Breaking News - 457 Visas Stopped

[MaggieMay24]

1 hour ago, Vic154 said:

I'm surprised at some of the jobs on the short term list - especially CEO/Managing Director. What CEO is going to give up his current role, up sticks and move to Aus for two years with no chance of PR if they settle down with their family? And surely leaders in their 30s/40s with experience and earning good salaries are what the country should want to attract? My previous MD was on a 457 and he was amazing, transformed the whole business, made it extremely profitable for the good of all Australian employees and the economy. Shows they are out of touch and have not thought it through. Surely this policy is worse case and they will tweak it down the track a bit more leniently - I have faith!

Luckily for me I hit my 2 year point in July, and company have agreed to help with TRT so doing the paperwork now, fingers crossed there are no further changes in the meantime, but I really feel for some people who's hopes and dreams of living in Aus permanently have been shot.

I work for a global company and we would frequently have a European manager relocate on an expatriate assignment for 2 years, so CEO may be more common than you'd think.  We don't do it as often now since expatriate programs are very expensive, but it's certainly something we would appreciate being able to do if needed.

[ItchyFeet76]

7 hours ago, Curious said:

Bit of an update for those in a similar position to me... I don't know how valid the source is, but gives me some hope...

Marina Brizar, head of corporate and private client at immigration law firm Playfair Visa and Migration Services, said there was a grace period for people currently on 457s to apply for permanent residency. The changes to residency eligibility will not kick in until March 2018, so 457 holders have until then to submit their residency applications. In a statement, the Department of Immigration and Border Protection confirmed this.

"Existing 457 visas will continue to remain in effect until they expire. As is currently the case, a 457 visa holder who wishes to remain in Australia beyond the validity of their current visa, must apply for a new visa before their current visa expires," a department spokeswoman told HuffPost Australia.

"Existing 457 visa holders and applicants as at 18 April 2017 will continue to have access to existing employer sponsored pathways to permanent residence. Further details will be published on the Department's website in due course."

My husband's company has just started the process for three of their 457ers (186 direct entry) today!

[Marianne Smith]

31 minutes ago, ItchyFeet76 said:

My husband's company has just started the process for three of their 457ers (186 direct entry) today!

Can you do that for profession on the short term list that haven't completed the 2 years of work with the employer yet ? 

[ItchyFeet76]

1 minute ago, Marianne Smith said:

Can you do that for profession on the short term list that haven't completed the 2 years of work with the employer yet ? 

Yes, until March 2017. It's the direct entry route (the same one we applied for (5 months in) in December....still waiting though!)

[Vic154]

3 hours ago, ItchyFeet76 said:

My husband's company has just started the process for three of their 457ers (186 direct entry) today!

Sounds like they're gonna have an influx of 186 applications in the coming weeks. Wonder if that will prompt them to issue further comms and/or make more amendments....

[ItchyFeet76]

8 hours ago, Vic154 said:

Sounds like they're gonna have an influx of 186 applications in the coming weeks. Wonder if that will prompt them to issue further comms and/or make more amendments....

Well I assume it shouldn't affect those of us already in the queue as they'll be behind us...?? Unless they process them in order of priority industry, eg IT trumps hospitality??

[Vic154]

26 minutes ago, ItchyFeet76 said:

Well I assume it shouldn't affect those of us already in the queue as they'll be behind us...?? Unless they process them in order of priority industry, eg IT trumps hospitality??

Yeah I think if your applications already in you'll be fine. Just thinking of people like me who are still waiting for their 2 year mark to be eligible to apply. 

[Laura MacDonald]

Has anyone had their 457 approval this week?  Ours was submitted 25th January and we're still waiting for approval and nomination approval.

I'm on a WHV to allow one of us to make money, but due to the 6 month rule, I'll likely need to leave my job in the next 5 weeks if we haven't heard anything by then.  I'm unlikely to find as good and as well a paid job with only a 6 month WHV to my name.

We're in a bit of a strange position.  The company sponsoring us is UK based.  The other 2 guys sponsored have temp sponsorship until Feb next year which was based on their project timelines.  Both of their jobs have been moved to the 2 year list as has my partners, so come Feb next year, all 3 of them will only be able to apply for a further 2 year Short Term Visa.

Now none of us are looking likely to want to stay at all as we don't see the point in selling up, leaving jobs and life's behind for 2 years to have to go back to the UK and start all over again.

Not sure where we fall in any category now as we doubt the UK company will be able to sponsor anyone for any other visa if nothing is guranteed.  They will be unlikely willing to gamble paying wages for 3 senior staff members for only 2 years for them to have to shut down too with no one to continue running the business for them.  My partner has already been able to prove that no one here wants to do his jobs and those who did, didn't have the right experience/skills.

