Procedural Fairness for 2173 vs 2174

[umerkha2007]

Hi there,
I have an express entry profile with Primary Occupation 2174. I had to prove only one year continuous work experience.
Experience 1: 2173 (2 years)-> Visa officer says this experience is valid but not in your primary occupation
Experience 2: 2174 (4 months) -> Visa officer accepts
Experience 3: 2173 (6 months) -> Visa officer accepts but not in primary occupation
Experience 4: 2174 (6 months) -> Visa officer accepts

Now the issue is that the because of these interchanging experiences 1 year contnuous in 2174 isnt there.

So the Visa Officer sent me a Procedural Fairness letter stating to clarify my experience in my primary occupational NOC.

Options lawyer gave me:
1. Say you made a clerical mistake by chosing wrong NOC code and that your primary NOC code should be 2173
2. Say that the job duties for the Experience 3 match 2174 instead of 2173.

What do you guys think I should send as a reply?

 

[Bangoga]

In my opinion, Id change experience 3 to 2174 in that case. Its interesting since this is the first time ive seen this issue ever show up. Usually the 2174 and 2173 job duties align so well with each other that the differences are very small (the new TEET system some what fixes that).

Honestly both of those are fine options. If you can make an argument for similarities in job duties for experience 3 go for that or go for the clerical error option. You should be accepted regardless, seems like a understandable issue, but IRCC is what IRCC is. What does your lawyer think as a better option?

 

[umerkha2007]

@Bangoga Thanks so much for your reply. Lawyer gave me these two options. But she says option 1 is better because even if they refuse, you go out empty slate. They said, what you don't want to get involved in, is misrepresentation. They said, if you give them a new document now, which contradicts a document you sent them before, they might book you for misrepresentation or leave a credibility issue for future application. They said that "Human clerical mistake" cannot count as misrepresentation or credibility issue.

But what she also said is that you should try both options. Which, to me, is a bit confusing. Cause if I'm pleading them to change my Primary NOC Code to 2173 and on the other hand asking Experience 3 to be changed to 2174, it seems to me that that is a conflict in my own statement and might arise the suspicion that I'm only changing occupation due to beneficiary reasons.

I was also thinking about getting a letter from Experience 3 company, further elaborating my job duties, but again, I don't want to contradict what I already gave them. I only want to support my argument that, I put 2173 by mistake for Experience 3 and that after thorough review of job description of 2174, I feel that it more suits my role and I could say that to elaborate my point, I requested my company to provide me a letter which describes the projects I was working on and what my role in those projects was.

What is your opinion?

 

[Bangoga]

I can't really say, other than good luck, this genuinely is a first? Is this CEC? FSW?
How similar is experience 3 to 2173 and 2174? I would hope choosing any of those two would not be useed as misrepresentation, seems farfetched since the duties align 50% to each other? have you considered getting a second lawyers opinion?

 

[umerkha2007]

@Bangoga Thanks for the reply again. Its FSW with PNP.
I thought about arguing over the similarities of 2173 and 2174 but the lawyer was clear that they will not accept that argument.
In the fairness letter, this is what the Visa Officer wrote about Experience 1:

You stated working for Experience 1 between 2019/06 and 2020/11. On the letter of employment it lists your position with that company as a software engineer. The duties listed also appear to conform with the duties of a software engineer, which falls under NOC code of 2173, distinctly separate from NOC 2174, your primary NOC.

And for Experience 2, they wrote:

You worked for Experience 2, between 2020/10 and 2021/04, and provided sufficient evidence that you did so under NOC 2174. However, your subsequent employment, for Experience 3 between 2021/4 and 2021/11, was under NOC 2173.

And for Experience 4, they wrote:

While the documents provided for both of this employment show duties matching the primary NOC code, the length of employment does not equate to 1 year, as the end date of the qualifying period is 2022/08

So now, either I switch my Primary NOC code to 2173 and claim Experience 1. Or change my NOC code for Experience 3 to 2174. Pretty bad situation really. Not something I expected to be contacted about really cause like you said, 2173 and 2174 are almost the same really. But here we are.

