2231-79 Computing Professional (ICT Recent Graduate) and the new priority

[Guest chajath]

@hajiyama

That's the sort of response I got from DIAC too. Its beyond incompetency. Its indecency.

[Guest swan2748]

Thank you for your information George. I agree that most of this nonsense is decided by the Department. However we can't phase ACS out. I will tell you why. I applied for a reassessment of my occupation in May 11, 2010 because I have gained 1 year local experience and was hoping to get into CSL soon before 1 July. But their result letter came on 11 Aug, 2010 with a 2231-79 Java Specialist. It is on their website that they say result letter after July will not be given a ASCO code so why the heck did I get this ****? 2231-79 after July, 2010 is totally useless but I can't even ask them to change the result because those rights are only for people who get their result between 1 May - 30 June.

Now you are telling me not to blame ACS? I will not only blame it but will also hope it dies one day and to be replaced by some other organization that is more responsible.

 

My case was exactly the same. Applied in May as well. I received my result letter end of July, with ASCO 2231-79 Java Specialist. I contacted ACS but their response was send a new application (with new fee) and supporting documents and then I might be able to get one of the ANZSCO occupations. My result letter states that my position is a software developer (I didn't have it anywhere in my application). Why couldn't they assign developer programmer (another name for software developer according to the ANZSCO document) code? I think ACS is also grabbing our hard earned money and not representing the best interests of computing professionals. And I am a member of ACS...lol..

 

Then I think, even if I get my skills assessed with ANZSCO codes (SOL 3), I would still have to lodge a fresh application for GSM, which I don't want to do. I would be happy to get new ACS assessment with the SOL 3 if we were allowed to update our skills assessment in the existing GSM application. With the current state of affairs, I am not willing to submit another application which may lose priority again since the rules keep changing.

[Guest Manj]

Got this useless email response from the DIAC officer Roland W on Friday,

 

Dear

 

Thank you for your email in relation to your visa application under Australia's General Skilled Migration program.

 

We apologise for the time it has taken to answer your enquiries. A high volume of enquires is the cause of this delay. Please be advised this email will answer all of the following enquiries - email ID numbers:xxxx

 

 

Notes on file indicate your enquiries have been answered.

 

Yours sincerely,

Roland W

Adelaide Skilled Processing Centre

Communications Unit

 

So I went thru all my previous email communications with the DIAC, and found the email from what looks like a straight copy and paste from the template by David E with the corresponding email ID Roland W quoted in his response,

 

Dear Client,

 

Thank you for your email in relation to your visa application under Australia's General Skilled Migration program.

 

The Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Chris Evans, has set new priority processing arrangements for certain Skilled Migration visas. These arrangements take account of the changes to the Skilled Occupation List (SOL) that came into effect on 1 July 2010, as well as the revocation of the Migration Occupation in Demand List (MODL) and the Critical Skills List (CSL). The new arrangements are designed to better address the needs of industry by targeting skills in critical need across a number of sectors. The current priority processing Direction commenced on 14 July 2010.

 

The priority processing arrangements apply to the following visas from 14 July 2010:

* Employer Nomination Scheme (ENS);

* Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme (RSMS); and

* General Skilled Migration (GSM) visas except for:

- Skilled - Recognised Graduate Subclass 476;

- Skilled - Graduate Subclass 485;

- Skilled - Designated Area - Sponsored (Residence) Subclass 883 and

- Skilled - Regional Subclass 887.

 

Under the Ministerial Direction the following processing priorities (with the highest priority listed first) apply:

1. Applications from people who are employer sponsored under the ENS or the RSMS.

2. Applications from people who are nominated by a State/Territory government agency under a State Migration plan agreed to by the Minister.

3. Applications from people who have nominated an occupation on the new Skilled Occupation List (SOL) - Schedule 3 in effect from 1 July 2010.