Shame really considering they are finishing such a large important build to Melbourne and Australia at the moment (the large distrubution centres in the west) as well as probably cancelling any future projects they may have because of this new ruling.

Personally, the past 5 years of my life which have been put in to trying to get here now feel like a complete waste of time.

[Vic154]

14 hours ago, MaggieMay24 said:

I work for a global company and we would frequently have a European manager relocate on an expatriate assignment for 2 years, so CEO may be more common than you'd think.  We don't do it as often now since expatriate programs are very expensive, but it's certainly something we would appreciate being able to do if needed.

Yes it's great for global companies who have an office in Australia and want to ensure business is running as per global best practice having the skills/experience of an established MD on shore. 

My point was more that you would think Australia would want this calibre of people in their country as no doubt would bring different methods and knowledge of how things work in other countries which is vital. Some MDs I suspect given the choice by their company would now choose not to got to Australia, and maybe stay put or go elsewhere. I know my old MD wouldn't have come without chance of PR down the track. It would probably be more inconvenient for companies as they would have to guarantee a similar role back home or somewhere else after the two years in order for the employee to commit. 

[imthedave]

1 hour ago, Vic154 said:

Yes it's great for global companies who have an office in Australia and want to ensure business is running as per global best practice having the skills/experience of an established MD on shore. 

My point was more that you would think Australia would want this calibre of people in their country as no doubt would bring different methods and knowledge of how things work in other countries which is vital. Some MDs I suspect given the choice by their company would now choose not to got to Australia, and maybe stay put or go elsewhere. I know my old MD wouldn't have come without chance of PR down the track. It would probably be more inconvenient for companies as they would have to guarantee a similar role back home or somewhere else after the two years in order for the employee to commit. 

As I mentioned in my earlier posts, this is exactly my situation. I was offered the chance to relocate to Aus with my family to open and operate a local company in line with our global strategy and corporate practices. I'm actually under quite strict internal guidelines to employ only local people because as a group, we tend to enter a market and invest in the local community etc..

It's actually very common for overseas companies to do this in any country. It's unlikely that you will find a local person with the background knowledge and more importantly, level of trust, these corporate groups look for to head up the business. That's why they look internally first for the main role.

I'd been relocated 8 years ago by the same company to do exactly the same thing. The difference was, the city I was in was hell so I jumped at this chance and even took a bit of a cut in my relocation package on condition I wouldn't be moved again so we sold up and moved here based on the previous conditions of being able to transition over time into PR and more. This is now the first stable place we've called 'home' for a very long time.

I know I'm waffling a bit but the points made here about the way global companies work at a high level are exactly valid.

I'm not talking MacDonalds and KFC but industrial foreign businesses with specialist technologies invest heavily into any country when opening a local company. There is a transition period where they may bring in overseas workers to train up local people but then the local business becomes self sufficient. I did exactly that. I employed 8 local Australians, including 2 graduates whilst still at university, brought 2 foreign engineers over from Europe for 6 months each to train my local staff in skills that were not available in Australia and then sent them back.

Now I have a very efficient team that I manage. The business is growing rapidly and I'm even looking to expand the team further and open another satellite office in Queensland and Perth with local staff.

I did that. My skills, my knowledge gained over the past 25 years but because it was over that time period, I'm now 46.

Now though, it seems that level of skill set is not considered as needed for the long term in Australia and what they want is for people like me to come here, do this for 2 - 4 years and then leave and not be rewarded by the chance of PR.  It's true that at this age, anyone who has moved around like this would now be looking forward towards how and where they would potentially retire. I'm not trying to create a stereotype but generally, people my age and in this level of position are not 'poor' to an extend we would be a drain on society.

Think about this.. I actually have a long term strategic plan in place already for elevating my current younger staff up to a level that maybe they will take over from me in 10 - 12 years time. Thus, the cycle becomes complete and the company is fully 100% Australia and I am rewarded by being able to settle in a nice country.

Why can't I be rewarded by Australia by doing this?

I'm pushing forward now with the direct entry 186 before the new age limits come in next April.

I think Australia has it's faults like anywhere else but in general, it is a fantastic place to live and bring up children. It's like that because of the complete multi-cultural skill set.

Australia is a hell of a long way away from anywhere else though in travel times. Once these new practices come into effect fully, I really can't see many middle aged, experienced senior level people wanting to up root their families and come such a long way for such a short period and nobody is going to come all this way without their families having to face lengthy time away from the business for visiting 'home'

 

Sorry.. rant over ;-)

 

 

 

[imthedave]

....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.

