URGENT:My partner is 3-month pregnant & we want to shift to Canada(we're expats)
- Thread starter Davidef
- Start date
Any company is eligible to apply for an LMIA.Davidef said:
The trick is finding a company willing to go through the process for specific positions or roles you qualify for. Unfortunately no list exists for that. You have to apply for jobs through regular job sites and hope you get lucky.
Thank you for the precious info, Scylla, with all my heart.
A few things: do the parents of my partner need to register my stay at their house somewhere if I get to stay with them as my partner sponsors me and I look for a job somewhere ?
Also, the documentation proving that my partner and I are staying together at her parents' house can only be a mere affidavit or more is needed ?
Where does an employer have to apply for an LMIA?
A few things: do the parents of my partner need to register my stay at their house somewhere if I get to stay with them as my partner sponsors me and I look for a job somewhere ?
Also, the documentation proving that my partner and I are staying together at her parents' house can only be a mere affidavit or more is needed ?
Where does an employer have to apply for an LMIA?
No they don't have to register, and yes an affidavit is ample proof. Not sure about a LMIA though, as my wife's application was inland and she was granted an open work permit...Davidef said:
The LMIA process is long, involved and expensive. The employer has to start by advertising the job for at least a month to prove no Canadian could be found for the role. This advertising must meet the requirements of the LMIA process. The employer then needs to submit the LMIA application for processing along with a $1,000 fee. Processing of the LMIA application can take as long as four months with no guarantee of an approval at the end. Detailed information about the LMIA process can be found here: http://www.esdc.gc.ca/en/foreign_workers/hire/median_wage/high/overview.pageDavidef said:
Have you considered to give birth in India？ I would assume that with you or your partner's companies/organizations provide good health insurance. I mean, India is turning into a medical tourism country for those with money, and the amounts are a lot cheaper than in many Western countries, so the quality of medical care should not be a problem.Davidef said:
Your child will still be Canadian even if born in India. What the baby cannot do is to pass on citizenship to your grandchild should the grandchild be born outside Canada (i.e. passing citizenship onto 2nd generation born outside Canada). Honestly, that's up to your child to decide in the future whether he/she would live in Canada or reside abroad.
The advantages are many. For one, 10K in savings will be burned through very very quickly. Why not keep working, while the PR application is going through, and keep earning and saving money?
Your chances of finding a job while still abroad are quite slim, and even if you arrive and apply Inland and get a work permit, you may not find work in your field (not quickly anyway).
As you say you work at a consulate, perhaps you have other considerations in mind, such as the typical rotating assignments which means you may be asked to go to another country without much in the decision making process. The bottom line is, you are better off working and saving while applying for PR, and that is not going to happen in Canada. Whether being in India is a better option economically, only you and your partner would know.
Good luck.
Thank you Scylla and Profiler.
You are really helping us a lot.
@Cheng: thank you for your sincere piece of advice too. Alas, our contracts ain't that amazing. She is a primary school teacher and I am just a contract employee; my contract has several limitations (e.g. can't be transferred as easily as diplomats routinely are). But yes, also your option is a viable one. Waiting a bit could help.
Three important questions:
- In the the first months of our relationship (we met in July 2015) we were living separately because she had staff accommodation by contract and she was not contractually granted housing with me until April 2016, when we promptly shifted together. Does this make my partner fall under the category of conjugal partner ?
- Also, I am separated. We would get married instantly but I am in the process of getting divorced. (The Indian law doesn't allow you to divorce before a specified long time ; in brief, they made me wait for the completion of 2 years of marriage). I have been told that this point, of course, doesn't allow us to get married immediately and that's not a huge problem. But does it have any impact on the concept of common law partnership/conjugal partnership?
- the third question: can one renew an ETA from within Canada?
You are really helping us a lot.
@Cheng: thank you for your sincere piece of advice too. Alas, our contracts ain't that amazing. She is a primary school teacher and I am just a contract employee; my contract has several limitations (e.g. can't be transferred as easily as diplomats routinely are). But yes, also your option is a viable one. Waiting a bit could help.
Three important questions:
- In the the first months of our relationship (we met in July 2015) we were living separately because she had staff accommodation by contract and she was not contractually granted housing with me until April 2016, when we promptly shifted together. Does this make my partner fall under the category of conjugal partner ?
- Also, I am separated. We would get married instantly but I am in the process of getting divorced. (The Indian law doesn't allow you to divorce before a specified long time ; in brief, they made me wait for the completion of 2 years of marriage). I have been told that this point, of course, doesn't allow us to get married immediately and that's not a huge problem. But does it have any impact on the concept of common law partnership/conjugal partnership?
- the third question: can one renew an ETA from within Canada?
Conjugal partnership is more for people who cannot marry because of extrenuous reasons. Unfortunately divorce in process isn't one of those things.Davidef said:
You may have trouble with reporting common-law with a disolving marriage still. How long had you been separated from your (ex) partner?
They might suggest bigamy, as there was two relationships existing. So you'd might want to address the divorce with earnest.
Agreed that applying under conjugal isn't an option for them.profiler said:
They can apply as common law provided they have lived together continuously for at least a year. Having an ongoing divorce doesn't stop them from qualifying as common law and is not bigamy (we have plenty of people on this forum who have applied successfully as common law while not yet divorced). Bigamy is when you marry someone while still married to someone else - nothing to do with common law.
