Unfortunately, many applicants limit their acquaintance with the immigration procedure to studying the GOL (see terminology). Indeed, this list includes almost all engineering specialties, and all of them have fairly high indicators: ETF – at the level of 17 points, Occ. – 5. However, most potential immigrants do not pay attention to the problem that is actually the main one: the fact that you consider yourself an engineer does not mean that an embassy official will consider you an engineer.
Unfortunately, such cases cannot be called exceptions. People who are preparing their documents for an immigration visa should abandon existing stereotypes. These stereotypes can be called Soviet, Ukrainian – it doesn't matter. The essence is that your opinion about your own qualifications, education, and abilities is of no interest to anyone at the embassy. Yes, during the interview you will need to make an impression of a person confident in their own strengths and capabilities, however, if you do not have the necessary qualifications, your story will impress no one. No, even the most booming demand for programmers in Canada (which in itself is a controversial and ambiguous issue) will not lead to Canadians issuing immigration visas to self-taught specialists, of which we have many.
It should also be remembered that the official reviewing your case at the embassy is not an engineer by education and cannot objectively assess your professional level. When making a decision, this person is guided only by the documents at their disposal. Thus, your compliance with the profession is actually checked formally. And the official has a document such as the NOC, which, unlike the GOL, cannot be found in free use. This document provides clear answers to the questions:
– where can an engineer of this specialty work?
– what subgroups are included in the concept of an engineer of this specialty?
– what education should such a specialist have?
– what are the daily duties of this specialist?
At the same time, add the phrase “in Canada” to each of the above questions. That is, the applicant's compliance with the Canadian equivalents of your profession will be checked. And no one cares that you have been working as an engineer in our Soviet-Ukrainian understanding all this time. It may turn out that you have not worked a single day in the Canadian vision of this specialty. At the same time, you may have full compliance with entries in your work record book, specialty according to your diploma, excellent reviews in recommendation letters – after all, no one at the embassy will even say that you are a poor specialist. It's just that your specialty is called differently in Canada.
We have more than once had clients who received a refusal after going through the procedure on their own. Their data was interpreted by the embassy official as data of a “technician.” And indeed: if you carefully study the descriptions of these professions in the NOC, many of our engineers will objectively classify themselves as a “technician” or at least find in his duties much of what our engineers actually perform. The official will not burden himself with the problem of mismatched names and concepts – he sees your non-compliance with Canadian engineering duties and that is enough for him to draw conclusions. It should be noted that interpreting data as a “technician” for most applicants is equivalent to a refusal. For comparison: a technician's specialty receives 15 points for ETF and 1 point for Occ (an engineer receives 17 and 5 points respectively), as well as the maximum possible score for work experience – 6 (engineers – 8). If you had a governess in childhood who taught you English and French, and your sister lives in Canada, then due to additional points for knowledge of a second official language (15 points, compared to 6 points for knowledge of one language at the “well” level) and having a relative in Canada (plus 5 points), you will be able to get a visa. Otherwise, you will most likely be refused.
Events will unfold according to the same scenario if you are recognized as a “technologist.” Less often, but there are cases of engineers being classified under managerial specialties. This can happen if the engineer’s position also has managerial functions: for example, chief engineer or technical director. It is practically impossible for engineers who work in trading companies and are engaged in selling equipment to go through the immigration procedure. Their work record books may list the position “engineer,” although in essence they would correspond to the specialty “sales manager.” All these cases are equally disadvantageous for applicants with an engineering education.
Therefore, based on the above, before submitting documents to the embassy, it is necessary to verify the “engineering essence” of your activities. This task, in turn, is divided into three subtasks:
– determine which specialty your education and job duties are closest to;
– bring the description of your work history into compliance with the most favorable interpretation for you;
– prove to the embassy official that you belong to your chosen professional group.
The first stage is the simplest, but only if you have the NOC at your disposal and have a good command of English. If you have neither, it is better to turn to immigration specialists. They should answer this question at the very first consultation. Therefore, the costs at this level will not be large (the cost of a consultation usually does not exceed $5). At the same time, during the consultation, try to steer the conversation with the consultant from the plane of “promising/unpromising client” to the question of “which specialty my data corresponds to.”
The second stage of going through the immigration process on your own will be more difficult. Here you need to combine professional knowledge, information from immigration documents, and a certain amount of creativity. This is not about forging documents. Under no circumstances! It is simply necessary to compile a resume with a detailed description of your responsibilities. And the problem lies precisely in which responsibilities to include and which not to.
The same line must be followed when preparing other documents, especially recommendation letters. In the text of the recommendations, in addition to a positive reference, there should be a brief description of responsibilities, which again confirms the content of the resume. It is advisable to include in the package all documents that in any way relate to your professional activity as an engineer: certificates, advanced training courses, patents, inventions, articles in specialized press, etc.
