Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/liberal-mp-brands-shaky-457-laws-most-racist-he-has-seen-20130619-2oicb.html The proposed changes to the subclass 457 visa legislation are in the balance as we approach the end of the Parliamentary session. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 An interesting - some may say provocative - comment I have just read on the proposed new 457 visa arrangements, and which I post here for commentary: With the hand out / sit down / get paid for nothing society that has been encouraged in Australia under the Labour Government as a country we can no longer afford to employ our own citizens. 457s are the only way we can maintain our overall standard of living. Either the offshore worker's come into Australia or the whole companies will move to the workers. 457's stop the tax revenue moving offshore. Source: http://www.smartcompany.com.au/managing-people/056101-457-visa-laws-before-parliament-today-what-your-business-needs-to-know.html Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Pom Queen Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Personally I think changes are needed 1) To protect people coming over on a 457 from being abused by their employer or made redundant after a short period 2) To make sure that there isn't an Australian who could do the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-18/look-locally-first/4763932?section=act ABC Lateline interview with the Immigration Minister. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Pom Queen: who decides whether an Australian is to be employed over a non-Australian? The business? The Government? Unions? In my view any imposition on an Australian employer of one employee over another is a fundamental overreaching of Government into matters that are not its concern. I should be in a position to choose who I employ, and if Government starts deciding who employers are required to employ I can assure you that employers will move jobs offshore. Labour market testing is a farce and a smokescreen. Onwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Personally I think changes are needed1) To protect people coming over on a 457 from being abused by their employer or made redundant after a short period 2) To make sure that there isn't an Australian who could do the job. I would say essential to guarantee the continued support of an immigration policy. As I wrote on another thread I have just become aware that the original 1996, 457's were introduced to allow business to import professionals as a short term measure to fill in gaps, if local workers, regardless of race or nationality but born here or having PR. This was done away with in 2001 allowing business to recruit directly without seeking local workers first. One may expect such a move from the Liberals, but the fact that Labor did nothing to rectify it on gaining power, grates on me. The latest moves though cynical have at least brought attention to a situation few Australians, I expect would have been aware off. Do all countries treat their population with such contempt these days? Britain followed the low wage agenda for sometime now. Looks Australian business is doing all in their power to bring as down to similar poor levels. A race to the bottom in a manner of speaking. I hope the resistance to 457 is fierce if Labor doesn't correct a grave error it allowed to continue for so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 I would say essential to guarantee the continued support of an immigration policy. As I wrote on another thread I have just become aware that the original 1996, 457's were introduced to allow business to import professionals as a short term measure to fill in gaps, if local workers, regardless of race or nationality but born here or having PR. This was done away with in 2001 allowing business to recruit directly without seeking local workers first. One may expect such a move from the Liberals, but the fact that Labor did nothing to rectify it on gaining power, grates on me. The latest moves though cynical have at least brought attention to a situation few Australians, I expect would have been aware off. Do all countries treat their population with such contempt these days? Britain followed the low wage agenda for sometime now. Looks Australian business is doing all in their power to bring as down to similar poor levels. A race to the bottom in a manner of speaking. I hope the resistance to 457 is fierce if Labor doesn't correct a grave error it allowed to continue for so long. A race to the bottom? Emotive nonsense! Have you heard of the TSMIT? And the fact that businesses sponsoring under the 457 program are required to demonstrate a market rate of pay that is no less than the TSMIT? If some employers are paying less than the agreed nominated salary, or are involved in requiring their employees to use ABNs/self employment that is in breach of the requirements of the program that is a compliance issue that should be dealt with by DIACs compliance team. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 A race to the bottom? Emotive nonsense! Have you heard of the TSMIT? And the fact that businesses sponsoring under the 457 program are required to demonstrate a market rate of pay that is no less than the TSMIT? If some employers are paying less than the agreed nominated salary, or are involved in requiring their employees to use ABNs/self employment that is in breach of the requirements of the program that is a compliance issue that should be dealt with by DIACs compliance team. Best regards. So the 2001 change of law with regards to the requirement to access home workers instead of the immediate recruitment is emotive nonsense it it? While the number of rorts brought to the attention of Fair Work Australia may not be huge at 157 complaints in relation to 457 holders, which by the way resulted in $ 207,871 being recovered for workers, it is not to be unexpected that only those suffering serious abuse would take the matter so far. The price being the PR carrot being dangled in front of workers would be ample to ensure compliance. The issue being Australian jobs should be going to local workers apart from where professional positions are called for to place short term shortages. Local conditions are being unduly sabotaged by the influx of 457s. Speak to folk in IT and get a run down of declining fortunes in that area due to off shore labour. Don't have the details at hand but that fellow wanting to get a meat works of the ground in NT using only/mostly 457s from India. I'm seeking out more info on that one, but probably be struggling to get off the ground as stands. Not forgetting the 12 fitters paid $5,000 for a months work before tax. ($21 an hour instead of $45 for Aussie workers. (Anglo Swiss mining ) World Wide petroleum paying Philippines workers $32 for a 12 hour shift. They are seeking back payments. The examples go on. Vested interests are doing very nicely from the scheme. Nice little earners in other words for those in the business. Not unfair to mention some likely to be on this forum. Obviously they will put up be somewhat defensive towards the visa. As will those making use of the visa. As it turns out at least poster on a 457 on here is finding the going tough and asking if they could get benefits to