I am really unhappy

[sundaymorningstaple]

What I am saying is the process leaves a lot to be desired for.. I looked at the EPEC site again, and it may be a while for you guys, but it actually expressly mentions one can stay up to a year with an EPEC! Is this some sort of Singlish I don't understand? Here it is:

''The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows {allows means ICA is given permission from the government to issue a LTVP if they deem it suitable - it didn't say it guarantees you one} foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore. Successful EPEC applicants are required to apply for a one-year Visit Pass from the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority (ICA) to allow them to stay in Singapore. {If it were guaranteed, then the pass would have been issued with the EPEC don't you think?}

Am I right in saying it should expressly mention, an EPEC does not equal one year LTVP?

No. The explanation is easily understood by anybody with a reasonable comprehension of standard English. I think it is you who is having the problem understanding, not the information being disseminated. The government has long ago learned that to put things into yes or no type statements, reduces their flexibility and also is a prescription for receiving tailor made applications (clones). Therefore they leave themselves the widest possible latitude for operation. And rightly so.

Now before resident mood-dampeners (''no offence'') shoot me for ranting and complaining when something doesn't go my way, I have to clarify that I never thought EPEC = LTVP, but their wording does indeed suck major balls..

[slayerk2000]

What I am saying is the process leaves a lot to be desired for.. I looked at the EPEC site again, and it may be a while for you guys, but it actually expressly mentions one can stay up to a year with an EPEC! Is this some sort of Singlish I don't understand? Here it is:

''The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows {allows means ICA is given permission from the government to issue a LTVP if they deem it suitable - it didn't say it guarantees you one} foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore. Successful EPEC applicants are required to apply for a one-year Visit Pass from the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority (ICA) to allow them to stay in Singapore. {If it were guaranteed, then the pass would have been issued with the EPEC don't you think?}

Am I right in saying it should expressly mention, an EPEC does not equal one year LTVP?

No. The explanation is easily understood by anybody with a reasonable comprehension of standard English. I think it is you who is having the problem understanding, not the information being disseminated. The government has long ago learned that to put things into yes or no type statements, reduces their flexibility and also is a prescription for receiving tailor made applications (clones). Therefore they leave themselves the widest possible latitude for operation. And rightly so.

Now before resident mood-dampeners (''no offence'') shoot me for ranting and complaining when something doesn't go my way, I have to clarify that I never thought EPEC = LTVP, but their wording does indeed suck major balls..

As much respect as I have for you and the undeniable amount of contributions you've made to this forum SMS, I wholeheartedly disagree with your viewpoint.

You think they shouldn't expressly say 'Please note, an EPEC does not guarantee success in the application of a Long Term Visit Pass'??

That sentence would leave them enough room for the flexiblity you so seek BUT would also clear up the differenent versions of the word 'allow' you and I have.

The way they've said it (and I'm sure anyone with a reasonable comprehension of standard English would agree) is :

''The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore.''

NOT

''The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows the ICA to issue a LTVP if they deem it suitable, for foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore.''


Their wording would lead one to believe the EPEC was the main theme, and not SVP..


"Here is a pass that makes you eligible to eat the cake, please get in line to apply for a fork in the kitchen"

SMS, do you not think they should at least have the courtesy to say 'limited number of forks available' or 'forks MAY (for the flexibility) not be available?

Really?

[sundaymorningstaple]

Their wording would lead one to believe the EPEC was the main theme, and not SVP..


"Here is a pass that makes you eligible to eat the cake, please get in line to apply for a fork in the kitchen"

SMS, do you not think they should at least have the courtesy to say 'limited number of forks available' or 'forks MAY (for the flexibility) not be available?

Really?

(Bolded) Precisely. Not everybody needs a fork to eat cake. In fact, probably only a 50:50 portion do. Which goes back to my earlier point. English comprehension. You example is good, as it supports my views.

Why does a site where YOU not them are the applicant need to be nice and pleasant? They only need to list the facts as they see them. As the country uses English as it's language of government, they need not write for the lowest common denominator to understand as that isn't the type of person they are looking for anyway. In fact, that's a major thrust of the current election taking place here today. The influx of foreigners who aren't bringing anything more to the table than those Singaporean already here. With all due respect, you need to learn how to work within the framework that the local government thinks and not the other way around.

