457 visa FOs started at QantasLink
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to the fact it seems 2 guys have 457 for QL, we will have to agree to disagree.
"One would think the word `relevant’ (bearing upon or connected with the matter in hand; pertinent) is highly descriptive, accurate and specific particularly when related to the word `positions’ when the positions to be filled is that of pilots including pilots to fly a particular aircraft.
it would certainly be held as such within a court of law."
I think we also need to agree to disagree on how our legal system works and what would be upheld. I think a fancy Lawyer would have no problem convincing a court that any Pilot training would be classed as "relevant" and look we even has several Check and "Training" pilots employed full time your Honour.
They are employing a "pilot" they have and do give training to pilots already employed.
I have personal experiences with DIBP in relation to with 24 visa applications including 7 refused visas and have dealt with several Registered Migration Agents and am fully aware of what you have copied and pasted - just none of it on paper or in practice states if you apply for a 457 for a Captain position on a Dash 8 -400 then your training must be for that position.
"One would think the word `relevant’ (bearing upon or connected with the matter in hand; pertinent) is highly descriptive, accurate and specific particularly when related to the word `positions’ when the positions to be filled is that of pilots including pilots to fly a particular aircraft.
it would certainly be held as such within a court of law."
I think we also need to agree to disagree on how our legal system works and what would be upheld. I think a fancy Lawyer would have no problem convincing a court that any Pilot training would be classed as "relevant" and look we even has several Check and "Training" pilots employed full time your Honour.
They are employing a "pilot" they have and do give training to pilots already employed.
I have personal experiences with DIBP in relation to with 24 visa applications including 7 refused visas and have dealt with several Registered Migration Agents and am fully aware of what you have copied and pasted - just none of it on paper or in practice states if you apply for a 457 for a Captain position on a Dash 8 -400 then your training must be for that position.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The training benchmarks for an established business are:
A) Recent expenditure, by the business, to the equivalent of at least 2% of the payroll of the business, in payments allocated to an industry training fund that operates in the same industry as the business. {this could be a training fund for Jetstar and still comply}
OR
B) Recent expenditure, by the business, to the equivalent of at least 1% of the payroll of the business, in the provision of training to employees of the business.
Expenditure that can count towards this benchmark includes:
· employment of a person who trains the business’s Australian employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents as a key part of their job.
Like Check and Training Captains
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2013L01236
http://migrationblog.border.gov.au/2...457-employers/
A) Recent expenditure, by the business, to the equivalent of at least 2% of the payroll of the business, in payments allocated to an industry training fund that operates in the same industry as the business. {this could be a training fund for Jetstar and still comply}
OR
B) Recent expenditure, by the business, to the equivalent of at least 1% of the payroll of the business, in the provision of training to employees of the business.
Expenditure that can count towards this benchmark includes:
· employment of a person who trains the business’s Australian employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents as a key part of their job.
Like Check and Training Captains
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2013L01236
http://migrationblog.border.gov.au/2...457-employers/
Last edited by Band a Lot; 25th Sep 2016 at 08:23. Reason: extra link
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CCMS the responding person Nick is a Registered Migration Agent since some time in 2006 (first 2 digits of licence number is year they got licence)
So he has about 10 years in this visa field and is a professional in the field including 457 visa's.
457 visa and trainning requirement.
So he has about 10 years in this visa field and is a professional in the field including 457 visa's.
457 visa and trainning requirement.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
`The relevant instrument is fairly general, but I don't believe the training is limited to the actual nominated position only. After all, the training requirement is linked to the sponsorship, not to individual nominations/visa applications.
The business is required to show that the training that has been, and continues to be, provided to employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents is related to the purpose of the business.’
a) He states he `believes’: belief is not a statement of fact.
b) ` the training requirement is linked to the sponsorship, not to individual nominations/visa applications’: The sponsorship as would be the advertising for the positions, is linked directly to the requirement for pilots in a specified position i.e. in the case mentioned Dash 7 Captains.
c) Yes, the airlines do train pilots and it has been/is the norm, standard practice airlines to train pilots to upgrade to Captain and transition to different types.
As this is/has been standard Australian and worldwide practice it can be successfully argued that training for these positions should be considered as meeting the training requirements.
`Training Australian workers: an obligation for 457 employers
Since 1 July 2013, the training obligation takes this a step further by requiring businesses in the programme to continue contributing to the training of Australians for the entire time they are approved as a sponsor and employ 457 visa holders.’
`The business is required to show that the training that has been, and continues to be, provided to employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents is related to the purpose of the business.
Expenditure that can count towards this benchmark includes:
• on-the-job training that is structured with a timeframe and clearly identified increase in the skills at each stage, and demonstrating:
BaL:
I suggest you need to fully need to state/clarify your position?
