Guest263228 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 5 hours ago, Vic154 said: Totally agree Raul. They targeted the wrong visa, they targeted 457s because it's more widely known so will get more votes because of it. Most abused visas and where majority of immigrants get PR are from are Student visas and defacto visas. They're the ones that need tightening up, not 457s. Student visas they won't because they bring in great revenue for the unis. Hope they do something about defactos because they are easy to get around and I know two people who got this visa without being in a genuine relationship. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I have said my piece on defacto visas and have nothing to add. Education in Australia is a major business. Without the carrot of PR possibilities a future prospect, it is a very competitive market, hence USA, Canada, UK, New Zealand , even Europe would prove hard to compete with. Market forces dictate in this instance. Where as the flooding of the nation by 457's (take a look at the IT market if remaining a disbeliever) But besides that I am far from clear how you would square up the fact that too many occupations remain on the skill shortage list. Or as I pointed out some time ago, why those working under Skill Level 1 (so called managers and Professionals) and Skill Level 2 (so called Associate Professionals) are not subject to market testing. (to determine whether an Australian can do the job) I believe these make up to close on 80% of 457 visa holders (whom are not market tested) Unless of course you agree where it is required it is overcome by putting an add on Facebook or Social Media? In turn you would agree they (employer) has done enough to satisfy market testing in labour availability. Or you alternatively agree the process is a farce. I won't go into abuses as these are well documented. But abuse enough from the way it is carried out I'd have thought. My last say on the matter as it is not a subject of critique that goes down well on this forum for obvious reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest263228 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Seriously deluded if you want to base an argument on the ranting's of Hopkins. The voice of reason and tolerance, Not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acc0101 Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Any one here is planning to leave this country due to the new policy? or any one here still waiting the result ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raul Senise Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 18 hours ago, Pura Vida said: I never declared that $53,900 must be paid to imported workers, I perhaps did not state it clearly, but that amount is the minimum salary that can be legally paid on 457. Now as we are (allegedly) speaking in regards about skilled workers, taking into account the average wage earnings (when last consulted) was $82,789, one could perhaps assume the amount for a skilled imported worker would at least be set above National Average,(which of course includes unskilled workers) This is simply not the case. Unless you can provide different statistics of course. The Immigration Department’s own statistics for the last financial year show that the Average nominated total remuneration for primary 457 applications granted was over $90,000 across all states and industries. Salaries across different industries will vary dramatically and the figures you quote are averages across all industries. It would be ridiculous to use this national average as the benchmark as it would be way above the norm for some industries and way below for others. This is not how the 457 system works, even though many think so. You can’t sponsor an engineer for example and pay them $53,900. You must pay the market rate that an equivalent Australian would receive. 18 hours ago, Pura Vida said: I realise business is up in arms about the changes and various other rent seekers, but a read of the recent Senate Report , A National Disgrace The Exploration Of Temporary Work Holders, makes interesting bed time reading. This is a report on all temporary visas including 417, 462, 416, 444, 570, 576, 485, etc, yet you are using it to criticize the subclass 457 program. 18 hours ago, Pura Vida said: It identified major flaws in Consolidated Sponsored Occupations List. Which it found as being ad hoc and ineffective. There is no argument that the CSOL was not ideal and could use some tinkering, however, the recent shot gun approach to the skills list is a disaster, which will ultimately have serious adverse affects for Australian employment. 18 hours ago, Pura Vida said: Senate Committee also claimed 457 visa system was not responsive to either higher levels of unemployment or labour changes in specific skilled locations. And the latest changes have not addressed this issue in the slightest. 18 hours ago, Pura Vida said: Taking the evidence further. Joanna Howe, Senior Lecturer in Law at Uni of Adelaide, identified major flaws in 457 visa program, which has meant foreign workers are being used in areas whee there are no labour shortages. She described the system as 'shambolic'. Modest reforms at best reducing the use of temporally skilled visa's by as little as 9% I am informed. Hardly pulling the rug or deserving the condemnation by business received to date. As with any system and any visa pathway, there will be flaws that some will take advantage of. That is why there is a monitoring system in place with stiff penalties. 