the government, including IRCC, have attained those positions because they take the mandate of law seriously and are conscientious in their efforts to execute the law. Contrary to some of the more unfounded rants in this forum.
BUT some endeavors are still time-consuming. Resuming any semblance of normal operations in the wake of the Covid-19 measures will, obviously, BE SLOW going. Signs of progress are good signs. But for those in the back seat chanting "are we there yet," the same old refrain is likely to be playing for a good while longer. "Not yet." (Should one say, "Not yet, kids?")
The gap between what is being delivered and forum expectations has almost always been rather wide. It tends to be especially wide during difficult transitions. I am not trying to argue that the way things work is above criticism. Not at all.
But the process is not capricious or arbitrary. The criteria is not random. It is going to go WAY SLOW still for a good while longer plus some. If history is any indicator, that offers little promise: it took CIC well into 2014 and even into 2015 to deal with the backlog of citizenship applications built up in 2011 and 2012. I hope they do far, far better with this.
