ali Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 44 minutes ago, Aron said: I am a bit upset to see that quite some people thinks that a sick temporary worker who seeks medicare treatment is a burden for Australian. That poor sick person payed for his own insurance! Should not he feel granted and deserved to receive treatment once he is sick? Isn't that the purpose of insurance? I paid my health insurance every month and if in my whole life I am healthy and don't get a lot of chance to use my insurance, I won't feel I am robbed by health insurance company. On the contrary, if I am sick and used my health insurance to treat my diseases, I won't feel shame at all and I won't feel I am taking advantage of the health insurance company, as that is what insurance do! Why you guys believe a sick temporary worker who has always paid his medicare and his private insurance is a burden and is taking advantage of Australia tax payers? You don't pay medicare, you pay private health insurance and here in Aus that does not mean free treatment, quite often there is a gap (sometimes that's hundreds of $) The majority of us pay health insurance - we've been paying it for 12 years and my husband has used it only once (but still had $200 out of pocket expenses) - you never really get your monies worth. Sadly, from what you have written you have experienced a significant illness which hinders your PR application and unfortunately, being in between a temporary visa and application for PR it has jeopardised your PR application. As previously mentioned, hundreds of applicants are turned down because of the medical issues - they have to have a general criteria on which to assess applications. The problem is that a temporary visa is just what it says on the tin - temporary, it has a start and end date in which had you become ill you would have been able to access health care as per your health insurance/medicare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERYSTORMY Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 It is your choice to pay for health insurance. You didn't need to. Like any insurance, you purchase it knowing it has big limitations. I returned to the UK after paying years of the highest premiums sold in Oz. During which time, the only time I needed it, it wasn't available as the co pay was too big. Does that mean I should have access to it now? Of course not. You are paying for possible treatment while there. Nothing more. Same as any other insurance. A temp visa holder has to be aware that health is an issue that can they result in their ineligibility for a further visa. If they weren't then that would be a massively stupid thing to do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aron Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Quoll said: Immigration law isn't about fairness. It's a set of rules put in place to cover everyone. A lot of people are denied pr visas because of medical conditions and they can whine all they like but the rules are there to be followed. You seem to think there is an assumption of entitlement to pr just because you've been temporary which is not the case. We would be in a right mess if immigration were governed by emotional blackmail. I thought the medical treatment visa is for when you aren't fit enough to leave the country and so couldn't be repatriated but would be visa -less if you had to stay. If you're currently on a temporary visa and have health insurance why is there a problem? I am not saying temporary worker is granted for PR. I am only asking if you think this scenario is fair: A temp worker has been working in Australia for years and he maintained medicare or/and private health insurance . (personally I pay medicare levy plus surcharge plus private health insurance. Since I have applied PR so I must pay medicare levy and surcharge. Since I have not got my PR so I am still a foreigner and my private health insurance for foreigners is not entitled for medicare surcharge deduction. ). The temp worker is now waiting PR decision and his current temporary working VISA expired so he is on bridging VISA now. However his body exam for PR shows that he gets cancer now. Thus, his PR application is refused, and he is requested to leave Australia in 30 days, therefore he won't be able to receive treatment using his insurance. And he does not have insurance neither in his birth country. While I understand PR should be refused. I am asking do you feel it is fair and reasonable to give this man a method to stay in Australia and use his own insurance to seek medical treatment? Or do you think this man seek treatment in Australia using his own insurance or medicare is a emotional blackmail? Edited March 1, 2019 by Aron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aron Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 2 hours ago, ali said: You don't pay medicare, you pay private health insurance and here in Aus that does not mean free treatment, quite often there is a gap (sometimes that's hundreds of $) The majority of us pay health insurance - we've been paying it for 12 years and my husband has used it only once (but still had $200 out of pocket expenses) - you never really get your monies worth. Sadly, from what you have written you have experienced a significant illness which hinders your PR application and unfortunately, being in between a temporary visa and application for PR it has jeopardised your PR application. As previously mentioned, hundreds of applicants are turned down because of the medical issues - they have to have a general criteria on which to assess applications. The problem is that a temporary visa is just what it says on the tin - temporary, it has a start and end date in which had you become ill you would have been able to access health care as per your health insurance/medicare. Hi Ali, thanks for your kindness. fortunately I am a very healthy person. However I heard about people fall in such miserable situation and I just feel sympathy, and could not stop thinking over this matter. While I know PR should be refused if there is serious healthy issue, I just feel they should be given a method to stay in Australia to seek treatment using their insurance instead of being forced to