 

Edited April 21, 2017 by imthedave
spelling mistake

[ItchyFeet76]

4 hours ago, Vic154 said:

Yeah I think if your applications already in you'll be fine. Just thinking of people like me who are still waiting for their 2 year mark to be eligible to apply. 

Why are you waiting two years? Just go down the Direct Entry route!

[Gills1987]

Hi all,

Not posted on here in over a year, but been following this thread all this week.

Im currently on 457 with my family, this was granted July 2016. We love it here and were on course to apply for transition next July. 

I've been speaking with my company's migration lawyer today and have been advised that in order for us to secure PR we need to apply through the direct entry stream by March 2018. Reason being that the transition stream will not be open to us after March 2018, when the changes are brought in and obviously we will not have completed our 2 years by then.

so it's all hands on deck to get my vetassess completed and application in as soon as possible.

hope everyone finds a solution to their predicament!

cheers,

tom

[theveed]

3 hours ago, imthedave said:

I did that. My skills, my knowledge gained over the past 25 years but because it was over that time period, I'm now 46.

Now though, it seems that level of skill set is not considered as needed for the long term in Australia and what they want is for people like me to come here, do this for 2 - 4 years and then leave and not be rewarded by the chance of PR.  It's true that at this age, anyone who has moved around like this would now be looking forward towards how and where they would potentially retire. I'm not trying to create a stereotype but generally, people my age and in this level of position are not 'poor' to an extend we would be a drain on society.

Think about this.. I actually have a long term strategic plan in place already for elevating my current younger staff up to a level that maybe they will take over from me in 10 - 12 years time. Thus, the cycle becomes complete and the company is fully 100% Australia and I am rewarded by being able to settle in a nice country.

Why can't I be rewarded by Australia by doing this?

I'm pushing forward now with the direct entry 186 before the new age limits come in next April.

I think Australia has it's faults like anywhere else but in general, it is a fantastic place to live and bring up children. It's like that because of the complete multi-cultural skill set.

Australia is a hell of a long way away from anywhere else though in travel times. Once these new practices come into effect fully, I really can't see many middle aged, experienced senior level people wanting to up root their families and come such a long way for such a short period and nobody is going to come all this way without their families having to face lengthy time away from the business for visiting 'home'

 

Sorry.. rant over ;-)

 

 

 

So with you on this @imthedave

Our company wants to transfer me to Aus, and I already have a business and operation plan to build up a local team of 5 for 2017 and another 5-10 in 2018 for our business unit serving Aus/NZ. All of that is out of the window now if I don't get relocation, particularly for a long-term PR arrangement.

Like you, I'm in the 40s and we're set to spend at least 10-20 years of our lives in Australia as our kid just started secondary school and we've been planning to send him to Australia for university 6 years down the road anyway, we thought it'd make sense for us to just move earlier rather than wait until he has to apply for a student visa.

Not to bring income into limelight, we're not exactly moving there taking away anyone's job opportunity or even social services with the relocation package and personal investment we plan to carry over from Singapore to Aus... 

While I understand the constant need for immigration and work visa policies to be reviewed, carpet bombing based purely on a list is rather short-sighted, particularly if the business that applied for the visa needs a foreign employee to run the entity.

It's like saying "we'll only allow locally-born owners, MDs, GMs, and C-level individuals to operate and stay in Australia beyond 4 years".

[Vic154]

1 hour ago, ItchyFeet76 said:

Why are you waiting two years? Just go down the Direct Entry route!

My two years is coming up soon anyway in July, and I wasn't 100% sure I would pass the skills assessment for my field - Sales and Marketing

[ItchyFeet76]

1 hour ago, Gills1987 said:

Hi all,

Not posted on here in over a year, but been following this thread all this week.

Im currently on 457 with my family, this was granted July 2016. We love it here and were on course to apply for transition next July. 

I've been speaking with my company's migration lawyer today and have been advised that in order for us to secure PR we need to apply through the direct entry stream by March 2018. Reason being that the transition stream will not be open to us after March 2018, when the changes are brought in and obviously we will not have completed our 2 years by then.

so it's all hands on deck to get my vetassess completed and application in as soon as possible.

hope everyone finds a solution to their predicament!

cheers,

tom

Sounds like a good plan. Plus, by the time you've done 2 years the new rules will mean that you actually have to do 3 years!

We submitted our DE application last December. I did it myself but was lucky to have Emergico on hand for any questions, as they were employed by my husband's company to do the employer nominee part of the application. 

Good luck!

[Agz15]

Wondering what people's interpretations of the current changes (wef 19/04/17) are.

