WORK EXPERIENCE ISSUES

[Encore]

So, I am wondering here. What is important to CIC? Is it that a candidate was working for the 1560 hours or that the candidate has an offer that gives him/her the possibility of working 1560 hours?
I mean, if candidates have employment letters that states that they are hired full time and would work 40 hours/week, but the candidate actually works 25 hours/week. How does such situation play out?
Is it the actual work hours that matters to CIC or the offer that the candidate has?

 

[StAnger]

So, I am wondering here. What is important to CIC? Is it that a candidate was working for the 1560 hours or that the candidate has an offer that gives him/her the possibility of working 1560 hours?
I mean, if candidates have employment letters that states that they are hired full time and would work 40 hours/week, but the candidate actually works 25 hours/week. How does such situation play out?
Is it the actual work hours that matters to CIC or the offer that the candidate has?

25 hrs/week against committed 40 hrs/week, seems like he/she has an excellent boss.

Well, as I understand, 40 hrs/week would translate to full time employment. CIC goes by whats in black & White and strictly go by what they have chalked out to assess the applicants. So they need that magic number of 1560 hrs I reckon.

 

[Encore]

25 hrs/week against committed 40 hrs/week, seems like he/she has an excellent boss.

Well, as I understand, 40 hrs/week would translate to full time employment. CIC goes by whats in black & White and strictly go by what they have chalked out to assess the applicants. So they need that magic number of 1560 hrs I reckon.

Ok, lets paint a different scenario here.
Lets assume a casual worker with an offer of maximum work hours of 15hrs/week but actually does work of 10 hrs/week. So, what will be the case of such person? Would the issue be based on the actual hours delivered or the hours on the employment contract?
How will CIC even know the exact work hours an employer puts in?

 

[Asivad Anac]

Ok, lets paint a different scenario here.
Lets assume a casual worker with an offer of maximum work hours of 15hrs/week but actually does work of 10 hrs/week. So, what will be the case of such person? Would the issue be based on the actual hours delivered or the hours on the employment contract?
How will CIC even know the exact work hours an employer puts in?

CIC goes with what is provided on the reference letter. If they are skeptical about any information on the reference letter, they might connect with the employer to confirm those details.

 

[CanadaWeCome]

Ok, lets paint a different scenario here.
Lets assume a casual worker with an offer of maximum work hours of 15hrs/week but actually does work of 10 hrs/week. So, what will be the case of such person? Would the issue be based on the actual hours delivered or the hours on the employment contract?
How will CIC even know the exact work hours an employer puts in?

While i understand your questioning...but CIC has to depend on some concrete proof/fact that is admissible in the court of law (if push comes to shove) they can rely on at the end of the day.

So i guess a signed & stamped employer reference letter by an employer on their own letter head is their best bet. And as @Asivad Anac said if they have a reason to doubt that letter, they have all the right (& facilities i guess) to communicate with them to cross verify the facts.

Beyond that i guess its mostly the employee (most certainly) or the employer (may be) and perhaps God who would know the truth and the whole truth.

 

[vladikim]

does anyone know, can I count my work experience as a foreign experience while I was a student back in my home country? I was in my last year of college and worked full time (noc b position).

 

[Asivad Anac]

does anyone know, can I count my work experience as a foreign experience while I was a student back in my home country? I was in my last year of college and worked full time (noc b position).

Yes. Provided you can get a valid reference letter.

 

[Encore]

Oyeah!
Thanks everyone for the opinion. I think the idea is clear.
I suppose that is why in some cases things like pay stubs will be useful. If for nothing to show work done in exact numbers vs. pay

 

[jes_ON]

So, I am wondering here. What is important to CIC? Is it that a candidate was working for the 1560 hours or that the candidate has an offer that gives him/her the possibility of working 1560 hours?
I mean, if candidates have employment letters that states that they are hired full time and would work 40 hours/week, but the candidate actually works 25 hours/week. How does such situation play out?
Is it the actual work hours that matters to CIC or the offer that the candidate has?

The only interest CIC would have in a job offer letter is if it was an LMIA-supported offer of future employment in Canada.

In reference to past employment, job offer letters are NOT proof of work performed, you are correct.

That is why CIC asks for recent letters of employment from all employers. "Recent" can be unclear, but in reference to a previous (not current) job, it means that it was written AFTER the job ended. The purpose of the LOE is that an employer testifies to the work actually performed.

Employment documents should also include other proof - e.g. proof of income (tax documents, paystubs), or other corroboration.

CIC can cross-reference the information in the letter with the other documents to confirm consistency in information.

Example: If the letter states that you worked full-time at 40 hours per week, and earn an annual salary of 50,000, but your tax documents show only 25,000, you will have some explaining to do.

Yes, it is more difficult for people who are paid an hourly wage, and have variable hours. They have to keep very good records and be able to prove the hours they worked.

 

[Encore]

The only interest CIC would have in a job offer letter is if it was an LMIA-supported offer of future employment in Canada.

In reference to past employment, job offer letters are NOT proof of work performed, you are correct.

That is why CIC asks for recent letters of employment from all employers. "Recent" can be unclear, but in reference to a previous (not current) job, it means that it was written AFTER the job ended. The purpose of the LOE is that an employer testifies to the work actually performed.

Employment documents should also include other proof - e.g. proof of income (tax documents, paystubs), or other corroboration.

CIC can cross-reference the information in the letter with the other documents to confirm consistency in information.

Example: If the letter states that you worked full-time at 40 hours per week, and earn an annual salary of 50,000, but your tax documents show only 25,000, you will have some explaining to do.

Yes, it is more difficult for people who are paid an hourly wage, and have variable hours. They have to keep very good records and be able to prove the hours they worked.

@Jes, sorry am a little confused now. What should be the major document? The employment letter, or the reference letter? For people who have done this before, which did you have to upload? Is it okay to have the just the reference letter uploaded in cases of casual work that gets renewed every 3 or so months? Would the reference letter alone suffice?

 

[jes_ON]

@Jes, sorry am a little confused now. What should be the major document? The employment letter, or the reference letter? For people who have done this before, which did you have to upload? Is it okay to have the just the reference letter uploaded in cases of casual work that gets renewed every 3 or so months? Would the reference letter alone suffice?

I have no idea what you mean when you say "reference letter." As far as CIC is concerned, a letter of employment/reference letter is the same thing, it covers your work HISTORY, not future work. A letter of employment is not a "recommendation," just a statement of the facts of your employment.

A contract renewal is an extension, not a new job. One letter should cover the entire period of work. For example, if you worked 3 years on annual contracts in the same position for the same company, you only need one letter that covers those 3 years...

 

[Encore]

I have no idea what you mean when you say "reference letter." As far as CIC is concerned, a letter of employment/reference letter is the same thing, it covers your work HISTORY, not future work. A letter of employment is not a "recommendation," just a statement of the facts of your employment.

A contract renewal is an extension, not a new job. One letter should cover the entire period of work. For example, if you worked 3 years on annual contracts in the same position for the same company, you only need one letter that covers those 3 years...

Thanks.
Makes sense!