4. All other applications are to be processed in the order in which they are received.

 

The SOL identifies occupations that reflect the high value, nation building skills Australia needs. The complete list of occupations on the SOL is available on the department's website at <Skilled Occupation Lists (Formerly Known as Form 1121i)>

 

As your nominated occupation is not on the SOL - Schedule 3 and you are not sponsored by an employer or nominated by a State/Territory government in accordance with an occupation on the State Migration plan, your visa application will not be finalised until those visa applications which meet the higher processing priorities are finalised.

 

This priority processing Direction supersedes all previous Directions and applies to all unfinalised GSM applications with the exception of the subclass 476, 485, 883 and 887 visas identified above. This Direction applies irrespective of whether the application is newly lodged, has been assessed and is in the final stages of processing, or is nominated by a State/Territory government or family sponsor.

 

If you wish to have your application processed as a priority, you may wish to consider seeking an Australian employer to formally sponsor you.

 

Further information on the priority processing direction is available on the department's website at <What's New? Recent Changes in General Skilled Migration>

 

Information on our current processing timeframes can be obtained by sending a blank email to gsmb.information@immi.gov.au <mailto:gsmb.information@immi.gov.au>.

This is an automated service providing processing information only. Please do not send any other enquiry or information to this email address.

 

Further enquiries may be directed to the department's General Skilled Migration Post-Lodgement Enquiry Form at <General Skilled Migration Post-Lodgement Enquiry Form>. Please do not contact the department to request your application be exempt from the new priority processing Direction. Case Officers must adhere to the Minister's Direction.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

David E.

General Skilled Migration

Department of Immigration and Citizenship

 

 

So I wrote to them again with the below email,

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

I am writing to you with the dissatisfaction of how inappropriately my previous email enquiry to the department was handled by case officer Roland W.

 

I was writing in the hope that the department could clarify the below question for me, but was given useless copied and pasted information that did not even touch my question. I would appreciate if a definitive answer can be provided this time, and once again please avoid using the response template as my question is quite specific and will require manual input.

 

Please clarify if the PASA guidelines used by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) to assess applicants' suitability as ICT professionals is set / drafted by the DIAC, or if the DIAC believes it bears any responsibility in implementing / drafting such skills assessment guidelines.

 

I look forward to hearing from you and thank you kindly for your help.

 

Regards,

 

Very disappointed to the fact that not only my specific request was ignored but also they appeared to be so off the topic that they did not even touch my question. I am prepared to escalate this case if the next reply from the DIAC still does not answer the question, and I'll keep everyone here updated.

 

Bunch of loosers....they don't even know how to communicate in their own language effectively!

_______________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Guest guanqunc]

guys any news? As they had a crapy election, we may need to wait longer

[Guest hajiyama]

@hajiyama

That's the sort of response I got from DIAC too. Its beyond incompetency. Its indecency.

 

I guess the positive side of this type of useless response is that the more we get, the stronger our cases will be at the Commonwealth Ombudsman. So let’s bombard the DIAC with meaningful enquiries and collect their useless replies to support our case.

I also believe actions against the ACS and DIAC should be taken as soon as the new government is formed.

[Skyrocket]

@hajiyama

That's the sort of response I got from DIAC too. Its beyond incompetency. Its indecency.

 

same here..

[Guest Manj]

Bumping the thread up!!

___________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Guest chajath]

So, where do we go from here.

Any updates/thoughts?

[Guest Manj]

So, where do we go from here.

Any updates/thoughts?

 

Tired of listening to this political fiasco...hope those loosers sort out their governement quickly so we could start the battle (of writting and talking to the minister's) again

________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Guest chajath]

Response from Commonwealth Ombudsman: Have we reached the dead end?

 

Dear Mr Yi

 

I am writing in response to your complaint about the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC). When you contacted our office you raised concerns about the changes announced by DIAC to the skilled migration program.

 

The Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office investigates complaints about the actions of Australian Government agencies. However, under our legislation we cannot investigate the actions and decisions of the Minister, who in this case has required changes be made to the priority of certain visa classes. Therefore there is no action that our office can take to expedite the processing of your application.