 

[Bangoga]

@Bangoga Thanks for the reply again. Its FSW with PNP.
I thought about arguing over the similarities of 2173 and 2174 but the lawyer was clear that they will not accept that argument.
In the fairness letter, this is what the Visa Officer wrote about Experience 1:



And for Experience 2, they wrote:



And for Experience 4, they wrote:


So now, either I switch my Primary NOC code to 2173 and claim Experience 1. Or change my NOC code for Experience 3 to 2174. Pretty bad situation really. Not something I expected to be contacted about really cause like you said, 2173 and 2174 are almost the same really. But here we are.

Was your PNP accepted as 2173 or 2174?

 

[Bangoga]

So from what im reading the issue isn't that your duties don't match up, its the fact that you are asking for employment under 2174 but your claimed 2173 for experience 1 and 3 (or at the very least your job title states as software engineer)

 

[umerkha2007]

@Bangoga it was accepted as 2174. I claimed 2174 for Experience 1 but the Visa Officer thinks that for Experience 1, its more close to 2173 based on job title and (maybe) job duties (This is what I can explain as well). And for Experience 3, again, he thinks its 2173, but I showed my experience letter to the lawyer and they did say its closer to 2174. I'm confused at this point.

 

[Bangoga]

@Bangoga it was accepted as 2174

Did your letters specifically say you are 2173 or 2174 for your job references?

 

[umerkha2007]

@Bangoga

Did your letters specifically say you are 2173 or 2174 for your job references?

No, the letters only mention my job title and duties. Its based on the title mostly that the visa officer is convinced that its 2173 and not 2174.
And lawyer said that BC PNP is totally separate from your Express Entry application. So you can change your Primary NOC for Express Entry application even if you received your PNP in another NOC Code.

 

[singhno]

Hi there,
I have an express entry profile with Primary Occupation 2174. I had to prove only one year continuous work experience.
Experience 1: 2173 (2 years)-> Visa officer says this experience is valid but not in your primary occupation
Experience 2: 2174 (4 months) -> Visa officer accepts
Experience 3: 2173 (6 months) -> Visa officer accepts but not in primary occupation
Experience 4: 2174 (6 months) -> Visa officer accepts

Now the issue is that the because of these interchanging experiences 1 year contnuous in 2174 isnt there.

So the Visa Officer sent me a Procedural Fairness letter stating to clarify my experience in my primary occupational NOC.

Options lawyer gave me:
1. Say you made a clerical mistake by chosing wrong NOC code and that your primary NOC code should be 2173
2. Say that the job duties for the Experience 3 match 2174 instead of 2173.

What do you guys think I should send as a reply?

option 1 is valid and shall be accepted. They cant reject your PR application if you choose 1.

 

[singhno]

@Bangoga it was accepted as 2174. I claimed 2174 for Experience 1 but the Visa Officer thinks that for Experience 1, its more close to 2173 based on job title and (maybe) job duties (This is what I can explain as well). And for Experience 3, again, he thinks its 2173, but I showed my experience letter to the lawyer and they did say its closer to 2174. I'm confused at this point.

visa officer is wrong, 2173 is a subset of 2174. 2174 includes almost all of the duties of 2173.

 

[singhno]

visa officer is wrong, 2173 is a subset of 2174. 2174 includes almost all of the duties of 2173.

THe officer seems confused because of the title of your job. You shall explain that although the title is Software Engineer, your duties were more aligned with 2174 a software developer.

 

[powerssdd]

Any updates?

 

[umerkha2007]

Any updates?

Not yet, they said they've added my response to the file. However, it is mentioned in the rules of IRCC that they cannot send an acceptance or refusal before the end date of deadline given in the procedural fairness letter.