PR Approval Chances in 2021

[Ganbal]

Hi - we are planning to apply for a PR this year. It would be very helpful to get some opinions on our chances

Me:
Age: 37
Race + Nationality: Indian
Education:
- Master in Computers
Occupation: IT - Project Leader
Salary: 92K with bonus
Pass Type: Employment Pass (EP)
Living/working in Singapore: Since 2013 (8+ years) 1 Company change
Total years of work experience: ~12+ years

Wife:
Age: 35
Race + Nationality: Indian
Education:
- Master in Computers
Occupation: IT- Developer Lead
Salary: 102K with bonus
Pass Type: Employment Pass (EP)
Living/working in Singapore: since 2013 (8+ years) Working in a same company
Total years of work experience: 13+ years

Applied 3 times before rejected.

Kids : 2 Daughters (Studying Here)
Elder - 9 yrs old..
Younger - 4 yrs old

[WincH+]

Actually, the criteria were all listed out by ICA - "ICA takes into account factors such as the individual's family ties to Singaporeans, economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency, to assess the applicant's ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into our society, as well as his or her commitment to sinking roots."

Most aspiring applicants were much focused on highlighting one's economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency; but rarely touches on one's ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into the society, as well as his or her commitment to sinking roots.

How do you rate yourself and your family in terms of (1) ability to contribute to Singapore, (2) ability to integrate into our society, and most importantly, (3) commitment to sinking roots?

Also, don't bother in highlighting pious in religion, routine blood donations, charity donations, volunteer works, etc. as the government had been slapped left, right, and centre in the past by those who went missing right after being granted with SPR.

Noted that you have tried 3 times, so when was the last rejected time, and apart from length of residency and age, what had changed since then?

[Ganbal]

Actually, the criteria were all listed out by ICA - "ICA takes into account factors such as the individual's family ties to Singaporeans, economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency, to assess the applicant's ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into our society, as well as his or her commitment to sinking roots."

Most aspiring applicants were much focused on highlighting one's economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency; but rarely touches on one's ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into the society, as well as his or her commitment to sinking roots.

How do you rate yourself and your family in terms of (1) ability to contribute to Singapore, (2) ability to integrate into our society, and most importantly, (3) commitment to sinking roots?

Also, don't bother in highlighting pious in religion, routine blood donations, charity donations, volunteer works, etc. as the government had been slapped left, right, and centre in the past by those who went missing right after being granted with SPR.

Noted that you have tried 3 times, so when was the last rejected time, and apart from length of residency and age, what had changed since then?

Thanks for your time and helpful advice. Last PR application rejected on Mar 2020. After last rejection, Salary(around 20K/pa increased both of us) and Designation changed.

[WincH+]

Frankly speaking, your profile is more or less quite similar to others that had also failed in getting SPR. I think you also knew that you're competing with your fellow countrymen for maybe just 500+ slots within your ethnic quota every year as I tend to see most Indian applicants applied as a family, i.e., 1x main applicant, 1 spouse, and 1-2 children, so it would be at least 3-4 slots taken per successful application.

So apart from the financial stability since Mar 2020, what had changed in terms of (1) ability to contribute to Singapore, (2) ability to integrate into the local society, and most importantly, (3) commitment to sinking roots? Also, can you substantiate such claims? Over the years, the SPR criteria obviously swayed from pro-capitalist to pro-nationalist...

[smoulder]

Most aspiring applicants were much focused on highlighting one's economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency; but rarely touches on one's ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into the society, as well as his or her commitment to sinking roots.

How do you rate yourself and your family in terms of (1) ability to contribute to Singapore, (2) ability to integrate into our society, and most importantly, (3) commitment to sinking roots?

What you are asking for is like an interview - anyone can just lie and answer what you want to hear. It's impossible for anyone to meaningfully quantify these things if they are not in one the following categories :

1) Malaysians, preferably Chinese
2) married to an SC
3) Studied at a local school in Singapore

[WincH+]

What you are asking for is like an interview - anyone can just lie and answer what you want to hear. It's impossible for anyone to meaningfully quantify these things if they are not in one the following categories :

1) Malaysians, preferably Chinese
2) married to an SC
3) Studied at a local school in Singapore

Yes, spot on - interview it is. My mindset always tend to think the whole Singapore operates like a big company with the President as Chairman, PM as CEO, so on and so forth.

Just like changing a new job/company, one may fit into the job specifications but not into the company culture - and most probably, office politics aside, one would opt to jump ship or get sacked earliest possible when either party doesn't gel together.

Long gone were the days where the management solely focuses on the job specifications/performances with many new hires being brought in, but only to get hit hard by high turnover rate, and not mentioning the growing dissatisfaction of existing employees due to difference in salary scale, benefits, culture, etc. Instead, the management now puts up a balancing act in terms of employee retention/welfare, etc. of existing employees while not shortchanging on job specifications/performances of new hires.

During shortlisting, more stringent screening criteria had been put in place to better ensure the potential new hires are more or less fits into the company culture - it's a hit or miss thingy but at least it had been done to keep the turnover rate of new hires and to dissatisfaction rate of existing employees in rein.

Unless one ticked all the boxes - both the tangible economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency, and the intangible ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into the society, as well as his or her commitment to sinking roots - how could one stand out from the rest of the applicants all having more or less the same profile, especially when the ethnic slots every year are so limited?