If a 457 application was submitted prior to this date, I understand that (providing the occupation remains on one of the new lists) then the 457 may be granted for 2 or 4 years. What I can't figure it is if the 2 year 457 granted prior to March 2018 will have an option to renew/convert to PR.

the gov factsheet only mentions that the PR pathway is unavailable on the 2 year TSS visas effective March 2018. No specific mention of no chance to PR for 457s granted up until that point

anyone heard anything else or in a similar position?

[dodziu]

 

Cant find my occupation on any list on border.gov.au ( medium and long term, short term or removed) -Accommodation and Hospitality Manager (nec) 141999;looks like disappeared

Or maybe I am blind???

Is it possible that they removed my occupation without removing?

 

[theveed]

13 hours ago, Agz15 said:

the gov factsheet only mentions that the PR pathway is unavailable on the 2 year TSS visas effective March 2018. No specific mention of no chance to PR for 457s granted up until that point

anyone heard anything else or in a similar position?

I think if you haven't completed your minimum 186/187 requirement of 2 years working under the same 457 and you're in the CSOL (Short Term) list before Mar2018, you'll fall under the no-PR cluster.

[Owl]

On 18/04/2017 at 1:51 PM, MelT said:

Some interesting comments. Given that it costs the recruiter more in real terms to recruit using a 457 visa. I find it difficult to believe that this method is used to source 'cheap labour' when I fact it is used to recruit skilled migrants.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's because a lot of time the employer force the employee to pay back through under table. So the cost is on employee not employer.

[AJ]

On 4/18/2017 at 1:09 PM, MelT said:

They also provide required skills and experience; not forgetting tax revenue and contribute to GDP.... It is generally more costly for a company to recruit using the 457 visa. Which is usually only used when the required skills and experience cannot be obtained in the local labour market.

We are dual nationals and find the labour market here in Australia quite discriminatory, so this change in policy is no surprise.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Do you seriously think that everyone on a 457 is a skilled worker?  Open your eyes!

[elderberry]

11 minutes ago, AJ said:

Do you seriously think that everyone on a 457 is a skilled worker?  Open your eyes!

I thought that was the case until the news item stopping Mcdonalds employing people on 457s to make up big macs.

[Agz15]

4 hours ago, theveed said:

I think if you haven't completed your minimum 186/187 requirement of 2 years working under the same 457 and you're in the CSOL (Short Term) list before Mar2018, you'll fall under the no-PR cluster.

Rubbish, this announcement has really messed up our plans.

Also confused about the one onshore renewal rule...maybe there will be options to renew or return if you apply offshore??

On a separate note - does anyone have any experience with the direct entry 186, partner would be at 3 years work experience point by jan/feb next year but haven't been able to find any info on if applications submitted before the March 2018 changes will only be applicable to applications submitted after that date. 

[Vic154]

Think as long as you apply before March 2018 you should be ok, but this hasn't been confirmed. My MA isn't even 100% sure.

I'm on my second 457, haven't managed to get PR due to changing jobs and the 2 yr rule. I'm hoping to get my TRT app in before March, if something goes wrong and I can't get PR and have to leave after 457 expires, that would mean I've been in the country for 8 years, working constantly in a good job, paying taxes, settled down and still not allowed to stay. If I then do the short stay work visa twice (4yrs) then it's 12 years total been here and no right to stay! Then add to that the 4yrs to get citizenship if/when get PR. This is seriously messed up but am optimistic it will work for me and majority of us surely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Agz15]

1 hour ago, Vic154 said:

Think as long as you apply before March 2018 you should be ok, but this hasn't been confirmed. My MA isn't even 100% sure.

I'm on my second 457, haven't managed to get PR due to changing jobs and the 2 yr rule. I'm hoping to get my TRT app in before March, if something goes wrong and I can't get PR and have to leave after 457 expires, that would mean I've been in the country for 8 years, working constantly in a good job, paying taxes, settled down and still not allowed to stay. If I then do the short stay work visa twice (4yrs) then it's 12 years total been here and no right to stay! Then add to that the 4yrs to get citizenship if/when get PR. This is seriously messed up but am optimistic it will work for me and majority of us surely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a ridiculous amount of time/taxes in a country to not get PR!! I hope something works out for you, you just have no idea if they'll add more conditions to 186s or 457s down the line before next year...

Although im hoping that in due course there will be exemptions added or some opportunity to get PR after the 2 + 2 years on the short term visa (maybe offshore application or something). There is no mention of *not* being able to get PR if your 457 is approved after April 17 but before March 18. It's implied but not specifically mentioned.

Who knows, but Australia suddenly doesn't seem so attractive anymore.