 

Changes to the migration program, including priority processing arrangements, have been implemented by DIAC since 1 January 2009, to ensure the Skilled Migration program is targeted and responsive to industry and migration needs within the employment market. The latest announcement, which came into effect from 14 July 2010, gives priority processing to applications in the following order:

1. Applications from people who are employer sponsored under the Employer Nomination Scheme (ENS) and the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme (RSMS).

2. Applications from people who are nominated by a state or territory government agency with a nominated occupation that is specified on that state or territory’s state migration plan.

3. Applications from people who have nominated an occupation on the new Skilled Occupation List (SOL) – Schedule 3 in effect from 1 July 2010.

4. All other applications are to be processed in the order in which they are received.

 

I understand your disappointment that your application remains unfinished, however the priority processing direction applies to all skilled migration applications currently with DIAC for processing, regardless of when the application was lodged or the applicant’s circumstances. This is, at least in part, to simplify an already extremely complex and significant change in the Australian visa system.

 

I also understand your concern regarding the apparent disadvantage of your categorisation, coming as a result of the Australian Computer Society (ACS) releasing a new skill assessment list. Unfortunately, while the ACS does provide information that feeds into governmental processes, is not itself an Australian Government agency, and therefore we do not have jurisdiction to investigate your complaint. If you have not already done so, you may want to contact the ACS to discuss your issue. Their contact details are:

 

Location: PO Box Q534

Queen Victoria Building

Sydney NSW 1230

Phone: 02 9290 3422

Internet: assessment@acs.org.au

 

Further information on the priority processing direction for skilled migration visas and what options are available to assist you can be found on DIAC’s website at the following link: What's New? Recent Changes in General Skilled Migration. For an update on the status of your application, you may wish to contact your DIAC case officer. Information on how to lodge an enquiry to DIAC can be found at the following link: Contact Us - Department of Immigration and Citizenship.

 

Consequently I have decided not to investigate your complaint. I understand that you may be disappointed with this decision, however, I do not consider that investigation of your complaint would result in a different outcome for you and I am closing your complaint.

 

If you have any questions about this decision you can contact me by email on immi_complaints@ombudsman.gov.au. I can give you information about your right to an internal review of my decision if you wish. This information is also available on our website at www.ombudsman.gov.au.

 

You can view a copy of our Service Charter and our brochure Making a complaint to the Ombudsman, which explain the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s role in more detail at http://www.ombudsman.gov.au.

 

Your sincerely

____________________________________

XXXX

COMMONWEALTH OMBUDSMAN

email immi_complaints@ombudsman.gov.au

website www.ombudsman.gov.au

Assisting the Australian community by resolving complaints and fostering good government administration

 

[/Quote]Thank you very much for all those copy and pasted information, that was very informative, indeed.

 

I believe I have exhausted all the venue for seeking administrative measure to rectify the issue. When the July direction has first come out I thought "Oh come on, Australia can't be that bad" but now I think Australia is such place where Ministers are making all sort of absurd directions and for those who gets unfairly disadvantaged? Bad luck.

 

Let's all hope this barbaric government don't get to have a second term.

[Guest hajiyama]

Response from Commonwealth Ombudsman: Have we reached the dead end?

 

Thank you very much for all those copy and pasted information, that was very informative, indeed.

 

I believe I have exhausted all the venue for seeking administrative measure to rectify the issue. When the July direction has first come out I thought "Oh come on, Australia can't be that bad" but now I think Australia is such place where Ministers are making all sort of absurd directions and for those who gets unfairly disadvantaged? Bad luck.

 

Let's all hope this barbaric government don't get to have a second term.

 

Looks like this is a good enough reply to shuffle on the ACS’s face since they told us to talk to DIAC in their last email reply. I personally believe we should concentrate our firing at the ACS since they are the one in charge to develop the PASA guidelines. The reply from the Commonwealth Ombudsman says it loud and clear that the government has nothing to do with developing the PASA guideline. We need to get back to the ACS, shuffle this letter in their face and force them to take responsibilities.

[Guest macbeth4397]

No matter what ACS does , DIAC is the one who has the power and the authority to imply and make rules on duration or estimated visa time line....