Sorry, my bad. I thought I'd read it in IP-8 pages 10 and 28. But I wasn't in the position, so I didn't read that closely..scylla said:
I wanted to post again now that I have had a chance to read IRPA: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-2002-227/page-27.html#h-78 125 (1) under Excluded Relationships reads:
125 (1) A foreign national shall not be considered a member of the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class by virtue of their relationship to the sponsor if
(a) the foreign national is the sponsor’s spouse or common-law partner and is under 18 years of age;
(b) the foreign national is the sponsor's spouse or common-law partner, the sponsor has an existing sponsorship undertaking in respect of a spouse or common-law partner and the period referred to in subsection 132(1) in respect of that undertaking has not ended;
(c) the foreign national is the sponsor's spouse and
(i) the sponsor or the spouse was, at the time of their marriage, the spouse of another person, or
(ii) the sponsor has lived separate and apart from the foreign national for at least one year and
(A) the sponsor is the common-law partner of another person or the sponsor has a conjugal partner, or
(B) the foreign national is the common-law partner of another person or the conjugal partner of another sponsor;
(c.1) the foreign national is the sponsor’s spouse and if at the time the marriage ceremony was conducted either one or both of the spouses were not physically present unless the foreign national was married to a person who was not physically present at the ceremony as a result of their service as a member of the Canadian Forces and the marriage is valid both under the laws of the jurisdiction where it took place and under Canadian law; or
(d) subject to subsection (2), the sponsor previously made an application for permanent residence and became a permanent resident and, at the time of that application, the foreign national was a non-accompanying family member of the sponsor and was not examined.
Of particular interest is 125 (1)(c)(i). I interpret this as an exclusion, but the language is a little ambiguous with respect to spouse v. common-law partner. Would signing the Stat Declaration of Common-Law not make them spouses under law? Of course it's totally up to interpretation, but I would urge the OP to try to resolve his previous marriage before applying.
125 (1) A foreign national shall not be considered a member of the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class by virtue of their relationship to the sponsor if
(a) the foreign national is the sponsor’s spouse or common-law partner and is under 18 years of age;
(b) the foreign national is the sponsor's spouse or common-law partner, the sponsor has an existing sponsorship undertaking in respect of a spouse or common-law partner and the period referred to in subsection 132(1) in respect of that undertaking has not ended;
(c) the foreign national is the sponsor's spouse and
(i) the sponsor or the spouse was, at the time of their marriage, the spouse of another person, or
(ii) the sponsor has lived separate and apart from the foreign national for at least one year and
(A) the sponsor is the common-law partner of another person or the sponsor has a conjugal partner, or
(B) the foreign national is the common-law partner of another person or the conjugal partner of another sponsor;
(c.1) the foreign national is the sponsor’s spouse and if at the time the marriage ceremony was conducted either one or both of the spouses were not physically present unless the foreign national was married to a person who was not physically present at the ceremony as a result of their service as a member of the Canadian Forces and the marriage is valid both under the laws of the jurisdiction where it took place and under Canadian law; or
(d) subject to subsection (2), the sponsor previously made an application for permanent residence and became a permanent resident and, at the time of that application, the foreign national was a non-accompanying family member of the sponsor and was not examined.
Of particular interest is 125 (1)(c)(i). I interpret this as an exclusion, but the language is a little ambiguous with respect to spouse v. common-law partner. Would signing the Stat Declaration of Common-Law not make them spouses under law? Of course it's totally up to interpretation, but I would urge the OP to try to resolve his previous marriage before applying.
A Stat Dec does not make people spouses under the law. Many people have successfully applied as common-law while still technically married. They just need to be able to show that the marriage was finished before the common-law relationship started.profiler said:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/op/op02-eng.pdf
5.38. What happens if the common-law partner (principal applicant) is married to another person?
Persons who are married to third parties may be considered common-law partners provided their marriage has broken down and they have lived separate and apart from the spouse for long enough to establish a common-law relationship – at least one year. In this case they must have cohabited in a conjugal relationship with the common-law partner for at least one year. Cohabitation with a common-law partner cannot be considered to have started until a physical separation from the spouse has occurred. A common-law relationship cannot be legally established if one or both parties continue their marital relationships. Officers must be satisfied that a principal applicant is separated from and no longer cohabits with a legal spouse.
Thank you, people. It all makes much more sense now.
- In reference to the first question:
"In the the first months of our relationship (we met in July 2015) we were living separately because she had staff accommodation by contract and she was not contractually granted housing with me until April 2016, when we promptly shifted together. Does this make my partner fall under the category of conjugal partner ?"
Here let me add: since October, in all sincerity, we have been basically staying together almost 24/ 7, due to the irreconcilable differences with my ex wife. However, the housing proof at the time was hindered by her the precariousness and unnecessary rigidity of her contract, which strongly affected us a couple. My question is: Would a co-signed affidavit suffice to prove we have been staying together since October 2015?
- Also, could one renew an ETA from within Canada a bit before the expiry of the previous one ?
- In reference to the first question:
"In the the first months of our relationship (we met in July 2015) we were living separately because she had staff accommodation by contract and she was not contractually granted housing with me until April 2016, when we promptly shifted together. Does this make my partner fall under the category of conjugal partner ?"
Here let me add: since October, in all sincerity, we have been basically staying together almost 24/ 7, due to the irreconcilable differences with my ex wife. However, the housing proof at the time was hindered by her the precariousness and unnecessary rigidity of her contract, which strongly affected us a couple. My question is: Would a co-signed affidavit suffice to prove we have been staying together since October 2015?
- Also, could one renew an ETA from within Canada a bit before the expiry of the previous one ?