18 hours ago, Pura Vida said: Modest reforms at best reducing the use of temporally skilled visa's by as little as 9% I am informed. Hardly pulling the rug or deserving the condemnation by business received to date. You are misquoting data from a very badly written and misinformed ABC article. The changes were not modest in any way shape or form. The changes were introduced a little over a month ago. There are no statistics yet as to the effect these changes will have on the program. The issue is not so much the amendment to the lists, but the limiting of some occupations to two years and removing the path to Permanent Residency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raul Senise Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 16 hours ago, Pura Vida said: Education in Australia is a major business. Without the carrot of PR possibilities a future prospect, it is a very competitive market, hence USA, Canada, UK, New Zealand , even Europe would prove hard to compete with. Market forces dictate in this instance. Where as the flooding of the nation by 457's (take a look at the IT market if remaining a disbeliever) But besides that I am far from clear how you would square up the fact that too many occupations remain on the skill shortage list. So in your opinion having a dysfunctional student visa system is acceptable as it makes lots of money. Using student visas to obtain Permanent Residency is also acceptable because we can’t compete with other world student market otherwise? What about quality education? If exploitation of workers and taking jobs from Australians is your concern, the student visa industry is a major culprit. There are no measures in place to enforce salaries for student visa holders in the workforce and no labour market testing of any kind. Many international student are not English literate and easily open to exploitation by unscrupulous employers. 17 hours ago, Pura Vida said: Where as the flooding of the nation by 457's (take a look at the IT market if remaining a disbeliever) But besides that I am far from clear how you would square up the fact that too many occupations remain on the skill shortage list. Flooding? 457 applicants make up approximately 1% of the labour market! 17 hours ago, Pura Vida said: Or as I pointed out some time ago, why those working under Skill Level 1 (so called managers and Professionals) and Skill Level 2 (so called Associate Professionals) are not subject to market testing. (to determine whether an Australian can do the job) I believe these make up to close on 80% of 457 visa holders (whom are not market tested) Unless of course you agree where it is required it is overcome by putting an add on Facebook or Social Media? In turn you would agree they (employer) has done enough to satisfy market testing in labour availability. Or you alternatively agree the process is a farce. This could be easily addressed without destroying an overall very successful program for political gain. 17 hours ago, Pura Vida said: I won't go into abuses as these are well documented. But abuse enough from the way it is carried out I'd have thought. Again, these make up a very small percentage but attract huge media coverage. It is not the norm and the vast majority use the program legally and as it was intended. Look up the statistics on 457 monitoring and sanctions, they are publicly available. It is very easy to cherry pick information that conforms to your own views. 17 hours ago, Pura Vida said: My last say on the matter as it is not a subject of critique that goes down well on this forum for obvious reasons. That is a weak argument and not true. If you vehemently put forward a specific view which is not based on fact, you will be challenged. This is not critique, it is debate. No one has attacked or offended you have they? Your opinion is simply being put up to the scrutiny, which you do not appear to have done yourself. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petals Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 I am pleased this has happened. I am sorry for those of my compatriots who want to use this visa but its not good for Australia. Its not good for a lot of people who have this visa. I see weeping, moaning etc in the news about how we cannot survive without this visa and then I think on. My daughter two degrees on low pay, why because she got ill and had to take 2 years out of work. So hard to get back into a job. We used tor train people in Australia, take then from uni or TAFE and give them a go, but with this visa it stopped. Everyone wants experience. So you are a migrant you come here you bring up your family and then you find that even if they are educated its hard for them to get a job, experience, well where do the people get the experience who come here on these visas. In their own country that still trains people. Getting a degree, diploma shows that you are able to have stickability. However people only start to learn when someone give them a go despite the weight of education behind it. So good lets train those many many graduates and young people wanting a trade. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Needtoknow Posted May 28, 2017 Share Posted May 28, 2017 On 9/05/2017 at 18:56, VERYSTORMY said: The only ever way to apply for permanent residence from a 457 was to apply for a totally separate visa. The 186 and 187 are totally separate visas which carry with them some provisions for those applying from a 457 - though there is no requirement to have ever held a 457. The rules on visas and the entire system change regularly and it is important that people arrive understanding they have the visa that has been granted and not in a hope that they may be able to apply for something later. Doing so is silly as even when there are not major changes, the lists change regularly and occupations disappear Yes, but the TRT scheme uses the separate 186 visa. The understanding that you can apply for TRT route to permanency comes with the 457 visa and this is the understanding of the new employee and the employer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Needtoknow Posted May 28, 2017 Share Posted May 28, 2017 On 26/05/2017 at 08:21, Raul Senise said: So in your opinion having a dysfunctional student visa system is acceptable as it makes lots of money. Using student visas to obtain Permanent Residency is also acceptable because we can’t compete with other world student market otherwise? What about quality education? If exploitation of workers and taking jobs from Australians is your concern, the student visa industry is a major culprit. There are no measures in place to enforce salaries for student visa holders in the workforce and no labour market testing of any kind. Many international student are not English literate and easily open to exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Flooding? 457 applicants make up approximately 1% of the labour market! This could be easily addressed without destroying an overall very successful program for political gain. Again, these make up a very small percentage but attract huge media coverage. It is not the norm and the vast majority use the program legally and as it was intended. Look up the statistics on 457 monitoring and sanctions, they are publicly available. It is very easy to cherry pick information that conforms to your own views. That is a weak argument and not true. If you vehemently put forward a specific view which is not based on fact, you will be challenged. This is not critique, it is debate. No one has attacked or offended you have they? Your opinion is simply being put up to the scrutiny, which you do not appear to have done yourself. WELL SAID RAUL!!! This person will not stop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERYSTORMY Posted May 28, 2017 Share Posted May 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Needtoknow said: Yes, but the TRT scheme uses the separate 186 visa. The understanding that you can apply for TRT route to permanency comes with the 457 visa and this is the understanding of the new employee and the employer. But it is still a totally separate visa which many may never qualify for and many employers never agree to sponsor - even when put in the contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest263228 Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 On 26/05/2017 at 06:21, Raul Senise said: So in your opinion having a dysfunctional student visa system is acceptable as it makes lots of money. Using student visas to obtain Permanent Residency is also acceptable because we can’t compete with other world student market otherwise? What about quality education? If exploitation of workers and taking jobs from Australians is your concern, the student visa industry is a major culprit. There are no measures in place to enforce salaries for student visa holders in the workforce and no labour market testing of any kind. Many international student are not English literate and easily open to exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Flooding? 457 applicants make up approximately 1% of the labour market! This could be easily addressed without destroying an overall very successful program for political gain. Again, these make up a very small percentage but attract huge media coverage. It is not the norm and the vast majority use the program legally and as it was intended. Look up the statistics on 457 monitoring and sanctions, they are publicly available. It is very easy to cherry pick information that conforms to your own views. That is a weak argument and not true. If you vehemently put forward a specific view which is not based on fact, you will be challenged. This is not critique, it is debate. No one has attacked or offended you have they? Your opinion is simply being put up to the scrutiny, which you do not appear to have done yourself. What about quality 'education'? Fact being quality education is generally sought elsewhere. For reference Australia's top rated university comes in at 33 (Melbourne) Next (ANU) comes in at 47 and then both University of Queensland and Sydney share place number 60. Only two more are in the top 100. I am fully au fait with the corrupt practices around education in Australia, together with the rip offs involved as well as exploitation. It does appear you are not on the same page with regards to 457 and student visa. You really should include The People's Daily (China) on line as essential reading material to further ascertain what is happening in your industry. Kou Jie, wrote May 17 part of what follows. The 457Visa Scheme used to be a perk of studying in Australia. Its cancellation will definitely dampen enthusiasm for studies here (in Australia) according to Stacy Cul, a Chinese student majoring in