The third stage is difficult to separate from the second, since the documents listed above are part of the evidence of your belonging to the engineering profession. The conversation at the interview with the official will mainly concern professional topics and will be built around the documents you have provided. Naturally, the essence of your oral account must match the content of the resume, and oral information must not contradict the written one. Therefore, you can prepare in advance for a detailed conversation with the official, using the resume as a plan.
Preparation for the interview and the interview itself are a separate topic, to which we will devote a separate article in the near future.
There is a means that can almost guaranteed remove the question of your professional suitability from the agenda. We are talking about confirmation of your qualifications by the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers. The results of such an assessment are official and cannot be questioned by an immigration official. If there is a positive opinion from this organization, the embassy can only verify the authenticity of the documents you have provided.
To the CCPE, you must submit documents on education and work experience. The association's approach to evaluating your data is practically no different from that of an embassy official and is based on the NOC. However, this is done by correspondence. You must agree: proving your competence as an engineer in writing is somewhat easier than orally, when completely natural anxiety interferes with the process. A positive point is also that the CCPE employs specialists in your field, and one can hope for a more objective viewpoint. A negative point also exists: not everyone will benefit from such objectivity. Thus, preparing documents for submission to the CCPE also requires certain work, and sometimes the collection of additional documents that are not initially requested, but that significantly ease the problem of obtaining a positive result.
The procedure for processing documents at the CCPE can take from several months to a year. The fact is that the CCPE is a public organization and has no special obligations regarding deadlines to anyone. The employees of this structure, as a rule, are not exclusively workers of the association and combine their activities in it, as a rule, with teaching work at universities. This becomes especially noticeable in the summer months, when the activity of this respected organization practically comes to a halt. There is another recommendation for preparing documents: prepare all papers in duplicate. The reason for this is that documents at the CCPE sometimes get lost. Rarely, but it happens.
The most controversial issue, constantly debated by experts, is the choice of the moment when it is best to undergo the qualification assessment procedure. There are three main opinions on this matter, and each of them has certain grounds.
The first opinion is held by embassy officials when speaking with applicants. It boils down to the phrase: 'When we request it, then you will do it!' Indeed, in the list of documents mandatory for submission to the embassy, the said document from the CCPE is not required. There are many examples of applicants successfully going through the procedure without ever learning about the existence of the CCPE.
The opposite opinion is held by many immigration lawyers. They believe that this procedure must necessarily be completed before submitting documents to the embassy. Otherwise, the applicant leaves the official the opportunity to refuse to consider the case on the grounds of insufficient arguments in favor of their professional affiliation. As evidence, they cite the text of an instruction that was sent to all embassies on this matter in November 2000. We deliberately provide the quotes in English so that the reader can independently evaluate this message (after all, if you are planning to immigrate to Canada, you need to get used to the English language):
«Chapter OP5 – Appendix DPROCEDURES FOR ASSESSMENTS BY THE CANADIAN COUNCIL OF PROFESSIONALENGINEERS (CCPE)»
...While applicants should be encouraged to obtain the CCPE assessment, we can not insist on one as a prerequisite to the application process. If an applicant submits an application, without a CCPE assessment, the application should be assessed on the available information. In very few cases, where the applicant's credentials are clearly excellent, it may be evident that the applicant will likely to be able to work as an engineer in Canada, even if they have not submitted a CCPE assessment. If the conclusion is that the applicant has not submitted sufficient proof to establish that they can work as an engineer in Canada, the refusal letter should be issued. We will not send separate requests for CCPE assessments anymore – it is applicants obligation to make sure that submitted documents are sufficient to prove ability to work as engineer in Canada».
The third opinion, which the author holds, is a compromise: documents should be submitted to CCPE simultaneously with the application to the embassy. In our practice, there have been no cases where an applicant was refused at the very first stage of document review solely because they did not provide CCPE results. Therefore, it would be unjustified to delay submitting the case to the embassy until the CCPE review is completed. At the same time, one should not drag this issue out for too long and completely leave it to officials to determine your professional affiliation.
In favor of submitting documents to CCPE is also the fact that having confirmation of your engineering education together with positive English language test results (IELTS) from the British Council may lead to the waiver of an interview. The decision to waive an interview is made by the official on a case-by-case basis, but given these factors, the likelihood of such an outcome is quite high.
So, the moral: do not let the long-forgotten pride of belonging to the engineering profession intoxicate you. Remember the motto of those times, to which engineering pride also belongs: be vigilant! Believe me, many of those who dream of moving to Canada envy you for your diploma and are trying to solve much more complex issues.
Igor ZAVILINSKY,
General Director of the law
company «GBM & Partners»