Reading through your posts you indicate you are an Australian citizen however your posts tend to indicate due to personal experience (satisfactory & unsatisfactory) you have an axe to grind with the Immigration and Border Protection Department and Australian Immigration Laws?
Therefore, you would rather see the breaking down of Australian Immigration Laws and not have Australian Citizens protected?
The 457 Visa intent and purpose is to provide for the employment of non-Australian citizens where it can be demonstrated there not any, or insufficient qualified Australian Citizens available to fill these employment positions.
The intent and purpose further qualifies Australian citizens must be given every opportunity to apply for and/or be trained for these positions.
The 457 Visa system is specifically designed to allow an employer to source workers from overseas where it can be positively established and shown such workers are not available within Australia. Additionally it should be shown training programs are in place to train qualified Australians to fill any positions.
To participate and use this system it is incumbent upon an employer to meet with specified obligations ensuring no Australian citizen is disadvantaged or the working conditions/salary are not significantly less than would/should be available to an Australian citizen.
There is no dispute or argument the 457 Visa process is a legitimate procedure; it is well understood this contributes to ensure positive growth and progress within Australian industry however, when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers with Australian Citizens seriously disadvantaged in their Home country it is incumbent upon the relevant Federal Government Department or regulatory authority to comprehensively, forensically investigate such industry and take full, proper, positive, prompt action.
If Australian citizens e.g. in this case pilots (including Bal), are not prepared to stand to ensuring the Parliament, their elected representatives fully protect Australian Citizens, protect Australian jobs then the total system will break down, there will be not be employment protection of any type.
An open door policy will prevail which has already demonstrated the significant disastrous economic cost.
It is your employment in peril!
The business is required to show that the training that has been, and continues to be, provided to employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents is related to the purpose of the business.’
a) He states he `believes’: belief is not a statement of fact.
b) ` the training requirement is linked to the sponsorship, not to individual nominations/visa applications’: The sponsorship as would be the advertising for the positions, is linked directly to the requirement for pilots in a specified position i.e. in the case mentioned Dash 7 Captains.
c) Yes, the airlines do train pilots and it has been/is the norm, standard practice airlines to train pilots to upgrade to Captain and transition to different types.
As this is/has been standard Australian and worldwide practice it can be successfully argued that training for these positions should be considered as meeting the training requirements.
`Training Australian workers: an obligation for 457 employers
Since 1 July 2013, the training obligation takes this a step further by requiring businesses in the programme to continue contributing to the training of Australians for the entire time they are approved as a sponsor and employ 457 visa holders.’
`The business is required to show that the training that has been, and continues to be, provided to employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents is related to the purpose of the business.
Expenditure that can count towards this benchmark includes:
• on-the-job training that is structured with a timeframe and clearly identified increase in the skills at each stage, and demonstrating:
- the learning outcomes of the employee at each stage;
- how the progress of the employee will be monitored and assessed;
- how the program will provide additional and enhanced skills;
- the use of qualified trainers to develop the program and set assessments; and
- the number of people participating and their skill/occupation’
BaL:
I suggest you need to fully need to state/clarify your position?
Reading through your posts you indicate you are an Australian citizen however your posts tend to indicate due to personal experience (satisfactory & unsatisfactory) you have an axe to grind with the Immigration and Border Protection Department and Australian Immigration Laws?
Therefore, you would rather see the breaking down of Australian Immigration Laws and not have Australian Citizens protected?
The 457 Visa intent and purpose is to provide for the employment of non-Australian citizens where it can be demonstrated there not any, or insufficient qualified Australian Citizens available to fill these employment positions.
The intent and purpose further qualifies Australian citizens must be given every opportunity to apply for and/or be trained for these positions.
The 457 Visa system is specifically designed to allow an employer to source workers from overseas where it can be positively established and shown such workers are not available within Australia. Additionally it should be shown training programs are in place to train qualified Australians to fill any positions.
To participate and use this system it is incumbent upon an employer to meet with specified obligations ensuring no Australian citizen is disadvantaged or the working conditions/salary are not significantly less than would/should be available to an Australian citizen.
There is no dispute or argument the 457 Visa process is a legitimate procedure; it is well understood this contributes to ensure positive growth and progress within Australian industry however, when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers with Australian Citizens seriously disadvantaged in their Home country it is incumbent upon the relevant Federal Government Department or regulatory authority to comprehensively, forensically investigate such industry and take full, proper, positive, prompt action.
If Australian citizens e.g. in this case pilots (including Bal), are not prepared to stand to ensuring the Parliament, their elected representatives fully protect Australian Citizens, protect Australian jobs then the total system will break down, there will be not be employment protection of any type.
An open door policy will prevail which has already demonstrated the significant disastrous economic cost.
It is your employment in peril!
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BaL:
I suggest you need to fully need to state/clarify your position?
