OH NO !!!!! DISASTER FOR ALL SKILLED MIGRANTS (NOT I T)
Jan 11th 2002, 4:37 pm
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi George......
Good advice, as usual......
I agree with yourself and Jeremy, that some kind of information page on how things
are progressing, would be invaluable to us all. As you say, their time spent on the
phone, talking to frustrated applicants could certainly be put to better use!
I have heard on this NG, (and mabie you can confirm or deny this), that Teams 1&2 in
the London AHC, only consist of 2 people in each team. If this is the case, and they
are worried about the backlog, why do they not put more bodies onto the processing
teams? Many hands make light work, and all that sort of stuff!! If indeed I am wrong,
and they have, say 5 people in each team. Why not increase it to 8 or 10. Even if
staff training would be required, I reckon it would still cut down the queue in the
long run. It would only be for a relatively short period as they are not getting any
more new skilled applications.
I hope you are right about the, "new broom effect", when the new manager takes over.
I think that DIMA should give the rest of us a break and just have IT skills in MODL
instead of priority over everyone else. From what I can gather, IT migrants are not
finding it easy to get jobs at the moment, due to the, "flooding the market", effect.
I've had my application in since July 2001 and was given a 15 month processing time.
This sounds a bit optimistic now from what I've been hearing. This is particularly
annoying as my good mate, Chris Love, who is a Systems Programmer, only applied about
a month before me, and he has now been living in Perth WA (where I intend to live),
since September.
My other mate, Mark Wilson, applied 3 years ago, (not IT), and as I have said many
times on this NG, was approved after 16 days! He applied to the old Chatsworth House
office in Manchester which is sadly now closed.
Mark and Chris are probably drinking a VB together in Freemantle as I speak, and I'm
stuck here in sub zero temperatures in Scotland!! My, "Happy New Year", phone call
to them on New Year's Day, when they told me they were off to Cottesloe Beach to
cure their hangovers, left me searching around my house for a handy girder and a
length of rope!!!
It's only the start of January 2002 just now, but if I'm not in Perth for the fabled
drinkathon on Australia Day 2003, (which I've promised Mark and Chris I will be), I
think I'll install the girder in my bedroom myself!!!
Anyway, it's been a while since I had a moan, and unfortunately, you're the
recipient........
All the best for 2002.......
Cheers.......... Johnno.........
John Lamont
[email protected]
Good advice, as usual......
I agree with yourself and Jeremy, that some kind of information page on how things
are progressing, would be invaluable to us all. As you say, their time spent on the
phone, talking to frustrated applicants could certainly be put to better use!
I have heard on this NG, (and mabie you can confirm or deny this), that Teams 1&2 in
the London AHC, only consist of 2 people in each team. If this is the case, and they
are worried about the backlog, why do they not put more bodies onto the processing
teams? Many hands make light work, and all that sort of stuff!! If indeed I am wrong,
and they have, say 5 people in each team. Why not increase it to 8 or 10. Even if
staff training would be required, I reckon it would still cut down the queue in the
long run. It would only be for a relatively short period as they are not getting any
more new skilled applications.
I hope you are right about the, "new broom effect", when the new manager takes over.
I think that DIMA should give the rest of us a break and just have IT skills in MODL
instead of priority over everyone else. From what I can gather, IT migrants are not
finding it easy to get jobs at the moment, due to the, "flooding the market", effect.
I've had my application in since July 2001 and was given a 15 month processing time.
This sounds a bit optimistic now from what I've been hearing. This is particularly
annoying as my good mate, Chris Love, who is a Systems Programmer, only applied about
a month before me, and he has now been living in Perth WA (where I intend to live),
since September.
My other mate, Mark Wilson, applied 3 years ago, (not IT), and as I have said many
times on this NG, was approved after 16 days! He applied to the old Chatsworth House
office in Manchester which is sadly now closed.
Mark and Chris are probably drinking a VB together in Freemantle as I speak, and I'm
stuck here in sub zero temperatures in Scotland!! My, "Happy New Year", phone call
to them on New Year's Day, when they told me they were off to Cottesloe Beach to
cure their hangovers, left me searching around my house for a handy girder and a
length of rope!!!
It's only the start of January 2002 just now, but if I'm not in Perth for the fabled
drinkathon on Australia Day 2003, (which I've promised Mark and Chris I will be), I
think I'll install the girder in my bedroom myself!!!
Anyway, it's been a while since I had a moan, and unfortunately, you're the
recipient........
All the best for 2002.......
Cheers.......... Johnno.........
John Lamont
[email protected]
Jan 13th 2002, 5:11 am
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
George Thanks for your comments on this.
>
>
As you're probably aware, Canada's in the process of doing a lot more than simply
abandoning priority for IT people. They've put together a new selection system with
criteria so high that (in my opinion) they've got no chance of meeting their
skilled migration targets with it from 2002 onwards. They may have to relax things
later, but in the meantime a large backlog of applications (by all accounts, a lot
larger than anything Australia has) seems likely to be rejected. Having said that
Canada's had a big problem with the skilled migrants it's been taking in up to now
not being able to find anything more than menial employment, which is not the
intention of the exercise.
Inevitably the impact of Canada clearing out its backlog will affect the Australian
system in the 2002/03 year and beyond. I wouldn't be surprised to see the new
Canadian requirement of fluency in English (or French in Canada's case) being
incorporated into the Australian skilled system in the near future.
>
>
>
>
What about non-IT cases?
>
>
>
>
>
Butr surely the alternative of transferring the entire outstanding backlog offshore
to Adelaide would raise issues of its own?