[JR8]

The below is replying to two people at once!


SMS I don't know who your earlier post was replying to as you as you didn't quote anyone. I am having difficulty though in seeing who is presuming an EPEC = a job in SG. The conversation seemed to discussing to what extent one might assume an EPEC = an LTVP.

''The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows {allows means ICA is given permission from the government to issue a LTVP if they deem it suitable - it didn't say it guarantees you one}[/color]

Hmmm. You are looking at a one paragraph high-level summary of what an EPEC does. People who read it are not concerned about the government giving ICA permission and this and that. It says 'It allows foreigners to stay', there is no mention of 'it might allow foreigners to stay'. I actually think if they're going to start refusing LTVPs to EPEC holders then EPECs should come with massive health warnings on them similar to the disclaimer you have to sign at ROM.

foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore. Successful EPEC applicants are required to apply for a one-year Visit Pass from the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority (ICA) to allow them to stay in Singapore. {If it were guaranteed, then the pass would have been issued with the EPEC don't you think?}

I’m not convinced an LTVP should be issued at the same time an EPEC is approved. Would that mean the clock of validity on the LTVP is running from the day the EPEC is approved? Not much use if you’re only going to get 6 months and it takes you 3 months to pack up and get to SG. If instead you mean that you could be issued an LTVP in principle when the EPEC is approved then I fully agree. In fact that is what many people already think an EPEC is!

Am I right in saying it should expressly mention, an EPEC does not equal one year LTVP?

It should be much clearer on that point. Agreed.

No. The explanation is easily understood by anybody with a reasonable comprehension of standard English. I think it is you who is having the problem understanding, not the information being disseminated. The government has long ago learned that to put things into yes or no type statements, reduces their flexibility and also is a prescription for receiving tailor made applications (clones). Therefore they leave themselves the widest possible latitude for operation. And rightly so.

I find it confusing too sir! It should clearly state that an LTVP might not be issued to an EPEC holder. It would also be helpful if they gave some idea of the basis of such a decision might be made.

Now before resident mood-dampeners (''no offence'') shoot me for ranting and complaining when something doesn't go my way, I have to clarify that I never thought EPEC = LTVP, but their wording does indeed suck major balls..

Well it is what I used to think. I recall being aghast the first time I read here an EPEC holder being refused an LTVP. Sucks major balls? I’d go along with that!

[slayerk2000]

(Bolded) Precisely. Not everybody needs a fork to eat cake. In fact, probably only a 50:50 portion do. Which goes back to my earlier point. English comprehension. You example is good, as it supports my views.

No, in this context, 100% of people need a fork.

In that sentence the cake is the prize, the pass is the prerequisite, and the fork is made to sound like (as revhappy so rightly puts it) a mere formality.

Remember, it is made to sound like a formality yet it is not. In fact, the truth is that you need to secure a fork first and once you have done that, you find out you don't need the pass at all. A fact they should mention at the start.


'Why does a site where YOU not them are the applicant need to be nice and pleasant?'


They don't need to be pleasant, they only need to be concise- (and please, if you are about to reply 'but they ARE concise!'- I urge you to let other people with a better comprehension of English than myself, read that paragraph from MOM and note what they think)

If my English is that bad and the round table disagrees, I'll treat everyone to a a round of drinks and a cigar (max 10 )

[sundaymorningstaple]

Smoking is bad for your health. I quit almost 6 years ago. I don't eat cake either, but when I did, I rarely used or needed a fork unless it was meringue or lots of cream. Obviously you still don't understand, even with the links, what an EPEC actually is. It is not a guarantee to a LTVP. Full Stop. If you don't like it, or the English they use, then it might be a good idea to have some second thoughts about your desire to come here, as you may always be in a state of stress like you appear to be now. They aren't going to change for you or anybody else for that matter, so why whinge about it?

[slayerk2000]

Smoking is bad for your health. I quit almost 6 years ago. I don't eat cake either, but when I did, I rarely used or needed a fork unless it was meringue or lots of cream. Obviously you still don't understand, even with the links, what an EPEC actually is. It is not a guarantee to a LTVP. Full Stop. If you don't like it, or the English they use, then it might be a good idea to have some second thoughts about your desire to come here, as you may always be in a state of stress like you appear to be now. They aren't going to change for you or anybody else for that matter, so why whinge about it?

