Thanks Peter for your answer. I’ll be sure to apply this advice going forward.
With that being said, from seeing the replies to my original question, would you mind expanding on your answer a little more? I’m sure many of the other commenters in this thread would appreciate some more clarity here.
Peter already replied to this elsewhere in the thread. To a question
"Maybe a dumb question, but... I'm a Canadian who would qualify for a TN visa if I worked in the States, but don't currently have a visa or green card. On the online submission form for job openings, it always asks 'Are you legally entitled to work in the US?'. Am I meant to answer yes or no to that?"
Peter replies:
"Unfortunately, the correct answer is No because until you have the TN, you are not legally entitled to work in the U.S. Of course, this means that you will be excluded automatically for consideration of certain jobs."
Thanks! That definitely answers question 1) a little better.
He won’t answer the question from a strategic perspective. He will answer only from a legal standpoint. That’s the only perspective he is an expert in.
GP nowhere indicated to be looking for a strategic perespective answer, they're saying they want to know the legal reasoning.
Ok. I thought the other replies he was referring to were of strategic nature.