Skip to main content

Federal Skilled Trades - NEW!

As of today, January 2, 2013, Citizenship and Immigration Canada ("CIC") has started accepting applications in the new Federal Skilled Trades category for permanent residence.

At present, eligible occupations are limited to NOC B major groups: 72, 73, 82 and 92. There are currently 43 such occupations listed, subdivided into two groups. Group "A" has a cap of 100 applications per occupation, whereas Group "B" has no cap. For a full list of eligible occupations, click here.

A maximum of 3000 applications will be accepted between January 2, 2013 and January 1, 2014.

Program Requirements:

  1. Language proficiency
    • language test is mandatory (CELPIP or IELTS)
    • must meet the minimum level of Canadian Language Benchmark (CLB) 5 for speaking and listening, and CLB 4 for reading and writing.
  2. Minimum 2 years of full-time experience (or equivalent part-time) in a listed occupation, gained within the last 5 years, after being qualified to independently practice in that occupation
  3. Meet that occupations employment requirements (except licensing) as described in the NOC
  4. Have a full-time job offer for at least 1 year in that occupation or hold a certificate of qualification in that skilled trade from a Canadian province
    • Job Offer is valid if:
      • You are currently in Canada on a valid LMO-based work permit, and the offer is made by the employer on that work permit, for the occupation on that work permit. Your work permit, and job offer, must be valid at the time you file the permanent residence application, and at the time the application is approved;
      • You are currently working in Canada on an LMO-exempt work permit if that work permit was obtained under an international agreement (eg. NAFTA) or a significant benefit category (eg. intra-company transferee). No other LMO-exempt work permits qualify.
      • You do not have a valid work permit, and are not authorized to work in Canada. Your employer must obtain an LMO in addition to providing the job offer
      • If you are currently working in Canada on a valid work permit, but the above situations do not apply, then the prospective employer must first obtain a positive LMO.
  5. Financial ability
    • You must demonstrate the ability to financially establish yourself. There is no minimum requirement to show funds available for this if you are already working in Canada and have arranged employment.

Comments

  1. Nice informative post dear. now sharing some stuff about .Canadian Immigration Reforms guide

    ReplyDelete
  2. it is difficult to predict about success without knowing more about language performance in the individual sections and English level generally. A lot also depends on how much time student have to study and improve your English and which methods are using to do this.

    esl teacher

    ReplyDelete
  3. IELTS is not easy. Only students comprehension and analytical skills are important. Constant practice and confidence are needed for the IELTS.

    How to Write an Essay

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What? There's a backlog?

If you work in immigration, it's no secret that most applications seem to take an inordinately long time to be reviewed. That's the case for almost all applications whether overseas or in-Canada. Well, it seems the government is trying to do 'something' about it.



The BRO-V
The first change is to in-Canada H&C (humanitarian & compassionate) applications for permanent residence. Until now, all H&C applications were filed to the Case Processing Centre in Vegreville ("CPC-V"). Unfortunately, CPC-V did not make a decision on any applications where it felt that an interview was needed (99% of cases, it seems). So, all of those files would get transferred to the local CIC office where the applicant lived. For us, the Calgary office became EXTREMELY backlogged. Last year, I got a letter on a file telling me (and my client) that it was going to take 7 years for the Calgary office to make a decision! Now, for many people, the longer it takes, the better it i…

Refugee (Asylum) Claims - Understanding the Process

There has been a lot of news coverage about the influx of refugees (asylum seekers) into Canada via the United States, particularly into Quebec. This post is meant to explore who is entitled to make such a claim in Canada and what claimants can expect.

Eligibility to make the claimCanada and the US have entered into what's called a "safe third country agreement". Essentially, both countries consider the other to be relatively equal in terms of refugee protection and the refugee process. As such, there is an expectation for claimants to make their refugee claim in the first of these two countries. 
The practical consequence of this agreement is that it prevents individuals crossing from the US into Canada at a land border from making a claim in Canada. 
There are exceptions to this agreement: If the claimant has family in CanadaIf the claim is made at an in-land officeIf the claim is made at an airportThere are other eligibility factors as well, but this is the main issue aff…

Credibility vs. Plausibility in Refugee Claims

I recently appeared before the Federal Court on a judicial review of a negative Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision. The claimant was a Cuban national accused of flouting Cuba's currency controls.  The Applicant was self-represented at his refugee hearing before the Refugee Protection Division (RPD). As such, the corroborative evidence was far from idea. However, the RPD did find him to be detailed and consistent in his evidence. The RPD rejected the claimant's documents alleging they could not be independently verified to be authentic. However, the RPD made no actual efforts to verify the documents. The RPD also made a host of negative plausibility findings, which it said disposed of the claim in light of the lack of verifiable corroborative documents. The claimant exercised his appeal rights to the RAD, which agreed that the RPD had no basis to find the claimant's documents to be fraudulent. However, the RAD simply dismissed the claimant's corroborative documents…