Reading through your posts you indicate you are an Australian citizen however your posts tend to indicate due to personal experience (satisfactory & unsatisfactory) you have an axe to grind with the Immigration and Border Protection Department and Australian Immigration Laws?
*Yes Australian citizen and yes issues with DIBP like being told to leave a 10 year old kid behind to get a visa.
Therefore, you would rather see the breaking down of Australian Immigration Laws and not have Australian Citizens protected?
I do not agree with some of DIBP laws or am I against protecting our citizens. I am simply saying
* 457 visa holders CAN NOT be paid less than an Australian doing the same job/company - people that don't get this will never understand anything.
* Current laws and policy are what must be followed - not wishes or intentions of how law was meant to work in practice.
* It is about impossible to have a law that everybody in everyway intended, someone always gets it worse than others.
I would love to show you PAM3 (Procedures Advice Manual 3) but it is a very secret document/book it contains policy on Immigration law for use by DIBP staff and it is a one size fits all. State library in NSW and Vic have a copy as do 4 universities according to a website, all obsolete I assume.
PAM3 the parts I have seen give statements on what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. It was amended some months back in 457 training section to exclude commissions paid by training companies for referrals, Rumour had it was as much as 40% commission.
"To meet the requirements of Training Benchmark A, the applicant can show evidence of having made a contribution to a recognised scholarship fund that is operated by an Australian university or TAFE college. The scholarship fund should support education or training for Australian citizens or permanent residents in a course related to the business of the applicant, with no percentage of the contributions being allocated to commissions."
from a mate in the know:-
Thebusiness is required to show that the training that has been, and continues tobe, provided to employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanentresidents is related to the purpose of the business.
13/030 - specification of training benchmarks and training requirements (regs2.59(d), 2.68(e), 2.87B(2), 2.87B(3) and 5.19(4)(h)(i)(B)(I))
Training can take all sort of forms. There is a lot of info on it in therelevant parts of the PAMs. Both the nominated position and the training wouldbe relevant to the business, but training expenditure could also includetraining of staff in supporting/ admin roles etc. , general health and safetyand many other things.
The law is fine but it is policy that needs changing to include wording similar to that of Fiji I posted before. I seem to remember special equipment assumedly with persons to operate them were flown in for the rescue at Beaconsfield will still need an out clause for some things.
Policy is a thing easier for members of government can easier lobby for change than put it on the floor of parliament.
I suggest you need to fully need to state/clarify your position?
Reading through your posts you indicate you are an Australian citizen however your posts tend to indicate due to personal experience (satisfactory & unsatisfactory) you have an axe to grind with the Immigration and Border Protection Department and Australian Immigration Laws?
*Yes Australian citizen and yes issues with DIBP like being told to leave a 10 year old kid behind to get a visa.
Therefore, you would rather see the breaking down of Australian Immigration Laws and not have Australian Citizens protected?
I do not agree with some of DIBP laws or am I against protecting our citizens. I am simply saying
* 457 visa holders CAN NOT be paid less than an Australian doing the same job/company - people that don't get this will never understand anything.
* Current laws and policy are what must be followed - not wishes or intentions of how law was meant to work in practice.
* It is about impossible to have a law that everybody in everyway intended, someone always gets it worse than others.
I would love to show you PAM3 (Procedures Advice Manual 3) but it is a very secret document/book it contains policy on Immigration law for use by DIBP staff and it is a one size fits all. State library in NSW and Vic have a copy as do 4 universities according to a website, all obsolete I assume.
PAM3 the parts I have seen give statements on what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. It was amended some months back in 457 training section to exclude commissions paid by training companies for referrals, Rumour had it was as much as 40% commission.
"To meet the requirements of Training Benchmark A, the applicant can show evidence of having made a contribution to a recognised scholarship fund that is operated by an Australian university or TAFE college. The scholarship fund should support education or training for Australian citizens or permanent residents in a course related to the business of the applicant, with no percentage of the contributions being allocated to commissions."
from a mate in the know:-
Thebusiness is required to show that the training that has been, and continues tobe, provided to employees who are Australian citizens and Australian permanentresidents is related to the purpose of the business.
13/030 - specification of training benchmarks and training requirements (regs2.59(d), 2.68(e), 2.87B(2), 2.87B(3) and 5.19(4)(h)(i)(B)(I))
Training can take all sort of forms. There is a lot of info on it in therelevant parts of the PAMs. Both the nominated position and the training wouldbe relevant to the business, but training expenditure could also includetraining of staff in supporting/ admin roles etc. , general health and safetyand many other things.
The law is fine but it is policy that needs changing to include wording similar to that of Fiji I posted before. I seem to remember special equipment assumedly with persons to operate them were flown in for the rescue at Beaconsfield will still need an out clause for some things.
Policy is a thing easier for members of government can easier lobby for change than put it on the floor of parliament.
