457 training benchmark

[Vikki81]

Hi everyone,

 

I am so confused about the 457 training benchmark. I understand training benchmark A - payment into a training fund. But B is not so straightforward.

 

 

Example Scenario

 

A company has three employees (two PR and one TEMP) and pays them each $50,000. The employees were trained on the job with a senior member showing them how to do the role. How would you relate this to benchmark B?

 

So 1% of payroll for two PR workers who get $50,000 each will be $1000.

 

How can the company prove that $1000 was spent on training on the site? Do they just say the senior member spend x amount of hours training the new employees and that equals $1000?

 

I hope my question is making sense.

[Raul Senise]

Training benchmark B can be tricky and you really need to read and understand the relevant Regulations and Policy.

 

As per your scenario, here are a couple of pointers:

 

 

• The 1% is for the total payroll, irrelevant if they are PR or TR. As such in this case they would need to spend at least $1,500 on training the Australian staff;
  
• Any money spent training TR staff does not count;
  
• The scenario you describe is classified as "in house" training. It is difficult to attribute any expenditure to in house training and there are very specific and extensive rules for doing so;
  
• You can not claim the salary costs of staff to attend training;
  
• You can not claim the salary costs of staff giving training unless its is a significant portion of their position description. Even then it can be difficult.
  

 

 

With the scenario you have described you would struggle to meet training benchmark B.

 

Do yourself a favour and get some professional advice as I have seen even well organised candidates fail in this regard.