leave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aron Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, VERYSTORMY said: It is your choice to pay for health insurance. You didn't need to. Like any insurance, you purchase it knowing it has big limitations. I returned to the UK after paying years of the highest premiums sold in Oz. During which time, the only time I needed it, it wasn't available as the co pay was too big. Does that mean I should have access to it now? Of course not. You are paying for possible treatment while there. Nothing more. Same as any other insurance. A temp visa holder has to be aware that health is an issue that can they result in their ineligibility for a further visa. If they weren't then that would be a massively stupid thing to do. The scenarios I mentioned here is that a man's PR is refused due to cancer and as per law he must leave Australia in 30 days. Shall this man be allowed on a special VISA (not PR) to stay in Australia to seek medical treatment using his own insurance? This is not the same kind of limitation that you were referring. His insurance does cover cancer and he has maintained his insurance for years. Now if he is forced to leave Australia, then he can not use his insurance to save himself. When the medivac bill has passed in this great country to allow bringing ill refugees to Australia and receive free treatment, is it hard to accept that we give a very sick temporary worker to stay in Australia longer to allow him to seek treatment using his own insurance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERYSTORMY Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 12 minutes ago, Aron said: The scenarios I mentioned here is that a man's PR is refused due to cancer and as per law he must leave Australia in 30 days. Shall this man be allowed on a special VISA (not PR) to stay in Australia to seek medical treatment using his own insurance? This is not the same kind of limitation that you were referring. His insurance does cover cancer and he has maintained his insurance for years. Now if he is forced to leave Australia, then he can not use his insurance to save himself. When the medivac bill has passed in this great country to allow bringing ill refugees to Australia and receive free treatment, is it hard to accept that we give a very sick temporary worker to stay in Australia longer to allow him to seek treatment using his own insurance? There is a visa specifically for that. The medical treatment visa. Also, you do not lose your temp visa because of cancer or even because of being refused a subsequent PR visa. On refusal, the temp visa remains valid for its duration. If he happens to have been at the end of the temp visa when applying for PR, then my original comment stands. He would be going back to his home country. He can never assume gaining PR, even after applying. If you arrive on a temp visa, the advice has always been "assume you are returning to your home country at the end or earlier until you actually have another visa granted" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aron Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 minute ago, VERYSTORMY said: There is a visa specifically for that. The medical treatment visa. Also, you do not lose your temp visa because of cancer or even because of being refused a subsequent PR visa. On refusal, the temp visa remains valid for its duration. If he happens to have been at the end of the temp visa when applying for PR, then my original comment stands. He would be going back to his home country. He can never assume gaining PR, even after applying. If you arrive on a temp visa, the advice has always been "assume you are returning to your home country at the end or earlier until you actually have another visa granted" "assume you are returning to your home country at the end or earlier until you actually have another visa granted" ---- every Temp VISA holder should know this if you ask them However, if you ask them "do you know if you become a temporary worker, it means there is a small chance that one day might you in a situation that you are very very sick and you do not have any health insurance to reply on", I bet you 99% of the temp work visa applicants they won't know. After all, they are not migration agents or legislator and they won't know this until some of them fall into such miserable situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aron Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 Thanks everyone, though I might not fully agree each of the reply, I do respect your valuable inputs. While this is a heavy topic, I can only say, thanks god I am healthy and may God bless all of us to stay healthy, all the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newjez Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 21 hours ago, Aron said: The law and rule defines this way does not mean it is fair and reasonable. I cannot come up with any reason that sending back a patient to his own birth country to die is fair. Especially after that patient has maintained health insurance in Australia, and you don't give him a chance to use it to survive here. Workers come to Australia not to just take advantage of Australia, but also contribute here. You would go back to the UK to be treated by the NHS. If you came from a country that doesn't have public health, like the USA, you should have thought about it before you left. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newjez Posted March 2, 2019 Share Posted March 2, 2019 23 hours ago, VERYSTORMY said: It is your choice to pay for health insurance. You didn't need to. Like any insurance, you purchase it knowing it has big limitations. I returned to the UK after paying years of the highest premiums sold in Oz. During which time, the only time I needed it, it wasn't available as the co pay was too big. Does that mean I should have access to it now? Of course not. You are paying for possible treatment while there. Nothing more. Same as any other insurance. A temp visa holder has to be aware that health is an issue that can they result in their ineligibility for a further visa. If they weren't then that would be a massively stupid thing to do. Don't some visas require health insurance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemesis Posted March 2, 2019 Share Posted March 2, 2019 25 minutes ago, newjez said: Don't some visas require health insurance? Yes, lots of the temporary ones do - student visa does definitely. The 457 used to so I think the 482, its replacement, does too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaggieMay24 Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 Sometimes people simply have bad luck with the timing of visas and their own situation. But as others have said, there's the medical treatment visa and if the person is able to use their health insurance for treatment, then they could do so. But as far as getting government funded medicare, AFAIK that would only be an option while the person holds or has applied for a PR visa. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mallan82450 Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 I swore to myself after making comments last time that I wouldn't be drawn in by some of these forum members! I find it utterly astonishing that some people on here are so against people that discuss temporary visa's. Do you really think that people are so naïve that they don't research the pro's and cons of visa's? There is borderline bullying going on across this forum and those people should be ashamed of themselves. We have never considered Australia as a place to live and the company that is sponsoring us (one of the big 4 consulting firms not banks) approached us and they only offer temporary visa's initially BUT they have provided confirmation depending on performance (rightly so) that after 3 years they will nominate us through the ENS 186 transition scheme for PR. They DO NOT bring people over to Australia on short term list visa's before anyone starts. What on earth is wrong with that? I asked a million questions before we accepted the job and the main one was around the route to PR so it's not something we considered lightly. We also explained that we would not be coming over unless they paid for certain things which were agreed. I know we are lucky in this regard. Perhaps that's the only way some people get to come over to Australia? Yes, I suppose it might be nice to have PR straight away but WE might not like Australia and why would I want PR if I didn't like it because I won't be coming back; let some one else have it if we don't want it. The OP asked about fairness with regards to illness and PR and I see both sides of the comments (not quite the way they are delivered though). Rule are rules. If one if us gets seriously ill while we are here and it is around the time we are applying for PR then to be honest I would probably want to be at home with my family anyway so PR wouldn't be something at the forefront of my mind. Getting well would be. I do realise that some peoples situations are different with regards to family. Some of you need to talk a long hard look at yourselves and remember what your journey was like and if you can't say something nicely don't say it at all. The people that come on this forum are human and come for advice not to be bullied into thinking that their visa choice is not correct or that PR will never be an option. Wishing everyone a happy and healthy week. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marisawright Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 4 hours ago, mallan82450 said: I swore to myself after making comments last time that I wouldn't be drawn in by some of these forum members! I find it utterly astonishing that some people on here are so against people that discuss temporary visa's. Do you really think that people are so naïve that they don't research the pro's and cons of visa's? There is borderline bullying going on across this forum and those people should be ashamed of themselves. We have never considered Australia as a place to live and the company that is sponsoring us (one of the big 4 consulting firms not banks) approached us... Firstly, have you read the whole thread? The OP is presenting a hypothetical question about the rights of a person after their temporary visa has expired. None of the respondents has questioned the right of that person to be in Australia on a temp visa. As for your comments about responses on other threads: it's not bullying to offer information people haven't asked for. We've all learned from experience that people often have wrong assumptions when they arrive at theses forums, in spite of their research. That may be based on outdated information they've found on the internet, or a scam migration agent. Because they think they've already got the information, they may never ask the questions they should, and will go a long way down the visa process without realising they're bound to fail (or worse, they move to Australia then find their chances of PR are nil). In particular, we know from experience that there's a lack of awareness about the increasing difficulty of transitioning to PR at the end of a temp visa. Just look at the threads about the long, long wait for a 186 visa to understand what a stressful experience it is. We've seen too many families burn their bridges in the UK, confident they'll never need to go back, only to end up back in England having lost their home. Is it any wonder we want to be sure people are aware of the risks? You're lucky to be going to Australia with a reputable employer whom you've had experience with in the UK. Many people are moving to Australia to work for an employer they've never heard of, and arrive to find they've got the boss from hell and an impossible schedule - but then they're stuck, because if the leave, they'll have to go home. Still others find themselves made redundant mid-contract because the firm goes bust. People are often so busy thinking about the transition to PR, they don't always consider those complications. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skani Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, mallan82450 said: . Do you really think that people are so naïve that they don't research the pro's and cons of visa's? Yes - because we see proof of it every day on this forum. You may research thoroughly but, unfortunately, we see many people in a pickle because they haven't considered the consequences of the decisions they made. Edited March 4, 2019 by Skani 2 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.