accountancy at Melbourne University. Chinese citizens are the third largest national group utilising 457 visa behind India and UK. Cherry Pick? Just what part would you suggest as being untrue? Put to scrutiny? Come again. You have not responded to any of the evidence produced which included source. The fact being (yes I read AFR as well) and understand fully the whining that the very narrow adjustments to the system, a system being clearly Overused, if not abused (though I suspect both are true) by those with vested interests in the business of migration. Sadly it does appear all the major parties do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest263228 Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 On 27/05/2017 at 16:08, Petals said: I am pleased this has happened. I am sorry for those of my compatriots who want to use this visa but its not good for Australia. Its not good for a lot of people who have this visa. I see weeping, moaning etc in the news about how we cannot survive without this visa and then I think on. My daughter two degrees on low pay, why because she got ill and had to take 2 years out of work. So hard to get back into a job. We used tor train people in Australia, take then from uni or TAFE and give them a go, but with this visa it stopped. Everyone wants experience. So you are a migrant you come here you bring up your family and then you find that even if they are educated its hard for them to get a job, experience, well where do the people get the experience who come here on these visas. In their own country that still trains people. Getting a degree, diploma shows that you are able to have stickability. However people only start to learn when someone give them a go despite the weight of education behind it. So good lets train those many many graduates and young people wanting a trade. Yes it is that. There are far too many occupations on skills shortage list that could be filled by locals. The object being to keep a lid on wages, to which it has been very successful, (note stagnant pay increases in recent times) the real estate industry from going into steady decline and of course increasing GDP. (more people tend to do this) Not having proper labour testing, something I have been banging on about for ages, from direct experience, ensures the negatives above. The message remains hard to get out there with very influential forces maintain the rhetoric for high migration in all its forms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest263228 Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 On 26/05/2017 at 06:21, Raul Senise said: So in your opinion having a dysfunctional student visa system is acceptable as it makes lots of money. Using student visas to obtain Permanent Residency is also acceptable because we can’t compete with other world student market otherwise? What about quality education? If exploitation of workers and taking jobs from Australians is your concern, the student visa industry is a major culprit. There are no measures in place to enforce salaries for student visa holders in the workforce and no labour market testing of any kind. Many international student are not English literate and easily open to exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Flooding? 457 applicants make up approximately 1% of the labour market! This could be easily addressed without destroying an overall very successful program for political gain. Again, these make up a very small percentage but attract huge media coverage. It is not the norm and the vast majority use the program legally and as it was intended. Look up the statistics on 457 monitoring and sanctions, they are publicly available. It is very easy to cherry pick information that conforms to your own views. That is a weak argument and not true. If you vehemently put forward a specific view which is not based on fact, you will be challenged. This is not critique, it is debate. No one has attacked or offended you have they? Your opinion is simply being put up to the scrutiny, which you do not appear to have done yourself. A weak argument? Are you seriously challenging the findings DR Joanna Howe, Senior Lecturer in Law at Adelaide University then? ( Adelaide University rated 142 in world standards, too low a ranking for you?) What I wonder do you find disagreeable? Her critique being that foreign workers are being used in areas where there is no shortage. Describing the system as a shambles? I have a strong feeling most will certainly agree with that. Even migrant that are brought in and end up driving a taxi or bus. All arguments put over were certainly based on fact. I wasn't going to enter this debate anymore but did find your reply just a tiny bit patronising so felt obliged to respond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raul Senise Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 33 minutes ago, Pura Vida said: What about quality 'education'? Fact being quality education is generally sought elsewhere. For reference Australia's top rated university comes in at 33 (Melbourne) Next (ANU) comes in at 47 and then both University of Queensland and Sydney share place number 60. Only two more are in the top 100. I am fully au fait with the corrupt practices around education in Australia, together with the rip offs involved as well as exploitation. But from your previous comments, you seem to be OK with it because it makes money? 