Last edited by Band a Lot; 26th Sep 2016 at 05:24.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
`457 visa holders CAN NOT be paid less than an Australian doing the same job/company - people that don't get this will never understand anything.’
I have not mentioned anything about payment however, similar to all the other Legislation/Rules quoted/cut & pasted the rules are as equally specific: aliens granted a 457 Visa shall not be paid less than an Australian citizen and there should be in place workplace agreements.
In accepting and quoting the Legislation/rules about payment as they are writ why then are all the other Legislation/rules not accepted as writ?
Selective discussion ploy
`Current laws and policy are what must be followed - not wishes or intentions of how law was meant to work in practice’
Have I argued anything but? All I have quoted is essentially a direct cut & paste from the Department – intention, wishes is exactly what you have argued due to disagreement with application of the law or results of application of the law or rules.
`The law is fine but it is policy that needs changing to include wording similar to that of Fiji I posted before. I seem to remember special equipment assumedly with persons to operate them were flown in for the rescue at Beaconsfield will still need an out clause for some things. ‘
Totally irrelevant: What the laws are in other countries has no bearing upon the laws here: equally the Beaconsfield illustration is irrelevant – a special case covered under entirely different Legislation/Rule – another diversionary tactic.
`when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers’
This is precisely what is happening not just in QL but other companies/employers within the Australian aviation industry: any employer can set about devising a plausible ruse to circumvent this legislation and unless exposed and investigated Australian citizens are seriously disadvantaged within their own Country.
I will say it again:
The 457 Visa system is specifically designed to allow an employer to source workers from overseas where it can be positively established and shown such workers are not available within Australia. Additionally it should be shown training programs are in place to train qualified Australians to fill any positions.
To participate and use this system it is incumbent upon an employer to meet with specified obligations ensuring no Australian citizen is disadvantaged or the working conditions/salary are not significantly less than would/should be available to an Australian citizen.
There is no dispute or argument the 457 Visa process is a legitimate procedure; it is well understood this contributes to ensure positive growth and progress within Australian industry however, when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers with Australian Citizens seriously disadvantaged in their Home country it is incumbent upon the relevant Federal Government Department or regulatory authority to comprehensively, forensically investigate such industry and take full, proper, positive, prompt action.
If Australian citizens e.g. in this case pilots (including Bal), are not prepared to stand to ensuring the Parliament, their elected representatives fully protect Australian Citizens, protect Australian jobs then the total system will break down, there will be not be employment protection of any type.
An open door policy will prevail which has already demonstrated the significant disastrous economic cost.
It is your employment in peril!
I have not mentioned anything about payment however, similar to all the other Legislation/Rules quoted/cut & pasted the rules are as equally specific: aliens granted a 457 Visa shall not be paid less than an Australian citizen and there should be in place workplace agreements.
In accepting and quoting the Legislation/rules about payment as they are writ why then are all the other Legislation/rules not accepted as writ?
Selective discussion ploy
`Current laws and policy are what must be followed - not wishes or intentions of how law was meant to work in practice’
Have I argued anything but? All I have quoted is essentially a direct cut & paste from the Department – intention, wishes is exactly what you have argued due to disagreement with application of the law or results of application of the law or rules.
`The law is fine but it is policy that needs changing to include wording similar to that of Fiji I posted before. I seem to remember special equipment assumedly with persons to operate them were flown in for the rescue at Beaconsfield will still need an out clause for some things. ‘
Totally irrelevant: What the laws are in other countries has no bearing upon the laws here: equally the Beaconsfield illustration is irrelevant – a special case covered under entirely different Legislation/Rule – another diversionary tactic.
`when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers’
This is precisely what is happening not just in QL but other companies/employers within the Australian aviation industry: any employer can set about devising a plausible ruse to circumvent this legislation and unless exposed and investigated Australian citizens are seriously disadvantaged within their own Country.
I will say it again:
The 457 Visa system is specifically designed to allow an employer to source workers from overseas where it can be positively established and shown such workers are not available within Australia. Additionally it should be shown training programs are in place to train qualified Australians to fill any positions.
To participate and use this system it is incumbent upon an employer to meet with specified obligations ensuring no Australian citizen is disadvantaged or the working conditions/salary are not significantly less than would/should be available to an Australian citizen.
There is no dispute or argument the 457 Visa process is a legitimate procedure; it is well understood this contributes to ensure positive growth and progress within Australian industry however, when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers with Australian Citizens seriously disadvantaged in their Home country it is incumbent upon the relevant Federal Government Department or regulatory authority to comprehensively, forensically investigate such industry and take full, proper, positive, prompt action.
If Australian citizens e.g. in this case pilots (including Bal), are not prepared to stand to ensuring the Parliament, their elected representatives fully protect Australian Citizens, protect Australian jobs then the total system will break down, there will be not be employment protection of any type.
