Advice on making decision

[llessur]

1 hour ago, Marisawright said:

You are right and I stand corrected. I always think of Adelaide as being a bit further north than it really is.  If you look at the UV graphs for winter, you'll see that Adelaide is in the "below 3" area of the country.    Even in Spring and Autumn, it doesn't get above 8, which is the same as the UK.

In summer, though, it does become "Extreme" for the whole season.

Wow, I didn't realise UV levels stayed so high all year round for much of the country. That must be annoying

Yes, summer you do have to be careful in Adelaide but I've been here nearly a decade now and haven't been burnt once. I just take sensible precautions so I wouldn't say it's a particular burden or involves massive lifestyle changes. My bit of advice is to spend the money on really good sunscreen that doesn't feel greasy when it's on, makes it much less annoying to wear. plus I'm not afraid to flout my 'middle aged dad' credentials by wearing a sensible wide-brimmed hat on sunny days...

Edited November 12, 2021 by llessur

[Marisawright]

1 hour ago, llessur said:

Wow, I didn't realise UV levels stayed so high all year round for much of the country. That must be annoying

It's not just annoying, it's dangerous.  It's the reason melanoma rates per capita are among the highest in the world, even though we've been educated about "slip slop slap" for the last 30-odd years.  The WHO official advice is that during "extreme" UV, you shouldn't go out in the sun at all, even with sunscreen on!   Obviously if we all followed that advice, most Australians would have to hibernate most of the summer - so most of us are a bit in denial about it, I think.  Luckily there's such high awareness of skin cancers in Australia now, the death rates are very low. 

[Daffyduck]

Thanks once again for all your advice everyone. I'm lucky enough to be in a position that my line manager is supportive of a career break. Means we could go and try it for a year or two and still have a job to come back to. So, looks pretty positive so far.

Just the difficult conversation with the grandparents next.....

[ali]

On 11/11/2021 at 12:50, Blue Flu said:

Same here at supervised venues with parents present. But kids outside of own yards in suburbs without parental supervision barely ever in suburbs. This was not the case when I was young. 

I think you'll find that true of the UK also, I didn't let my children play out unsupervised in the UK either - the world has changed since we were children.

[Blue Flu]

3 minutes ago, ali said:

I think you'll find that true of the UK also, I didn't let my children play out unsupervised in the UK either - the world has changed since we were children.

I suspect it will depend just where in UK you find yourself. My last country prior to Australia in EU though children most definately played outside. But I agree the world has changed. A lot brought on by perceptions of danger though. Not saying it is not more dangerous now, but It most certainly was not as 'innocent' as some may think back in the day. Just not  as on the minds of people. 

[Blue Flu]

4 hours ago, Daffyduck said:

Thanks once again for all your advice everyone. I'm lucky enough to be in a position that my line manager is supportive of a career break. Means we could go and try it for a year or two and still have a job to come back to. So, looks pretty positive so far.

Just the difficult conversation with the grandparents next.....

That would be the preferred way . Test the waters first before diving in the deep end. 

[Marisawright]

21 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

That would be the preferred way . Test the waters first before diving in the deep end. 

Testing the waters is a good idea BUT the proviso is that it should be on a permanent visa, not a temp one.

There is a persistent myth that if you get a temporary (482) visa, you can "transition" to a permanent visa later.  That is not true.  You have the possibiliity of applying for a permanent visa down the track, but it is very far from a guaranteed transition. Quotas can change, eligibility rules can change (and do, every year), employers' policies change.  It's extremely uncertain.

On these forums you'll find many stories of families who moved to Australia on a 482 visa, believing they're on the path to migrating, only to end up back in the UK two or three years later, thousands of pounds out of pocket.  

[Blue Flu]

16 minutes ago, Marisawright said:

Testing the waters is a good idea BUT the proviso is that it should be on a permanent visa, not a temp one.

There is a persistent myth that if you get a temporary (482) visa, you can "transition" to a permanent visa later.  That is not true.  You have the possibiliity of applying for a permanent visa down the track, but it is very far from a guaranteed transition. Quotas can change, eligibility rules can change (and do, every year), employers' policies change.  It's extremely uncertain.

On these forums you'll find many stories of families who moved to Australia on a 482 visa, believing they're on the path to migrating, only to end up back in the UK two or three years later, thousands of pounds out of pocket.  

Yes that can be the case for those that came on temp work related visa's. Although many did onto to PR. That includes those that came out as Back packers as many that came as International Students. 