>
[usenetquote2]>>Sometimes visa posts don't know themselves when they will get the next allocation[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>of visas from Canberra.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Do you know how much of the contingency reserve of visas has been used up? Much if
this was intended to cover the onshore skilled program, if my memory is correct.
>
>
>
>
The implication of this statement is that any rise in the pass mark would only affect
new applications lodged, not existing ones in the pipeline? Is that what you meant?
It's not very in keeping with notions of 'fair go' to raise the passmark on
applications already in the system but that's what's happened before, including the
last time the passmark went up in July 1996.
Of course, if the passmark did go up, then any offshore applications on 110 points
would go into the pool for 2 years. Is there anything someone in the pool on 110
points could do to raise their score, such as get a skill assessment for a spouse or
invest A$100k in a designated security? (I know that normally these things should be
done in advance)
>
>
Quite. And a crude rise of 5 in the passmark would do nothing to solve this problem,
because most overseas graduating students have 115 points (60 for skill, 30 for age,
20 for English and 5 for an Australian qualification).
Where I think they've gone wrong with the onshore program is the idea that the simple
possession of a Bachelors degree in itself (without any work experience) makes
someone a 'professional', even if they've barely scraped a pass mark.
It would be far better to re-introduce the work experience requirement for all
applications, but let successful onshore students get a temporary work visa (giveing
complete work freedom) for 2-3 years to allow them to acquire the necessary skilled
work experience in Australia, if their qualification is good enough to pass muster in
the Australian workplace.
>
>
I wonder if the Department's eye has been off the ball recently due to concentrating
on the refugee issue.
>
>
>
And also to compensate for skilled Australian going overseas on a temporary or
permanent basis.
>
>
>
>
Hasn't stopped the Minister bringing in that new provision allowing RSMS visas to be
cancelled if the visa holder doesn't stay with the regional employer for 2 years.
>
>
>
It's a chicken and egg situation. I think the view of the SA and Tasmanian
governments is that if they had a plentiful supply of skilled labour locally then
investment would come. There is a degree of evidence that supply of skilled labour
can create its own demand (as the US and especially Irish economic experiences in the
1990s showed) but you are quite right that what drives many migrants to places like
Sydney is the availability of jobs.
It still won't surprise me if a new scheme to encourage skilled independent
applicants to settle in regional areas is in the pipeline.
Jeremy
>
>
As you're probably aware, Canada's in the process of doing a lot more than simply
abandoning priority for IT people. They've put together a new selection system with
criteria so high that (in my opinion) they've got no chance of meeting their
skilled migration targets with it from 2002 onwards. They may have to relax things
later, but in the meantime a large backlog of applications (by all accounts, a lot
larger than anything Australia has) seems likely to be rejected. Having said that
Canada's had a big problem with the skilled migrants it's been taking in up to now
not being able to find anything more than menial employment, which is not the
intention of the exercise.
Inevitably the impact of Canada clearing out its backlog will affect the Australian
system in the 2002/03 year and beyond. I wouldn't be surprised to see the new
Canadian requirement of fluency in English (or French in Canada's case) being
incorporated into the Australian skilled system in the near future.
>
>
>
>
What about non-IT cases?
>
>
>
>
>
Butr surely the alternative of transferring the entire outstanding backlog offshore
to Adelaide would raise issues of its own?
>
[usenetquote2]>>Sometimes visa posts don't know themselves when they will get the next allocation[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>of visas from Canberra.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Do you know how much of the contingency reserve of visas has been used up? Much if
this was intended to cover the onshore skilled program, if my memory is correct.
>
>
>
>
The implication of this statement is that any rise in the pass mark would only affect
new applications lodged, not existing ones in the pipeline? Is that what you meant?
It's not very in keeping with notions of 'fair go' to raise the passmark on
applications already in the system but that's what's happened before, including the
last time the passmark went up in July 1996.
Of course, if the passmark did go up, then any offshore applications on 110 points
would go into the pool for 2 years. Is there anything someone in the pool on 110
points could do to raise their score, such as get a skill assessment for a spouse or
invest A$100k in a designated security? (I know that normally these things should be
done in advance)
>
>
Quite. And a crude rise of 5 in the passmark would do nothing to solve this problem,
because most overseas graduating students have 115 points (60 for skill, 30 for age,
20 for English and 5 for an Australian qualification).
Where I think they've gone wrong with the onshore program is the idea that the simple
possession of a Bachelors degree in itself (without any work experience) makes
someone a 'professional', even if they've barely scraped a pass mark.
It would be far better to re-introduce the work experience requirement for all
applications, but let successful onshore students get a temporary work visa (giveing
complete work freedom) for 2-3 years to allow them to acquire the necessary skilled
work experience in Australia, if their qualification is good enough to pass muster in
the Australian workplace.
>
>
I wonder if the Department's eye has been off the ball recently due to concentrating
on the refugee issue.
>
>
>
And also to compensate for skilled Australian going overseas on a temporary or
permanent basis.
>
>
>
>
Hasn't stopped the Minister bringing in that new provision allowing RSMS visas to be
cancelled if the visa holder doesn't stay with the regional employer for 2 years.
>
>
>
It's a chicken and egg situation. I think the view of the SA and Tasmanian
governments is that if they had a plentiful supply of skilled labour locally then
investment would come. There is a degree of evidence that supply of skilled labour
can create its own demand (as the US and especially Irish economic experiences in the
1990s showed) but you are quite right that what drives many migrants to places like
Sydney is the availability of jobs.
It still won't surprise me if a new scheme to encourage skilled independent
applicants to settle in regional areas is in the pipeline.
Jeremy