An open door policy will prevail which has already demonstrated the significant disastrous economic cost.
It is your employment in peril!
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The law isnot being broken, if it is then just take your cut and paste and useinformation supplied by StudentInDEBT.
How do I report migration fraud?
If you suspect someone ofmigration fraud and want to tell us about it, you can:
telephone the Immigration Dob-in Service on 1800009 623
1800009 623Â FREE—if you need help with your English we can get an interpreter
fill out the Immigration Dob-in Service Online Report
fax your report to 1800 009 8491800009 849Â FREE
post your report to:
Information Collection Unit
Department of Border Protection
GPO Box 241
Melbourne VIC 3001
go to any Australian office of the department and make a report in person.
I hope you keep us all informed - I simply stated wording use by a country,same wording Australia should use - then much of what you have posted would becorrect. I find that funny!
Current wording of everything you posted is "interpretable" much likeCASA regs.
Ever know CASA to be wrong? CASA are saints compared DIBP got a bigger budgettoo.
One simple Question and just a short answer please>>>>>
If it is not cheaper (in fact more expensive) to employ a 457 Visa holder compared to a Australian Citizen - Why would company/s employ 457 personal? Must be a reason/s.
Answers along the lines of erode pay and conditions would be laughable given DIBP in strike mode for next 2 week because 3 year ongoing pay and conditions dispute.
How do I report migration fraud?
If you suspect someone ofmigration fraud and want to tell us about it, you can:
telephone the Immigration Dob-in Service on 1800009 623
fill out the Immigration Dob-in Service Online Report
fax your report to 1800 009 849
post your report to:
Information Collection Unit
Department of Border Protection
GPO Box 241
Melbourne VIC 3001
go to any Australian office of the department and make a report in person.
I hope you keep us all informed - I simply stated wording use by a country,same wording Australia should use - then much of what you have posted would becorrect. I find that funny!
Current wording of everything you posted is "interpretable" much likeCASA regs.
Ever know CASA to be wrong? CASA are saints compared DIBP got a bigger budgettoo.
One simple Question and just a short answer please>>>>>
If it is not cheaper (in fact more expensive) to employ a 457 Visa holder compared to a Australian Citizen - Why would company/s employ 457 personal? Must be a reason/s.
Answers along the lines of erode pay and conditions would be laughable given DIBP in strike mode for next 2 week because 3 year ongoing pay and conditions dispute.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reported over 9 months ago; awaiting a decision.
We are not talking about the wording of another country or what, in one’s opinion, should be used; it is entirely about the way the law is currently laid down here.
I totally disagree all is interpretable including CASA regs; the moment anyone starts interpreting law, regulations, SOPs, etc. we immediately have problems deciding the law and in particular standardisation, it just disappears.
(CASA to be wrong: the question answers itself)
Employers, certainly the more unscrupulous ones, do consider there are significant cost savings to be found using 457 visa employees particularly when they undertake a long term view. It is not difficult to provide an appearance of legitimacy and compliance with 457 visa regulations with the aim of circumvention.
457 visa employees are always under threat of withdrawal of sponsorship therefore need to toe the employer line.
SA new hires are desperate to find another country they can live in and will work for a wage considered acceptable enabling escape from SA. (plays into the hands of employers)
The 457 Visa system is specifically designed to allow an employer to source workers from overseas where it can be positively established and shown such workers are not available within Australia. Additionally it should be shown training programs are in place to train qualified Australians to fill any positions.
To participate and use this system it is incumbent upon an employer to meet with specified obligations ensuring no Australian citizen is disadvantaged or the working conditions/salary are not significantly less than would/should be available to an Australian citizen.
First and foremost we should be fully dedicated to protecting Australian employment.
Surprisingly there has been little comment from any directly affected?
Nor does there seem to be recognition by others who may well be affected if use of this i allowed to g unchecked?
We are not talking about the wording of another country or what, in one’s opinion, should be used; it is entirely about the way the law is currently laid down here.
I totally disagree all is interpretable including CASA regs; the moment anyone starts interpreting law, regulations, SOPs, etc. we immediately have problems deciding the law and in particular standardisation, it just disappears.
(CASA to be wrong: the question answers itself)
Employers, certainly the more unscrupulous ones, do consider there are significant cost savings to be found using 457 visa employees particularly when they undertake a long term view. It is not difficult to provide an appearance of legitimacy and compliance with 457 visa regulations with the aim of circumvention.
457 visa employees are always under threat of withdrawal of sponsorship therefore need to toe the employer line.
SA new hires are desperate to find another country they can live in and will work for a wage considered acceptable enabling escape from SA. (plays into the hands of employers)
The 457 Visa system is specifically designed to allow an employer to source workers from overseas where it can be positively established and shown such workers are not available within Australia. Additionally it should be shown training programs are in place to train qualified Australians to fill any positions.
