flag of convenience Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 (edited) No it is a visa for temp employment only. As such the rules can be changed anytime. If folk thought it a quick and cheap way to get into OZ, then really no ones fault but there's. As such I don't see why education be provided free. A number could have come on more permanent visa arrangements but chose 457 with little thought of possible consequences. Come any downturn in the economy conditions for temps were bound to change. Edited August 9, 2013 by flag of convenience Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 That's all well and good Flag but surely a modicum of compassion might not go amiss? There but for the grace of God....we could have been stung by this one had it happened a few years back....a lot of us put faith in our new Aussie employers to sponsor us for residency and some have no other way to come so make a leap of faith. I for one feel much sympathy and concern to those affected Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyNook Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Surely, if these 457 visa holders are so skilled, experienced and necessary for their companies to function, then the companies will be happy to pay the additional school fees in order to keep such important employees happy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 (edited) I think its a kneejerk reaction a cynical plot to get rid of 457 visa holders before their contracts are up. There was a similar phenomenon within the NHS in the 2000s...thousands of Filipino and other nurses bought in to plug gaps created by Thatchers review of nursing programme places...fast forward a few years and no jobs for local nurses. Guess who copped the flak..the Filipinos for taking our jobs..... Edited August 9, 2013 by HappyHeart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newjez Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 I think its a kneejerk reaction a cynical plot to get rid of 457 visa holders before their contracts are up. There was a similar phenomenon within the NHS in the 2000s...thousands of Filipino and other nurses bought in to plug gaps created by Thatchers review of nursing programme places...fast forward a few years and no jobs for local nurses. Guess who copped the flak..the Filipinos for taking our jobs..... Yep - it will be a vote winner too as unemployment increases. There is an us and them, and unfortunately, 457's are the them. Strikes me as really unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LKC Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Actually it pisses me off when people speak of 'these 457 holders...' and say that the 457 is a 'quick and cheap way to get in to Australia', because it was neither quick, nor cheap (given the school fees in NSW), and I don't think that people should be lumped together in the same 'demonised' group as those who exploit this, and other, visas. We came over on a 457 initially. Terrible! We chose a 457 for speed, because we didn't want to hang around in limbo, waiting for a PR visa to be granted, and because my OH's employer needed him in Australia ASAP, having been unable to fill his position by anyone in Australia. We did qualify for a skilled visa, which we eventually applied for (and had granted in seven days), but we still came on the 457. If that makes us lesser people than those who 'battled through' and waited for a PR visa, then fine. At the end of the day, we were granted the 457, PR and subsequently citizenship on our own merits, despite the perceived ease in which we came. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanith Greatrex Ball Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Well said LKC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernbird Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Good point. Do the schools keep a record of all the visas people are on? Yes they do. On the school database there is a section for visa type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 That's all well and good Flag but surely a modicum of compassion might not go amiss?There but for the grace of God....we could have been stung by this one had it happened a few years back....a lot of us put faith in our new Aussie employers to sponsor us for residency and some have no other way to come so make a leap of faith. I for one feel much sympathy and concern to those affected Sorry but don't see what compassion has to do with the arrangement. Surely the nature of the visa under lines the lack of certainty? It is hardly due to altruistic reasons that either side propose and accept 457s. It is fact some use as a speedier and cheaper measure to enter Australia. As such it was always a gamble. It worked for some while tears for others. All too many seemed to be under the illusion that it was a guaranteed way to remain. In actual fact it was to fill in shortages that couldn't be filled in Australia at the time. Of course the whole thing got out of hand when the employer not longer had to ascertain that there was no available local available to fulfil a role. This was not widely known at the time and shame to both political parties for allowing it to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Actually it pisses me off when people speak of 'these 457 holders...' and say that the 457 is a 'quick and cheap way to get in to Australia', because it was neither quick, nor cheap (given the school fees in NSW), and I don't think that people should be lumped together in the same 'demonised' group as those who exploit this, and other, visas. We came over on a 457 initially. Terrible! We chose a 457 for speed, because we didn't want to hang around in limbo, waiting for a PR visa to be granted, and because my OH's employer needed him in Australia ASAP, having been unable to fill his position by anyone in Australia. We did qualify for a skilled visa, which we eventually applied for (and had granted in seven days), but we still came on the 457. If that makes us lesser people than those who 'battled through' and waited for a PR visa, then fine. At the end of the day, we were granted the 457, PR and subsequently citizenship on our own merits, despite the perceived ease in which we came. The issues have been clearly underlined relating to 457s. Folk take the risk coming under this visa, simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jac2011 Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Certainly puts me off WA although ideally I would like PR - with 3 children and a starting salary of $58,000 it just isnt affordable, especially as there is no guarantee my OH would find work. I can kind of see why they are doing it but I do think its unfair to people currently in WA on a 457. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Sorry but don't see what compassion has to do with the arrangement. Surely the nature of the visa under lines the lack of certainty? It is hardly due to altruistic reasons that either side propose and accept 457s. It is fact some use as a speedier and cheaper measure to enter Australia. As such it was always a gamble. It worked for some while tears for others. All too many seemed to be under the illusion that it was a guaranteed way to remain. In actual fact it was to fill in shortages that couldn't be filled in Australia at the time. Of course the whole thing got out of hand when the employer not longer had to ascertain that there was no available local available to fulfil a role. This was not widely known at the time and shame to both political parties for allowing it to happen. I think it's very different if people come over without realising that it doesn't automatically lead to PR. That is a lack of basic research. We have taken a gamble by coming on the 457 (we didn't have a PR visa option unfortunately) and we accept that. If DH is made redundant for example we will have to accept that it was a gamble that didn't pay off. We'll be gutted but it will have been us who decided to take that risk. But to completely change the goalposts for existing 457 holders by introducing massive extra fees, such as for education, doesn't seem acceptable to me. Yes, they can do what the hell they like but does that make it ok? Does it mean that it's our own fault for not having a crystal ball? I don't think it is. There was no way to take this stuff into account when making a decision about coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest26012 Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 It's not good that this will affect 457 visa holders already here! I understand that it's a temporary visa but why not introduce it to new visa applicants? I think it's a cruel option tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 It's not good that this will affect 457 visa holders already here! I understand that it's a temporary visa but why not introduce it to new visa applicants? I think it's a cruel option tbh. Exactly. What I meant when I mentioned compassion, these are peoples lives here....'read the rules before you agreed to before you came' doesn't exactly fit in this situation..as I said compassion for those affected....not 'well you knew the risks, serves you right for being so gullible, feck off back home'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERYSTORMY Posted August 9, 2013 Author Share Posted August 9, 2013 Sorry, but having moved around the world and lived in a range of countries it is normal for temp visa holders to be subject to a lot of risk of change of circumstance. In fact, this is fairly minor compared to what I have seen in some countries previously. On a 457 you are only marginally one step up from a holiday visa. Infect, the working holiday visa in some ways is a stronger visa. Of of this is VERY researchable. There have been and will continue to be big amendments to temp visas. You say you will be gutted if you face redundancy and have to leave. But this is the entire point of this visa. It is why it has a time limit. It is no more related to emmigration than it is to a fish. I think it's very different if people come over without realising that it doesn't automatically lead to PR. That is a lack of basic research. We have taken a gamble by coming on the 457 (we didn't have a PR visa option unfortunately) and we accept that. If DH is made redundant for example we will have to accept that it was a gamble that didn't pay off. We'll be gutted but it will have been us who decided to take that risk. But to completely change the goalposts for existing 457 holders by introducing massive extra fees, such as for education, doesn't seem acceptable to me. Yes, they can do what the hell they like but does that make it ok? Does it mean that it's our own fault for not having a crystal ball? I don't think it is. There was no way to take this stuff into account when making a decision about coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest26012 Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Exactly. What I meant when I mentioned compassion, these are peoples lives here....'read the rules before you agreed to before you came' doesn't exactly fit in this situation..as I said compassion for those affected....not 'well you knew the risks, serves you right for being so gullible, feck off back home'! I think compassion means to be emphatic for those here facing these costs and not to think, I'm alright jack so what do I care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 (edited) When we came we came on a 457 with the view that it may be temporary..if we didn't like it...but that PR was assured after 3 months satisfactory service...after we arrived the goalposts changed..no more PR for 457 nurses at RPH...was gutted at the time as I took it on trust probably naivety on my part....luckily for us we had enough points to apply independently and PR was gained after a year....I left the hospital a few days after I was free to....hence I have..in the past..warned about the insecurity of the 457. To change goalposts for those already here though..that imo is very cruel as mentioned by madcow. I have friends who had no choice but to ride out the 457 for 4 years before the company would sponsor for PR...beautiful people who would have had to leave if this rule had come in prior to their residency being granted....regardless of the explicitly stated 'rules' prior to coming I maintain that empathy for those affected is in order here.... Edited August 9, 2013 by HappyHeart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Sorry, but having moved around the world and lived in a range of countries it is normal for temp visa holders to be subject to a lot of risk of change of circumstance. In fact, this is fairly minor compared to what I have seen in some countries previously. On a 457 you are only marginally one step up from a holiday visa. Infect, the working holiday visa in some ways is a stronger visa. Of of this is VERY researchable. There have been and will continue to be big amendments to temp visas. You say you will be gutted if you face redundancy and have to leave. But this is the entire point of this visa. It is why it has a time limit. It is no more related to emmigration than it is to a fish. Not really sure what you are trying to prove with some of