Gone were the days one could get their applications artificially boosted up by doing charity/volunteer works - the same like paying premium to get one's JobStreet resume or LinkedIn profile on top just to get more noticeable from countless numbers of other resumes/profiles.

By competing in an already scarce pool of slots with everyone having more or less the same profile and purely based on merits, it is just akin to striking lottery to be successful.

[smoulder]

I think you missed my point - in a job interview, especially when it comes to stuff related to motivation and commitment, people up a facade /or just lie. As an employer, it's never an exact science to figure out just what kind of an employee you are bringing in when you consider parameters which are not directly related to knowledge of the technical aspects of the job. Likewise, wouldn't it be quite a stretch to be expecting an ICA officer to figure that out?

Like I mentioned earlier, for now the obvious measures for integration are whether someone is a Malaysian, married to an SC or studied in a local school - other than that, I'm not sure what other intel they use to determine integration, but I'm guessing that they have something in place. They probably don't really care what the applicant says because that can be deliberately manipulative.

[WincH+]

I think you missed my point - in a job interview, especially when it comes to stuff related to motivation and commitment, people up a facade /or just lie. As an employer, it's never an exact science to figure out just what kind of an employee you are bringing in when you consider parameters which are not directly related to knowledge of the technical aspects of the job. Likewise, wouldn't it be quite a stretch to be expecting an ICA officer to figure that out?

Like I mentioned earlier, for now the obvious measures for integration are whether someone is a Malaysian, married to an SC or studied in a local school - other than that, I'm not sure what other intel they use to determine integration, but I'm guessing that they have something in place. They probably don't really care what the applicant says because that can be deliberately manipulative.

My apologies and yes, agreed that unless one is a Malaysian, married to an SC or (1st/2nd gens) studied in a local school, there seems to be no quantifiable/empirical evidence of integration commitment, and the officers are quite reluctant to entertain cover letter, recommendation letter, etc.

Perhaps there are some data analytics at work given that everything was computerised as big data nowadays in Singapore and they can digitised the past paper applications with the current whereabout of those successful applicants to judge whether a new applicant is potential "stayer" or "leaver". Even within "stayer" there most probably be another desired "converted to sc" and dreaded "remained as pr" sub-categories.

But going along that direction, with all new applicants being judged/screened with hard cold stats of past successful applicants, anyone that got rejected previously will tend to be rejected again as potential "leaver" unless there're some changes in terms of combined economic contributions, qualifications, age, family profile and length of residency algorithm that will hit the jackpot and land the applicant in the potential "converted to sc" zone based on big data.

[sp786]

There are many indians who still get PR approved without any integration like marrying local, studying here or the likes. It is an opaque process to be honest so the best you can treat SPR is like a lottery. Take Australia or Canadian PR it is well defined with points given to each layer of merit such as higher points for Canadian Education or Canadian work experience which doesn't feature here transparently though one may assume it may contribute to approval chances.

Just play the Toto of PR until you either get it or until you realize its time for you to go somewhere else.

[the observer]

“When it comes to PRs, we are careful not to cause major shifts in the ethnic proportions. And when it comes to naturalisation, we are even more careful. And this is why many well-qualified Indian nationals have yet to receive approvals for their PR or citizenship applications even after a long wait,” she added.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ ... -india-sim

[sundaymorningstaple]

This!^^^^^^^
Thanks, observer!
This is what we've been trying to hammer into the dunderheads on here for years. We've known about it, it is common knowledge with regard to immigration for PR & SGC. It was also spoken about in parliament last year as well. Singaporeans don't get it and apparently the quality of potentials aren't all that brilliant either, judging how they keep asking the same questions.

[smoulder]

This!^^^^^^^
Thanks, observer!
This is what we've been trying to hammer into the dunderheads on here for years. We've known about it, it is common knowledge with regard to immigration for PR & SGC. It was also spoken about in parliament last year as well. Singaporeans don't get it and apparently the quality of potentials aren't all that brilliant either, judging how they keep asking the same questions.

Many of the Singaporeans who think that the large number of Indians in IT here is because the gahmen favors us, have obviously not really traveled around. If they did, they would have known that Indians fill up large numbers of IT jobs in most major countries just because of our large numbers.

Secondly, they should probably read some of the posts here to correct their misconceptions that Indians get PR and citizenship easily.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Soooo true. For even more numbers to numb the brain, look at the numbers of Indian CEOs of the Fortune 500 in the US. Also look what industries. The same IT & Finance. When a country has 1.3 billion people there are bound to be a oversupply of brilliant people that Indian cannot absorb herself. Can't fault them for that.

[sp786]

Ceca people spill over beyond cecaland. So as a Ceca i say another PR aspiring Ceca should rethink. The group is seeing cecaland people as threat due to worldwide equal population and penetration into various markets. So ceca people got 2 choices

1. Think about self and leave to better places
2. Hold the fort and do not give up cecaman still needs to maintain presence here. After all ceca has resulted in 70 billion dollar investment in singapore.

[smoulder]

After all ceca has resulted in 70 billion dollar investment in singapore.

The average Singaporean isn't really thinking about the amount of investment opportunities that CECA resulted in. Because he's not got his hand on it.