33 minutes ago, Pura Vida said: It does appear you are not on the same page with regards to 457 and student visa. You really should include The People's Daily (China) on line as essential reading material to further ascertain what is happening in your industry. Kou Jie, wrote May 17 part of what follows. The 457Visa Scheme used to be a perk of studying in Australia. Its cancellation will definitely dampen enthusiasm for studies here (in Australia) according to Stacy Cul, a Chinese student majoring in accountancy at Melbourne University. As per my previous responses to you. You are relying on anecdotal evidence with supports your view, rather than hard facts. Are you seriously suggesting that the Australian Government should base their visa program on a letter from a Chinese student in a Chinese new paper? 34 minutes ago, Pura Vida said: Cherry Pick? Just what part would you suggest as being untrue? Put to scrutiny? Come again. You have not responded to any of the evidence produced which included source. When you site a letter from a student in a Chinese paper as “evidence” I do not see the point of responding. 35 minutes ago, Pura Vida said: The fact being (yes I read AFR as well) and understand fully the whining that the very narrow adjustments to the system, a system being clearly Overused, if not abused (though I suspect both are true) by those with vested interests in the business of migration. Sadly it does appear all the major parties do. I would rate the AFR as a source journalism, just like the ABC. I can see that your mind is made up on the subject and no facts or logic will change your mind. You call the changes a “very narrow adjustment” with is simply not true. The changes are far reaching and will hurt Australian business and ultimately employment opportunities for Australians. You seem to want to believe that the majority of people on 457 visas are being paid $53,900 and exploited. The facts, for example that the average total remuneration for 457 applications granted in 2016-17 in the Mining Industry was $189,900 or $123,500 in the Financial Insurance Industry, are not relevant to your frame of reference. Maybe they do not conform to your pre conceived notions. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starrynight Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 Hi. Has anyone heard anything regarding the govt stance on the issue of 457 grandfathering arrangements? Nothing has been said since the changes were made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raul Senise Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 On 5/30/2017 at 18:31, Starrynight said: Hi. Has anyone heard anything regarding the govt stance on the issue of 457 grandfathering arrangements? Nothing has been said since the changes were made. It is still uncertain with furthers details to be released closer to March 2018. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imthedave Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 On 21/04/2017 at 09:18, imthedave said: ....and in case why anyone is wondering why I took the 457 route first. It's simply because of the ways the sponsorship rules work here. I was employed by another local subsidiary as CEO and not directly with the Corporate Group. The Corporate Group opened the Australian office and not the other subsidiary. Sponsorship rules here would have allowed the Corporate Company to sponsor a foreign employee but as I wasn't employed by them, the sponsorship had to be done by the Australian company. The Australian Company was brand new and you can't sponsor a Direct Entry 186 within the first 12 months of business as you need a full year of accounts first. 457 was the only route for me to be sponsored and employed by the Australian Company. Even then, my 457 was only valid for 18 months because we were under 1 year old with the guidance that when renewed, it would be for the full 4 years, thus removing the need for direct entry and PR visa the transition route. I THINK my occupation has just been moved back to the 4 year list... :-/ I have literally been through hell over the last few months worrying about this and trying to get my 186 submitted... 457 renewal is lodged and waiting to be processed. Still sweating it out until Monday when I can speak to my MA but if I'm right, and the 111111 CEO/MD has moved back to the 4 year list, that means I'm eligible again for the transition (I think) unless they change the age limit again. I'm pretty sure the transition route is remaining at 50 for now and those with 457 granted are still eligible. Going to be a long sleepless weekend.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaggieMay24 Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 14 hours ago, imthedave said: I THINK my occupation has just been moved back to the 4 year list... :-/ I have literally been through hell over the last few months worrying about this and trying to get my 186 submitted... 