your posts to be honest. We all know about the 186 PR Visa that where there is a Transition Stream especially for 457 visa holders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 I also asked for written confirmation of the PR promise before we left but was told it wasnt policy to do that but to be assured after 3 months it would be a foregone conclusion..so yes, we took a risk..but we are trusting people...never imagined we would be in the position we found ourselves in...just as thousands of 457 holders didnt anticipate or plan for..these extra cost. Some people actually desperately want to be here..and stay here..those who like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest26012 Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 When we came we came on a 457 with the view that it may be temporary..if we didn't like it...but that PR was assured after 3 months satisfactory service...after we arrived the goalposts changed..no more PR for 457 nurses at RPH...was gutted at the time as I took it on trust probably naivety on my part....luckily for us we had enough points to apply independently and PR was gained after a year....I left the hospital a few days after I was free to....hence I have..in the past..warned about the insecurity of the 457. To change goalposts for those already here though..that imo is very cruel as mentioned by madcow. I have friends who had no choice but to ride out the 457 for 4 years before the company would sponsor for PR...beautiful people who would have had to leave if this rule had come in prior to their residency being granted....regardless of the explicitly stated 'rules' prior to coming I maintain that empathy for those affected is in order here.... I agree HH. We came on a 457 years ago. Assured PR after 3 months, which we got, luckily. We knew it was a temporary visa but took the risk. If existing 457 holders knew that they were paying the education costs then it would, I'm sure, have made lots of families think deeper about their move. For existing holders of this visa, it's a blow. If someone down the line came here with the knowledge about the costs and started complaining about it my empathy would be zilch! But for existing families here on this visa, it's a tough one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 I think it's very different if people come over without realising that it doesn't automatically lead to PR. That is a lack of basic research. We have taken a gamble by coming on the 457 (we didn't have a PR visa option unfortunately) and we accept that. If DH is made redundant for example we will have to accept that it was a gamble that didn't pay off. We'll be gutted but it will have been us who decided to take that risk. But to completely change the goalposts for existing 457 holders by introducing massive extra fees, such as for education, doesn't seem acceptable to me. Yes, they can do what the hell they like but does that make it ok? Does it mean that it's our own fault for not having a crystal ball? I don't think it is. There was no way to take this stuff into account when making a decision about coming. It is harsh but immigration is a law onto itself. It changes with regularity for those of us that observe. More the reason to only come with guarantees. I admit too late for folk like yourselves though. Normally laws are not back dated. They are from the date introduced. The temp nature of the visa though I suspect allows them the legal right to proceed with the regressive nature of the new rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongrel Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 No it is a visa for temp employment only. As such the rules can be changed anytime. If folk thought it a quick and cheap way to get into OZ, then really no ones fault but there's. As such I don't see why education be provided free. A number could have come on more permanent visa arrangements but chose 457 with little thought of possible consequences. Come any downturn in the economy conditions for temps were bound to change. We came on a 457 due to age credentials . So in your view agents having been giving prospective migrants Bulkshit that 457 dosent lead to permanent visas . Barnett is a slug , a two bob emperor .knee jerk policies , the blokes answer to the traffic congestion , charge car parking at the railway station . I should guess that the fees for a school kids can be claimed back on tax , as it is a work related cost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix16 Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Im shocked at the changes and also at some of the comments... lets not forget that people arriving on 457's pay the same taxes as PR's and citizens, they contribute to the economy in exactly the same way and get no 'perks' for being 'temporary'. As I've said many times in my posts, we came here on a 457, we had NO previous aspirations to move to OZ, it WAS NOT a quick 'back door' way in for us to bypass the arduous permanent visa rules ( as sometimes gets suggested on here), my husband was headhunted for his talents and we decided why not? As it turned out we simply fell in love with the place and hoped we could stay, we were lucky, with a fabulous employers support and as was, a clear 'transition' route for 457's, we were granted PR very quickly after arriving. Obviously this ruling won't affect the big bucks mining execs who are often brought in from all over the world regularly, but it will affect most others and I personally feel terrible about that. At the end of the day you come here on a 457, you have no rights, you have to be fully self sufficient whilst contributing equally to the economy and until now at least your kids were treated equally and entitled to a 'free' education but no more... whilst your taxes contribute towards education for others, it doesn't include your own.... perhaps a school fees tax break is in order for 457 holders, it's the least they deserve.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Que Sera Sera Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 You used to be able to claim school fees if you earnt under $120,000 joint I Believe years ago, not sure if its still the case though ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongrel Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 You used to be able to claim school fees if you earnt under $120,000 joint I Believe years ago, not sure if its still the case though ? As this is only for the457s duck, I believe that it is a cost pertaining to the employment or employers wil have to jiggle the packages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.