 

While I was discussing this issue with my migration lawyer yesterday, she told me about the loop and holes of the system ... No matter what government comes, to clean up the pipeline which consists of thousands of thousands of application, it will take serious amount of lengthy time.. This is because they will not have much of a option....They can not give PR all on a sudden to every one even though those people who made the application, all of them are legitimate when it comes to point system.. second they can not cancel all the application..specially in case of onshore it will have a huge impact on skill migration.......so no matter what government comes this hanging situation in the DIAC table will last for new few years.. They didn't give a toss about us in last three years.. do you really think all on a sudden they will open a charity and start to solve the problem.. they have too many other important issues in their plates....

 

And I think when it comes to IT the root goes goes far beyond 2007.. Even though Telstra is saying there is a shortage of IT skills, employment market is saying there are far too many IT people headhunting for work... None to mention a lot of programming is being outsourced in overseas..We all know without IT now a days even a small business can't survive..But when you apply for a simple job, the math is for a 1 position there will be minimum 100 to 200 resumes.. May be this sort of thing has contributed to not having IT - Recent Graduate not included in old CSL list..

[Guest tyasawa]

One question. Who develop the mapping for 2231-79 published on DIAC website sometime ago? It's a complete nonsense. If whoever responsible acknowledged that there's no definite mapping for 2231-79 and ask us to do reassessment to get properly mapped to ANZSCO, none of this disaster will happen.

 

What exactly can ACS do atm? Even if they changed their PASA Guidelines and we are able to get new assessment, there is no way to update our "nominated occupation" anyway since DIAC say so..... unless we apply for new visa off course. We need both DIAC and ACS to do something about this

 

I'm waiting for SMP so once again I can get my hope crushed. Rather than hoping for PR, I'm hoping to get the injustice done to 2231-79 heard and acknowledged. I don't really want to stay here that much now.

[User Name]

I also understand your concern regarding the apparent disadvantage of your categorisation, coming as a result of the Australian Computer Society (ACS) releasing a new skill assessment list. Unfortunately, while the ACS does provide information that feeds into governmental processes, is not itself an Australian Government agency, and therefore we do not have jurisdiction to investigate your complaint. If you have not already done so, you may want to contact the ACS to discuss your issue. Their contact details are:

 

Location: PO Box Q534

Queen Victoria Building

Sydney NSW 1230

Phone: 02 9290 3422 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 02 9290 3422 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Internet: assessment@acs.org.au

 

Just speechless. It's really a dead end. Let's see how they reply to Jeffster's one. Wouldn't make much difference since its the same a$$hole that is dealing with it.

[User Name]

ACS did/does the following:

 

1) Create the PASA guideline such as group A, B and C

2) Assess people into these groups by skills and qualification and if allocate them the ANZSCO/ASCO

 

Thats it, they dont do anything else. Hence they are not responsible for:

 

1) Drafting of ANZSCO/ASCO

2) Putting post-July IT grads before pre-July ones

 

Any attack on ACS is a complete waste of time regardless what that ombudsman or DIAC or anyone says.

[Guest chajath]

Any attack on ACS is a complete waste of time regardless what that ombudsman or DIAC or anyone says.

 

I tend to agree. So yeah, where do we go, I think it will only be clear to us after this hung parliament thing is settled. Let's wait and see.

 

I am pretty much devastated by how none of those complaints were even heard by the relative official at a certain rank. Or, perhaps no one is accountable for the thing we are going through, since the Gov't structure is so that every official can blame others and we end up finding no one to blame.

 

*sigh* but let's not get so dispirited by this, may I suggest. Seems like there will certainly be the change in Minister for Immigration, which opens up a tiny little window for change.

[User Name]

Hi Chajath, I would really respond in the following way:

 

Dear Ombudsman,

 

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately you have not understood the nature of the problem and I have the right to have my complain investigated not sidelined due to your lack of knowledge of the Immigration process pertaining to IT graduates.