To participate and use this system it is incumbent upon an employer to meet with specified obligations ensuring no Australian citizen is disadvantaged or the working conditions/salary are not significantly less than would/should be available to an Australian citizen.
First and foremost we should be fully dedicated to protecting Australian employment.
Surprisingly there has been little comment from any directly affected?
Nor does there seem to be recognition by others who may well be affected if use of this i allowed to g unchecked?
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Perth
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I don't see the fuss about the visa issues how many ozi pilots are working overseas"
Yes, majority I'd say are working for airlines hiring EXPATs or working for an airline in a country where they have a dual citizenship.
Recently spoke to former colleagues who worked up north and have said that the pilot I have mentioned WAS on a WHV with the same employer for more than 6 month because apparently if it's casual you can. Now, I'm not saying that's the law but it is what happened.
I agree with you Band a Lot that it is more expensive or an employer to sponsor an applicant because they need to pay them the same amount as an Australian, plus fees involved with the application. To be approved they need to show evidence that they are not enough Australians to fill the positions.
Yes, majority I'd say are working for airlines hiring EXPATs or working for an airline in a country where they have a dual citizenship.
Recently spoke to former colleagues who worked up north and have said that the pilot I have mentioned WAS on a WHV with the same employer for more than 6 month because apparently if it's casual you can. Now, I'm not saying that's the law but it is what happened.
I agree with you Band a Lot that it is more expensive or an employer to sponsor an applicant because they need to pay them the same amount as an Australian, plus fees involved with the application. To be approved they need to show evidence that they are not enough Australians to fill the positions.
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Joburg
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting perspectives on this thread.I am from SA Express and know both the guys personally who have joined Qlink.I can assure you that they are very experienced.One of them in particular is surely a great loss to us.His expertise and intellect has given our airline a much needed transformation.He has held very high positions in our airline.To put the record straight.They took the positions because for some reason or other they wanted to come to OZ.There were many guys(close to 20) offered the positions,but declined.South Africa is not the place where every white man is desperate to get out.It is a fantastic place to live and our freedoms are unquantifiable.Some of the reasons the guys gave for declining the offer was because of superior lifestyle that they live in SA.Some thought the salary at Qlink was ridiculous.The two genet,mean who are there now had their reasons for going and we would never know unless you ask them.Perhaps they have extended family there and want the opportunity to be close to them.Perhaps they wanted a challenge.
Moderator
The 2016 - 2017 Skilled Occupation List has been announced by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection:
Want to migrate to Australia? 2016-17 Skilled Occupations List (SOL) announced | SBS Your Language
Aeroplane Pilot is 231111. Helicopter Pilot is 231114. Neither are on the Federal Government Skilled Occupation List.
Aeroplane pilot ANZSCO Code 231111 may be eligible for a General Skilled Visa Sub Class 189 in the Northern Territory and West Australia and is on the South Australia "Supplementary Skilled List" or "Special Conditions Apply" List.
https://www.anzscosearch.com/search/
Want to migrate to Australia? 2016-17 Skilled Occupations List (SOL) announced | SBS Your Language
Aeroplane Pilot is 231111. Helicopter Pilot is 231114. Neither are on the Federal Government Skilled Occupation List.
Aeroplane pilot ANZSCO Code 231111 may be eligible for a General Skilled Visa Sub Class 189 in the Northern Territory and West Australia and is on the South Australia "Supplementary Skilled List" or "Special Conditions Apply" List.
https://www.anzscosearch.com/search/
Just a quick correction as the table in the anzscosearch website is a bit misleading. Aeroplane Pilot is not eligible for general skilled migration (189 visa) in those states, instead it is eligible for nominated (190) or regional provisional (489) visas.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QLink was up here in YVR (Vancouver, Canada) doing some sim evaluations and interviews for Direct Entry FO's.
Attached is presentation they gave to each candidate.
For your interest....
Attached is presentation they gave to each candidate.
For your interest....
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The abilities, qualification or professionalism of the pilots from SA taking up 457 Visa positions with QLink is not questioned.
Why many, many are leaving SA is a decision each and every individual has to make but of the over 60 or more pilots from SA I have had an association with, some taking 457 visa positions here or others going to work elsewhere, the overwhelming, individual majority decision for their leaving was they considered SA is no longer a place, certainly a safe place, for them to live. This also included some black men.
Living in SA or the politics, policies of SA are not the reason for this thread nor are employment of Australian pilots overseas.
The recruitment pack from QLink clarifies, justifies and confirms all which has been written here where the jobs of Australian pilots are under serious assault.
Airlines, operator management, with the exception of managerial remuneration, are not philanthropically inclined and whilst on the surface it may appear more expensive to hire pilots under 457 visa arrangements in depth analysis or long term objectives will show otherwise.