457 renewal is lodged and waiting to be processed. Still sweating it out until Monday when I can speak to my MA but if I'm right, and the 111111 CEO/MD has moved back to the 4 year list, that means I'm eligible again for the transition (I think) unless they change the age limit again. I'm pretty sure the transition route is remaining at 50 for now and those with 457 granted are still eligible. Going to be a long sleepless weekend.... It looks like your occupation is back on the MLTSSL but there's a caveat regarding salary and whether it was an intra-company transfer. So hopefully your MA can confirm if you're eligible or not: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2017L00848 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imthedave Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 It looks like your occupation is back on the MLTSSL but there's a caveat regarding salary and whether it was an intra-company transfer. So hopefully your MA can confirm if you're eligible or not: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2017L00848Yes, I saw the caveats.I'm not worried about that because the salary is over the limit they've set plus I'm an intercorporate transfer from a US company so even if it wasn't, I comply with that one.To be honest, although I haven't heard from my MA yet, I'm ecstatic about this.Ive read and re read the legislation notes so many times and can't see a flaw that would effect me.I've spent since April worried sick that everything was going to fall apart but now there seems to be some hope. I've got a PR application in too but with the 457, as long as they still allow a 3 year transition to PR and keep the age limit at 50, then my original route looks like it's back open :-)It does seem that the government/immigration have realised the initial lists were very restrictive and caught up genuine cases and now are trying to put it right.I also note they've got very detailed descriptions and caveats against 'fast food' and restaurants, clearly stating the differences which is good because that's were all of this started from!Sent using Poms in Oz mobile app Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Good Looking One Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Having submitted my 457 renewal in August 2016 and my employer answering a few questions pre and post Xmas, we have waited patiently for approval. Now with the changes to 457 Visa applications I am subject to the new rules and caveats which, in my mind, have been retrospectively and unfairly applied to existing applications. Could you imagine the absolute uproar if a Taxation/Income change had retrospectively been administered in this way? There are 3 of us working daily in the business: Firstly, me. Secondly, an apprentice who is now qualified as a marine technician through our business. Thirdly, we took on a 17 year old apprentice who is showing great potential after just 3 months with us. I am also advertising for 4th member of staff who ideally should have marine experience in the marques we represent. For 2 seasons now we have advertised and been unsuccessful in recruiting someone for this role. They simply do not exist in Australia. We have recently advertised in the UK as it seems to be the place to entice suitable and qualified staff. Going back to me and my 'bespoke' industry experience which bought me to Australia by my first employer 4-1/2 years ago The problem I face is this: I researched, started up from scratch and now run this specialist marine business for my employer. I have generated almost $1m of turnover since March 2015, 50% of this in the last financial year. Following the rule changes my employer has stated that if my Visa is not granted I will be made redundant and I will serve my redundancy notice period shutting down the business I have sweat blood and tears for over the last 2-1/2 years. All staff will be made redundant and the business will be wound up even though all the indicators are that the business is maintaining good growth and future prospects are looking quite exciting. He doesn't want to look for a replacement for me as he considers it a waste of his valuable time advertising for staff given the fact that he was only able to fill almost the same role as mine at our sister company with someone from the UK too!! I sold up everything to come to Australia. I created jobs. I trained and continue to train staff through to qualification. And I am expecting to be penalised by the new rules Does anyone have any straws I can clutch onto? (FYI, I am 54yo) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 24 minutes ago, The Good Looking One said: Having submitted my 457 renewal in August 2016 and my employer answering a few questions pre and post Xmas, we have waited patiently for approval. Now with the changes to 457 Visa applications I am subject to the new rules and caveats which, in my mind, have been retrospectively and unfairly applied to existing applications. Could you imagine the absolute uproar if a Taxation/Income change had retrospectively been administered in this way? There are 3 of us working daily in the business: Firstly, me. Secondly, an apprentice who is now qualified as a marine technician through our business. Thirdly, we took on a 17 year old apprentice who is showing great potential after just 3 months with us. I am also advertising for 4th member of staff who ideally should have marine experience in the marques we represent. For 2 seasons now we have advertised and been unsuccessful in recruiting someone for this role. They simply do not exist in Australia. We have recently advertised in the UK as it seems to be the place to entice suitable and qualified staff. Going back to me and my 'bespoke' industry experience which bought me to Australia by my first employer 4-1/2 years ago The problem I face is this: I researched, started up from scratch and now run this specialist marine business for my employer. I have generated almost $1m of turnover since