Fine, fine, enough with the back and forth. I never said EPEC=LVTP, just a desire (my desire) for them to word it better for the next person. That's all, let's leave it..

Whether my English is up to par or whether I'm the type of material Singapore wants/needs is besides the point (although I must say that I'm surprised it came from you SMS - but having said that, I can understand your frustrations since you've discussed this topic at length with other newbies and with the other stuff going on this week)

Seriously, the round of drinks is still on the table for the vets here, as my time in Singapore is obviously nearing an end and I have learned a damn lot from this forum, so..

Thank You

[JR8]

... Obviously you still don't understand, even with the links, what an EPEC actually is. It is not a guarantee to a LTVP. Full Stop. If you don't like it, or the English they use, then it might be a good idea to have some second thoughts about your desire to come here, as you may always be in a state of stress like you appear to be now. They aren't going to change for you or anybody else for that matter, so why whinge about it?

SMS

I think the explanation given by MOM is very misleading too, it does not come down to English comprehension. In fact I believe most people consider an EPEC to effectively be an in-principle-LTVP, really that is how it comes across. That it is not should be clearly explained to EPEC applicants.

I think that is what Slayer is saying, and I think he is going about the discussion in a rational and polite way.

Yes I agree that you take the rough with the smooth from the SG govt., but I can't see any reason they are not clear what an EPEC is. One or two extra lines on there website would avoid a lot of anguish. The current misinformation on what an EPEC is does them no favours!

[sundaymorningstaple]

I wasn't gong to bother to post in this thread any more as all we are doing is . But at the point of being redundant and constantly repeating myself, I offer the following directly from MOM's site for EPEC's:

The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore. Successful EPEC applicants are required to apply for a one-year Visit Pass from the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority (ICA) to allow them to stay in Singapore.

It does NOT say "for one year" but "for UP TO one year" which can mean ANY length of time that ICA shall determine upon their application for a one year pass. We have seen 3 month passes given to other Asian aspirants and well as 6 months and none at all, other than a SVP. I think it's actually quite clear. Somehow, others tend to think that MOM and ICA are somehow the same, but they are not. Even this stupid farm boy, with my rudimentary English, was able to catch the meaning and if I can, dog knows, everybody else should be able to as well.

So anyway, this is my last post in this thread.

[JR8]

What's Osama bin Laden doing to that poor horse?

[sundaymorningstaple]

[slayerk2000]

The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore. Successful EPEC applicants are required to apply for a one-year Visit Pass from the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority (ICA) to allow them to stay in Singapore.

It does NOT say "for one year" but "for UP TO one year" which can mean ANY length of time that ICA shall determine upon their application for a one year pass. We have seen 3 month passes given to other Asian aspirants and well as 6 months and none at all, other than a SVP. I think it's actually quite clear. Somehow, others tend to think that MOM and ICA are somehow the same, but they are not. Even this stupid farm boy, with my rudimentary English, was able to catch the meaning and if I can, dog knows, everybody else should be able to as well.

So anyway, this is my last post in this thread.

Ok, for the purposes of last posts I will say this:

Simple as: the EPEC does not allow any foreigner to stay in Singapore for ANY amount of time (up to one year, less than one year, 3 months, 6 months, whatever).

The EPEC grants the holder no powers/priorities with regard to stepping on the soils of Singapore.... which is the exact and sole reason the words ''The Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate (EPEC) allows foreigners to stay in Singapore for up to one year to facilitate their job search in Singapore'', should NOT appear on the EPEC page.

-end-

I would like to move this topic onto the EPEC itself but am going to start a new thread as I always welcome SMS's informed opinions..

[JR8]

Another topic has popped up re: turning an EPEC into an LTVP.

The Poster points out that you can't apply for the LTVP until you are in-country.

So this seems to be a catch-22. Comments over on this new thread please...

http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/sutra5 ... ht=#522161

[revhappy]

I am pretty sure the LTSVP issuance works just like an EP or DP. The applicant is first issued an In Principle Approval letter which also contains a single entry short term visa for 30 days. He could be abroad or in SG at the time of application.

Upon arrival into SG the applicant needs to set up the appointment and is issued the actual 1 yr LTSVP.

[JR8]

Yep could be right there Rev. Looks like the requiremenmts differ between a regular LTVP, and one issued under an EPEC. Damned confusing lah!