The apathy, indifference, inaction by those whose promotion, upgrading and jobs are at stake is a serious concern. Equally concerning is the diversionary, irrelevant discussion of working rules in other countries and about Australian pilots working there.
457 visas apply only in Australia, to Australian jobs; there is no dispute or argument the 457 Visa process is a legitimate procedure; it is well understood this contributes to ensure positive growth and progress within Australian industry however, when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers with Australian Citizens seriously disadvantaged in their Home country it is incumbent upon the relevant Federal Government Department or regulatory authority to comprehensively, forensically investigate such industry and take full, proper, positive, prompt action. Equally, those whose jobs are in danger should get of their asses taking some positive action.
Dining room table, bar oratory and PPrune discussion may all be highly entertaining but achieves little.
When your upgrade, job is not available it will be too late.
Why many, many are leaving SA is a decision each and every individual has to make but of the over 60 or more pilots from SA I have had an association with, some taking 457 visa positions here or others going to work elsewhere, the overwhelming, individual majority decision for their leaving was they considered SA is no longer a place, certainly a safe place, for them to live. This also included some black men.
Living in SA or the politics, policies of SA are not the reason for this thread nor are employment of Australian pilots overseas.
The recruitment pack from QLink clarifies, justifies and confirms all which has been written here where the jobs of Australian pilots are under serious assault.
Airlines, operator management, with the exception of managerial remuneration, are not philanthropically inclined and whilst on the surface it may appear more expensive to hire pilots under 457 visa arrangements in depth analysis or long term objectives will show otherwise.
The apathy, indifference, inaction by those whose promotion, upgrading and jobs are at stake is a serious concern. Equally concerning is the diversionary, irrelevant discussion of working rules in other countries and about Australian pilots working there.
457 visas apply only in Australia, to Australian jobs; there is no dispute or argument the 457 Visa process is a legitimate procedure; it is well understood this contributes to ensure positive growth and progress within Australian industry however, when a system is abused, attempted to be rorted or circumvented by unscrupulous employers with Australian Citizens seriously disadvantaged in their Home country it is incumbent upon the relevant Federal Government Department or regulatory authority to comprehensively, forensically investigate such industry and take full, proper, positive, prompt action. Equally, those whose jobs are in danger should get of their asses taking some positive action.
Dining room table, bar oratory and PPrune discussion may all be highly entertaining but achieves little.
When your upgrade, job is not available it will be too late.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regardless of the various cries of there are Aussies in all sorts of countries across the world, the 457 visa program is supposedly intended to only allow experienced workers in a selected range of fields entry into Australia only if a test has been applied that
demonstrated that there were no suitable applicants from within Australia.
Skywest did it with the ATR introduction for a bunch of experienced ATR crew and the hook there was there were very few experienced pilots with ATR time and it was a new type and therefore a cadre of experienced pilots was necessary for the introduction.
I don't think that reasoning could be applied to the QantasLink case and given that they have a well established check and training system experienced in training all manner of pilots, including cadets with sod all total time on the Dash, then I can't see the justification for allowing the 457 visas.
With regards Aussies in different countries, most of the countries are ones where the pilots are needed not wanted and they would give the expat pilots the push with the blink of an eye of they could.
Many are in Europe and a much smaller number in the US as a result of family ties that give them passports/right of residency in the respective countries and they have to do all the licensing like normal residents. No free passes in the easa system even for experienced pilots, so for those that went to those countries they worked for it, so good on them.
The US is easier from a licensing perspective but more difficult from an immigration perspective. Even more difficult from a seniority perspective. From what I read on another thread, if you don't have an aviation related bachelors degree you need 12 years of relevant industry experience to qualify for an E3 view, which I gather from my non existent research
is the US equivalent to our 457. Because of the way the industry works there you are not going to get much credit for your experience in terms of the positions available to you, so you start at the bottom of the list like everyone else and get **** money and **** rosters working for the regional feeders into the mainline carriers and work your way up from there. In fairness it is
probably much the same as here in many ways except the salaries paid here are much more substantial than those paid to 'junior' pilots in the US.
I would love to go and be a wide body airbus captain in Europe and take the family and see out my career there but it just ain't going to happen. I don't have the family heritage that gets me an EU passport, I couldn't be arsed doing all the subjects again, and starting as a FO again, so it just ain't going to happen for me, but there are those that are happy to take the bucks in China and not sure why the sandpit is attractive other than shiny wide body aeroplanes but people go there too, but make no mistake if the Chinese or the Emiratis could get rid of expats and crew all their aeroplanes with locals without huge dramas the expats (of all nationalities) would be gone in a heartbeat.
demonstrated that there were no suitable applicants from within Australia.
Skywest did it with the ATR introduction for a bunch of experienced ATR crew and the hook there was there were very few experienced pilots with ATR time and it was a new type and therefore a cadre of experienced pilots was necessary for the introduction.