[Marisawright]

34 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

Yes that can be the case for those that came on temp work related visa's. Although many did onto to PR. That includes those that came out as Back packers as many that came as International Students. 

Yes, many have gone on to get PR historically, but don't confuse "many" with "the great majority".  The previous visa (457) had a higher success rate than the new replacement (482).  While I would encourage singles or childless couples to jump at a 482 because they can be flexible, it would be foolhardy to recommend it to a family, due to the higher cost of moving the whole family there and back, disruption to education etc.   Different if the employer is paying all relocation and setup costs, of course, but that is extremely rare these days. 

Backpackers are another myth. I employed a lot of backpackers when I was working and they always excitedly shared stories of backpackers who had supposedly managed to get sponsored.  Funny, they were always a friend of a friend of a friend, not someone they actually knew. Bottom line, the only backpackers who get sponsored are people who were qualified and eligible in the first place, which is not a large percentage.  Employers are extremely restricted on who they can sponsor these days and even then, many are reluctant to go to the expense. Larger firms often have policies preventing them from sponsoring for junior positions, too.

[Lavers]

We made the move last June with 2 kids and we are loving it.

You still have to work 5 days a week but come the weekend it can feel like you are on holiday.

People are out and about every where and there is loads of things to do for the kids. 

You get alot more provided to you by the councils here, with new well maintained parks around where as in the UK (or atleast where we lived) the parks are few and far between, old with broken glass around from the teenagers getting pissed up the night before.

The kids love it and we definitely feel like it is a nicer environment for them to grow up in. Also the girls usually got a nasty cough during winter where as here they haven't been ill once.

There are good points and bad points about living here but If you feel like it's something you want to experience then you should go for it.

Yes it costs money but atleast there are no what ifs in 20 years time. 

Will we be here forever, I don't know, we just take it as it comes.

[Blue Flu]

8 hours ago, Marisawright said:

Yes, many have gone on to get PR historically, but don't confuse "many" with "the great majority".  The previous visa (457) had a higher success rate than the new replacement (482).  While I would encourage singles or childless couples to jump at a 482 because they can be flexible, it would be foolhardy to recommend it to a family, due to the higher cost of moving the whole family there and back, disruption to education etc.   Different if the employer is paying all relocation and setup costs, of course, but that is extremely rare these days. 

Backpackers are another myth. I employed a lot of backpackers when I was working and they always excitedly shared stories of backpackers who had supposedly managed to get sponsored.  Funny, they were always a friend of a friend of a friend, not someone they actually knew. Bottom line, the only backpackers who get sponsored are people who were qualified and eligible in the first place, which is not a large percentage.  Employers are extremely restricted on who they can sponsor these days and even then, many are reluctant to go to the expense. Larger firms often have policies preventing them from sponsoring for junior positions, too.

Gosh really? I've crossed paths with a number who came as back packers and remained. I knew an Italian even that got PR through her restaurant employer. She went onto marry and Italian also on a temp visa, who got PR and then had a child, found Australia too difficult after five and a bit years with a child and returned to Italy. Others living or were around me are/were  Irish four of which got PR. (telecommunications, mining, one in sales (no idea how that worked) but all came as back packers. 

[Marisawright]

41 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

Gosh really? I've crossed paths with a number who came as back packers and remained. I knew an Italian even that got PR through her restaurant employer. She went onto marry and Italian also on a temp visa, who got PR and then had a child, found Australia too difficult after five and a bit years with a child and returned to Italy. Others living or were around me are/were  Irish four of which got PR. (telecommunications, mining, one in sales (no idea how that worked) but all came as back packers. 

On other words they were more mature, qualified individuals who could have got skilled visas anyway 

[Blue Flu]

15 hours ago, Marisawright said:

On other words they were more mature, qualified individuals who could have got skilled visas anyway 

I suspect from a few chats with those mentioned that they found it far easier acquiring it onshore after making themselves 'known' than going through the 'normal' process. 

[Marisawright]

21 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

I suspect from a few chats with those mentioned that they found it far easier acquiring it onshore after making themselves 'known' than going through the 'normal' process. 

You are right.  My point is that when people say "backpackers often get sponsored and stay", people immediately think of the average backpacker,  i.e. a young person, just out of university or even without qualifications, arriving for an adventure. So it becomes a misleading statement.