March 2015, 50% of this in the last financial year. Following the rule changes my employer has stated that if my Visa is not granted I will be made redundant and I will serve my redundancy notice period shutting down the business I have sweat blood and tears for over the last 2-1/2 years. All staff will be made redundant and the business will be wound up even though all the indicators are that the business is maintaining good growth and future prospects are looking quite exciting. He doesn't want to look for a replacement for me as he considers it a waste of his valuable time advertising for staff given the fact that he was only able to fill almost the same role as mine at our sister company with someone from the UK too!! I sold up everything to come to Australia. I created jobs. I trained and continue to train staff through to qualification. And I am expecting to be penalised by the new rules Does anyone have any straws I can clutch onto? (FYI, I am 54yo) You have been here 41/2 years, if you are so crucial to this business why did they not sponsor you for PR before now? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Good Looking One Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 I started with Business A and spent 21 months building it until it was sold. I have been with Business B since December 2015. I am pretty clueless on Visa stuff (sister does it all) but I think I had to have been employed for a minimum of 2 years? So the plan was to renew my 4 year 457 and go for it during that period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanae Kaneda Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 On 4/18/2017 at 15:16, Matt Cahill said: More info on how and when they are doing it on immigration website...http://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Work/457-abolition-replacement Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clickity Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 Better for Australians, but worse for others. Politics... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starrynight Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 On 29/05/2017 at 15:33, Pura Vida said: Yes it is that. There are far too many occupations on skills shortage list that could be filled by locals. The object being to keep a lid on wages, to which it has been very successful, (note stagnant pay increases in recent times) the real estate industry from going into steady decline and of course increasing GDP. (more people tend to do this) Not having proper labour testing, something I have been banging on about for ages, from direct experience, ensures the negatives above. The message remains hard to get out there with very influential forces maintain the rhetoric for high migration in all its forms. They should go out and fill them then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoDemocracy Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 On 7/7/2017 at 10:58, The Good Looking One said: Having submitted my 457 renewal in August 2016 and my employer answering a few questions pre and post Xmas, we have waited patiently for approval. Now with the changes to 457 Visa applications I am subject to the new rules and caveats which, in my mind, have been retrospectively and unfairly applied to existing applications. Could you imagine the absolute uproar if a Taxation/Income change had retrospectively been administered in this way? There are 3 of us working daily in the business: Firstly, me. Secondly, an apprentice who is now qualified as a marine technician through our business. Thirdly, we took on a 17 year old apprentice who is showing great potential after just 3 months with us. I am also advertising for 4th member of staff who ideally should have marine experience in the marques we represent. For 2 seasons now we have advertised and been unsuccessful in recruiting someone for this role. They simply do not exist in Australia. We have recently advertised in the UK as it seems to be the place to entice suitable and qualified staff. Going back to me and my 'bespoke' industry experience which bought me to Australia by my first employer 4-1/2 years ago The problem I face is this: I researched, started up from scratch and now run this specialist marine business for my employer. I have generated almost $1m of turnover since March 2015, 50% of this in the last financial year. Following the rule changes my employer has stated that if my Visa is not granted I will be made redundant and I will serve my redundancy notice period shutting down the business I have sweat blood and tears for over the last 2-1/2 years. All staff will be made redundant and the business will be wound up even though all the indicators are that the business is maintaining good growth and future prospects are looking quite exciting. He doesn't want to look for a replacement for me as he considers it a waste of his valuable time advertising for staff given the fact that he was only able to fill almost the same role as mine at our sister company with someone from the UK too!! I sold up everything to come to Australia. I created jobs. I trained and continue to train staff through to qualification. And I am expecting to be penalised by the new rules Does anyone have any straws I can clutch onto? (FYI, I am 54yo) F***, I feel so sorry, It's so typical of the Australians, everything is played out for political advantage. 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.