I don't think that reasoning could be applied to the QantasLink case and given that they have a well established check and training system experienced in training all manner of pilots, including cadets with sod all total time on the Dash, then I can't see the justification for allowing the 457 visas.
With regards Aussies in different countries, most of the countries are ones where the pilots are needed not wanted and they would give the expat pilots the push with the blink of an eye of they could.
Many are in Europe and a much smaller number in the US as a result of family ties that give them passports/right of residency in the respective countries and they have to do all the licensing like normal residents. No free passes in the easa system even for experienced pilots, so for those that went to those countries they worked for it, so good on them.
The US is easier from a licensing perspective but more difficult from an immigration perspective. Even more difficult from a seniority perspective. From what I read on another thread, if you don't have an aviation related bachelors degree you need 12 years of relevant industry experience to qualify for an E3 view, which I gather from my non existent research
is the US equivalent to our 457. Because of the way the industry works there you are not going to get much credit for your experience in terms of the positions available to you, so you start at the bottom of the list like everyone else and get **** money and **** rosters working for the regional feeders into the mainline carriers and work your way up from there. In fairness it is probably much the same as here in many ways except the salaries paid here are much more substantial than those paid to 'junior' pilots in the US.
I would love to go and be a wide body airbus captain in Europe and take the family and see out my career there but it just ain't going to happen. I don't have the family heritage that gets me an EU passport, I couldn't be arsed doing all the subjects again, and starting as a FO again, so it just ain't going to happen for me, but there are those that are happy to take the bucks in China and not sure why the sandpit is attractive other than shiny wide body aeroplanes but people go there too, but make no mistake if the Chinese or the Emiratis could get rid of expats and crew all their aeroplanes with locals without huge dramas the expats (of all nationalities) would be gone in a heartbeat.
G3 instructor rating with instrument rating. Charter and skydive experience.
FAA ATP
4000TT
2200 turbine
600 multi
300pic multi
It does happen
I know the E3 visa requirements well. A four year bachelors is required or 3 years flying for every year of uni you are short of the 4 years. So if you have no uni at all you must have 12 years flying experience which you do not.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ask the people who have actually been issued with an E3 visa. You'll find that the 4 year bachelor degree is not a requirement for a pilot position because the job does not require it.
Envoy has had success with E3 Visas for Australian applicants. The key seems to be a 4 year degree in aviation that is equivalent to a US bachelors degree. Please let me know if you have this degree in order for us to move forward. Any missing college may be substituted with 3 years of aviation experience for each year missing.
So the above quote from a recruiter at that airline isn't true?
Another quote,
e3 Visa Requirements: Qualifying Candidates
First and foremost, you’re going to need to satisfy certain mandatory e3 visa requirements in terms of education and work experience. The e3 visa is a professional work visa intended for professional individuals.
As such, this means that you have to have the equivalent of a U.S. Bachelor’s degree, a great deal of experience in your field (more than 10 years), or some combination thereof (for instance, an associate’s degree and 6 years of education). Basically, your education or work experience have to be enough to make you employable for a “specialty occupation” under the USCIS’s guidelines of “academic or other qualifications demonstrating qualifications for the position.” And not only do you need to be qualified, but the position needs to qualify as well.
So the above quote from a recruiter at that airline isn't true?
Another quote,
e3 Visa Requirements: Qualifying Candidates
First and foremost, you’re going to need to satisfy certain mandatory e3 visa requirements in terms of education and work experience. The e3 visa is a professional work visa intended for professional individuals.
As such, this means that you have to have the equivalent of a U.S. Bachelor’s degree, a great deal of experience in your field (more than 10 years), or some combination thereof (for instance, an associate’s degree and 6 years of education). Basically, your education or work experience have to be enough to make you employable for a “specialty occupation” under the USCIS’s guidelines of “academic or other qualifications demonstrating qualifications for the position.” And not only do you need to be qualified, but the position needs to qualify as well.
"I'm an Aussie, I have been hired just recently with a regional in the US flying CRJ. No jet experience, on an E3 visa."
02041402,
Interesting. I've tried to follow this issue of Aussie visas and US employment but haven't heretofore seen anyone document their journey on that route.
Can you offer any more specifics without revealing more than you're comfortable with (PM, perhaps ?) ?
How did you get this visa...on your own individual effort...did the regional carrier offer and/or provide assistance ? Were you recruited by the carrier while living in Australia or did you approach them on your own initiative ?
Thanks...
02041402,
Interesting. I've tried to follow this issue of Aussie visas and US employment but haven't heretofore seen anyone document their journey on that route.
Can you offer any more specifics without revealing more than you're comfortable with (PM, perhaps ?) ?
How did you get this visa...on your own individual effort...did the regional carrier offer and/or provide assistance ? Were you recruited by the carrier while living in Australia or did you approach them on your own initiative ?
Thanks...