hitzs wrote:sundaymorningstaple wrote:Extended family back at home who could, in the future, end up in Singapore on ltvps based on either you or your spouse's sponsorship? They tend to look hard at collateral baggage. Have they asked, at any time, for more information regarding either of your family backgrounds? A lot get those requests for additional answers. Not saying this is the problem, but just tryin' to touch all the bases to see where there might be a correlation.
Are you working "with" or "for" a local bank. e.g., are you employed by the bank or by a manpower/IT service company under contract to the bank?
Where have you worked before? (Not the companies, but the countries).
You raised few good points! Yes, my parents and siblings live in India. In fact during my first application they specifically enquired about my family background. My dad served Indian army for 30+ years but now retired and my mum was a home maker. I am not sure if that can be of any concern to ICA.
Secondly, I permanently work for local bank (not a contract). In fact I did join them through their fast track leadership program (Management Associate Program)
Lastly, prior to coming to SG, I worked in Cyprus for 3+ years (with frequent stays in Europe/Israel/Canada) and studied MBA in UK.
Btw over the last 4-5 years I have been promoted 3 times and last being to VP - last promotion is after my rejection
. Not sure if that is good enough a reason for appeal....appreciate your suggestion.
Okay, hitzs, this is how I read it, based on your additional info.
They have, in fact, already inquired about the state of your family. Not good, retired. Could become dependent baggage here which adds to the drain on resources here (money notwithstanding) due to space constraints and infrastructure loading. Yeah, I know, what's 2 additional old retired folks. Heavier strain on the medical facilities, more loading on public transport systems possibly, etc. (I could go on as well you could).
Secondly, and maybe most importantly, and many do not give this a thought at all, is the fact that you have been rather mobile, e.g., stints in Cyprus, the UK, Europe, Canada and Israel. This has all the hallmarks of a person chasing the dollar (of course we are) but if you look at it from the government's point of view, you don't look like a "stayer" but someone who will up and fly for a few dollars more. Doesn't make sense for them to use up a slot for PR for somebody who, on the surface anyway, looks like they are only taking it up for the short term benefits and not for any real love for the country. This is why a lot of high-flyers in the Financial sector are not given PR as the government realizes that they have little hope of "holding" them here. Middle managers make better "stayer" than seniors.
I don't like to be negative and I've been accused of it often, but I try to look at things from the government point of view as it's this point of view that the applicant will face with a government official.
Of course, if you have a real "niche" occupation that the country dearly needs, they they will jump through hoops to entice you to stay. But isn't that the same everywhere?
sms
NB: as I am married to an Indian as is my daughter, I know for a fact that good Indian boys can never escape their mothers and will try their best to bring them wherever they go.
Oh, I would give it another go, say in another 6 months or so. What are you going to lose? Aside from possibly another promotion that will see you in another country?