The "backpackers" who get PR are not just already qualified in their occupation, they also have some experience before they arrive in Australia.  So they are already eligible for sponsorship and all they need to do is find an employer, which is hard to do from overseas. The only advantage conferred by the WHV is, as you say, the chance to connect with an employer. 

 

[Blue Flu]

4 hours ago, Marisawright said:

You are right.  My point is that when people say "backpackers often get sponsored and stay", people immediately think of the average backpacker,  i.e. a young person, just out of university or even without qualifications, arriving for an adventure. So it becomes a misleading statement.

The "backpackers" who get PR are not just already qualified in their occupation, they also have some experience before they arrive in Australia.  So they are already eligible for sponsorship and all they need to do is find an employer, which is hard to do from overseas. The only advantage conferred by the WHV is, as you say, the chance to connect with an employer. 

 

Which is one big advantage. I suspect many for the most part who really wants to stay will find a way to do so. Not immediate perhaps, plus not all will be successful but there are ways for the determined. Possibly a big issue could be the exploitation of workers, especially not with PR to have to put up with unscrupulous, indeed corrupt employers. Another issue is the under employment of migrants. I mean to many doing roles well over qualified for.  

[Marisawright]

37 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

I suspect many for the most part who really wants to stay will find a way to do so. Not immediate perhaps, plus not all will be successful but there are ways for the determined. 

See, that's what makes me angry, because it's such an irresponsible thing to say to people chasing "the Australian dream".  

I've met so many young backpackers, and even some people with families, who are not eligible for a work visa, but they fall for the line of, "If I can just get into Australia on some kind of visa, then if you're really determined, you'll find some way to stay".

If there is a way for them to stay, their pathway should be clearly identifiable before they arrive.  Some new kind of visa isn't going jump out of the woodwork after they arrive. People have lost their life savings or got into massive debt believing statements like that.  Some have even committed suicide.

 

[Blue Flu]

1 hour ago, Marisawright said:

See, that's what makes me angry, because it's such an irresponsible thing to say to people chasing "the Australian dream".  

I've met so many young backpackers, and even some people with families, who are not eligible for a work visa, but they fall for the line of, "If I can just get into Australia on some kind of visa, then if you're really determined, you'll find some way to stay".

If there is a way for them to stay, their pathway should be clearly identifiable before they arrive.  Some new kind of visa isn't going jump out of the woodwork after they arrive. People have lost their life savings or got into massive debt believing statements like that.  Some have even committed suicide.

 

Well no nothing about any Australian dream , apart from what I read on here, but have certainly met a number of people who have found ways to remain. Some when achieved it didn't bother to remain.  Sorry if you find that irresponsible but I relate to what I know. Certainly not all as also know others whose plans did not eventuate into desired result, even with a lot invested. 

I think it's called manipulating the system. No one ever claimed all would arrive at a successful outcome. Yes people have lost considerable money.  I have already written on exploitation. I don't think there is much else to be said on the matter. 

[Blue Flu]

31 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

Well no nothing about any Australian dream , apart from what I read on here, but have certainly met a number of people who have found ways to remain. Some when achieved it didn't bother to remain.  Sorry if you find that irresponsible but I relate to what I know. Certainly not all as also know others whose plans did not eventuate into desired result, even with a lot invested. 

I think it's called manipulating the system. No one ever claimed all would arrive at a successful outcome. Yes people have lost considerable money.  I have already written on exploitation. I don't think there is much else to be said on the matter. 

I should confirm I am revering to Back packers and International students.

[Marisawright]

5 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

I should confirm I am revering to Back packers and International students.

So am I.  

I am sure you've met people who've managed to stay, but that's only logical, isn't it?  The ones who didn't manage to stay, are not here to meet.  They're back in their home country, or dead. 

It's like saying sharks don't kill anyone, because the only shark victims you've ever met are still alive.

[Blue Flu]

45 minutes ago, Marisawright said:

So am I.  

I am sure you've met people who've managed to stay, but that's only logical, isn't it?  The ones who didn't manage to stay, are not here to meet.  They're back in their home country, or dead. 

It's like saying sharks don't kill anyone, because the only shark victims you've ever met are still alive.

I most certainly do know as I mentioned those who failed to qualify after putting in a lot of effort. But suicide? Are you really suggesting it is notable in number that young back packers, here on a temporally visa's  are resorting to such extremes?  Now I am aware of those on temporarily visa's being treated appallingly by government resorting to extreme methods, but yet to meet a back packer. 

I have met back packers deported from Australia as well after over staying.