 

Before you reply to this email, I urge you not to:

 

1) Copy and paste information from DIAC as I have read and understood all publicly available relevant information before submitting my complaint

2) Instruct me to contact another Government department or independent Agency who are not responsible

 

Firstly, the Australian Computer Society is not responsible for drafting of the ASCO/ANZSCO classification. DIAC and more specifically The minister of Immigration Chris Evans is responsible for that. Hence who goes to Category 3 and who doesn't is not a decision by ACS.

 

Secondly, this is a major issues since all IT graduates. DIAC, through their incompetent classification of IT occupation put pre July 2010 in category 4 while post-July 2010 IT graduates are in category 3. Since Category 4 will be processed after all of category 1, 2 and 3 is processed it means all post-July 2010 IT graduates will have their PR visas processed before pre-July 2010 IT graduates.

 

DIAC and Minister's office has been contacted and their lame explanation is that IT graduates are in over supply. My question is, if thats is the case why not put all (Pre and post July 2010) IT graduates in category 4? Minister's office and DIAC had no further explanation and resorted to the same cut and paste information as you have done as well.

 

Thirdly, the Australian Computer Society (ACS) has been contacted despite the fact that this issue is not of their making. The ACS has relayed me the same message that their responsibility is to classify applicants in the ASCO/ANZSCO classification system devised by DIAC and urged me to contact them instead.

 

Personally I am absolutely annoyed and sick of this buck passing but I do accept ACS's response that they are not responsible as they do not make the priority processing arrangement and they did not invent the ASCO/ANZSCO classification.

 

Lastly, it is your role as Ombudsman to investigate all complaint relating to government department/agency that has not been resolved via directly contacting the relevant authority. This is a major unresolved issue that not only affects me but thousand others who have lodged a valid visa application.

 

Therefore I urge you to reopen my case and investigate the problem. If you would like to contact me about this please feel free to do so.

 

Regards,

 

[Your name]

 

____________________________________________________

 

 

Unfortunately this lazy bum is our last option before declaring its dead end. So its worth fighting back. If you want to reply to him, feel free to modify the letter above. That is how I would tackle him - slowly get tough with him to get his ass off his seat.

[User Name]

Basically the idea is to let him know that you did your research and you know more than him. That way he wont treat you like a complete idiot and he'll figure out that instead of trying to cut corners with you he might as well tackle the problem and get it over and done with.

[Guest chajath]

Basically the idea is to let him know that you did your research and you know more than him. That way he wont treat you like a complete idiot and he'll figure out that instead of trying to cut corners with you he might as well tackle the problem and get it over and done with.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. Yeah. I can always make complaint to them rejecting my complaint against DIAC... whoa.... will see what I can do.

[Guest chajath]

So I've seen from other threads that ICT Recent Grads are actually getting those codes on the new SOL. Australian migration, what a screw up. Seriously.

[Skyrocket]

So I've seen from other threads that ICT Recent Grads are actually getting those codes on the new SOL. Australian migration, what a screw up. Seriously.

 

A friend of mine who finished the same course I did a year ago, got her assessment as developer programmer in 3 weeks, so they are getting the assessments pretty fast too...

[User Name]

Sometimes I think that corrupt third world governments which runs on bribes are better in the sense that there is no such thing as "dead end" because if you have the money you get things done. Unlike here where playing by the rules = kicking yourself further in the queue.

[Guest chajath]

I have asked the ombudsman deadline for appeal to the decision (that they won't look into my case) and they told me I have three months to appeal. I think it will be best to wait till the new government is formed (hopefully by the Coalition) and see what are they going to do about this mess first. If things are not going anywhere, then I might appeal to the Ombudsman's decision.

 

It's not a dead end.... yet!

[Guest Manj]

Got back from hospital today....Guys have I missed anything?

 

_______________________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

[Skyrocket]

Got back from hospital today....Guys have I missed anything?

 

_______________________________________________________

CAT (4), 885 applied 2008 AUG, ICT - Recent graduate NEC, IELTS 8.0, NAATI qualified, Currently employed as a ICT Project Officer

 

Nothing much, IT graduates that passed out in July are indeed getting the new ANZCO codes and thus moving up to category 3 in the skilled processing. What happened to u btw ?