ease the way. A return to 1996 457 conditions would be acceptable to most with compliance enforced. It is only correct and fair that people living in Australia get the first bite of the pie. Australia would do well to be really radical and but people for a change before business interests. They are not the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-18/look-locally-first/4763932?section=act ABC Lateline interview with the Immigration Minister. Best regards. Business has been attempting to influence any decision to change the present lassiez faire 457 system with own interests in mind. If anything the Immigration Minister confirmed the problem being some business is not seeking out local workers prior to going off shore. Hopefully the measures that look like being introduced will be in such a way that the probably incoming Liberal government will be unable to change the first month in government. If folk cannot see the logic of work going to Australian workers and those on PR visas first and foremost where ever possible, they should perhaps question their motives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Pom Queen: who decides whether an Australian is to be employed over a non-Australian? The business? The Government? Unions? In my view any imposition on an Australian employer of one employee over another is a fundamental overreaching of Government into matters that are not its concern. I should be in a position to choose who I employ, and if Government starts deciding who employers are required to employ I can assure you that employers will move jobs offshore. Labour market testing is a farce and a smokescreen. Onwards! Which is why business must be regulated and compliance enforced. If a business has such an attitude let them go off shore and pay workers $4 a day. Business already has numerous tax perks and benefits as well as the knowledge of operating in a law based relatively uncorrupt society. It's got far too big for its boots and influencing agendas. Time government took up the reigns and governed and put business back in its box. The greed appears to know no ends. Sadly probably to late until they take it so far they consume themselves. The employer has the entire nation to choose from. We are not a completely borderless world yet. Those that advocate wild west business tactics with little/no concern for place and conditions go to further articulate the sad situation we are in today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joebloggs Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Maybe just make the TSMIT $80K that way you know you are probably getting a proper skilled worker rather than low paid employee competing with locals. Wouldn't really need LMT then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Maybe just make the TSMIT $80K that way you know you are probably getting a proper skilled worker rather than low paid employee competing with locals. Wouldn't really need LMT then. Probably to low but take your point. Although with the downturn it is very questionable just how many 457s are required. Factor in 190,000 PR's on top of that. Should be only hard to source professionals in my view. Even then only when a local person cannot be sourced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Which is why business must be regulated and compliance enforced. If a business has such an attitude let them go off shore and pay workers $4 a day. Business already has numerous tax perks and benefits as well as the knowledge of operating in a law based relatively uncorrupt society. It's got far too big for its boots and influencing agendas. Time government took up the reigns and governed and put business back in its box. The greed appears to know no ends. Sadly probably to late until they take it so far they consume themselves. The employer has the entire nation to choose from. We are not a completely borderless world yet. Those that advocate wild west business tactics with little/no concern for place and conditions go to further articulate the sad situation we are in today. While you're trashing business interests maybe you can also tell me how many people I should employ, who those people should be, and how much I should be paying them? And we'll increase duties on imported goods to protect those few Australian businesses that remain, and then increase social welfare and the minimum wage to protect the interests of Australians who can't afford the resulting increase in the cost of living, etc. In case your forgetting, without business no-one gets employed - unless we're all to live off the public sector. I maintain, this issue is being exploited for political gain. The tools are already in the hands of Government to ensure compliance - their failure to engage them fully is one reason why some employers have been taking advantage. Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Maybe just make the TSMIT $80K that way you know you are probably getting a proper skilled worker rather than low paid employee competing with locals. Wouldn't really need LMT then. That's a good idea - but might need a lower TSMIT in regional Australia. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfndirt Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 A ponzi scheme of monumental proportions which is now coming to the back end of the cycle. Damage has already been done. 1500 IBM jobs going to Asia / NZ (today) Ford closing Rio sacking expensive people (today) As I have mentioned previous, once the US stops printing money we will be in with a chance at 70c / 50p. Still gonna need to bring in all those upper working class Indians to buy the cars and live in the cardboard houses 50k's from anywhere though. It's a bit of a let down when you see this glorious land for what it really is. The correct description of the 'lucky country' is soo on the money it's just not funny. I love this place but I am completely over it for the time being :-). Time to go back to the UK and start sending some big quids back down under me thinks. Ahhoooyyyy - the northern hemisphere bounce back is underway!!! All aboard, next stop Euro land adventures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 http://www.theage.com.au/comment/how-a-crackdown-on-457-visas-could-work-20130619-2oj69.html Another article - makes some good points. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenon4017 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 The problem with having a skills list is that a) there's a latency between the skill being required and the job being filled, a b) Australia is not homogeneous; there are local shortages in Darwin at the same time as a local surplus in Adelaide. Not everyone wants to move across the country, especially if their partner also has a job. I don't think 457s are a problem. They are by their nature temporary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted June 20, 2013 Author Share Posted June 20, 2013 That's a good point Xenon. As Norman Tebbit said in the times of Maggie (albeit in harsher terms) - and more recently, Angela Merkel "suggested" - those without work should move to where the jobs are. If they can't or won't, that's not the fault of businesses, which will do what must be done to get the work out the door. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.