bingobob777

If you wanted to go back to the UK 3 years in to a 4 year 457 Visa would the sponsoring employer still be obliged to pay for your flights?

Bermudashorts

Not if it was your choice no.

bingobob777

Hmmm

Tramps_mate

Can I ask. Why do you presume that your employer would pay? They paid to get you there did they? I wouldn't expect them to pay for your holidays back as your holidays are your choice. Unless your contract stated they would help with return visits.

newjersey

It appears that the OP wants to go back as in return to live in the UK, rather than go for a holiday there and return back to working for the same company. So under this assumption - Repatriation costs are bourne by the sponsoring employer under the 457 visa rules as far as I remember. So if the contract ends, the employer must shell out for the one-way tickets and possibly for removal of personal property, whether that is in the contract or not. There maybe some legal wrinkles as to whether it is applicable and/or enforceable, but the question has a basis in fact.

Tramps_mate

Ooooh. Its all down to contract then isnt it? Unless he is wanting to go back and quit his job in OZ type thing.

bcworld

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/skill...s-employer.htm

Obligation to pay travel costs to enable sponsored persons to leave Australia

The standard business sponsor must pay reasonable and necessary travel costs to enable the sponsored persons to leave Australia if the costs have been requested in writing by the sponsored persons, or the department and the costs have not already been paid by the sponsor in accordance with this obligation.

bingobob777

Yep. Brought here on a 4 year 457 Visa, contract states they will pay for return flights home for us all at the end of it. We may want to return home after 3 years. Would they then still need to pay for the flights?

bingobob777

Thanks that bcworld, seems pretty clear cut.

newjersey

Sorry, I can venture a guess but please double check. It may not be enforceable on your end if you decide to terminate the contract before its maturity or if they terminate you for a cause (worst case, engineer one and have you fired) to get out of it or substantially reduce the amount. One thing is certain, try to get it out of them before you leave, because after you are gone, your ability to enforce anything will be virtually non existent.

Bermudashorts

I agree needs checking. It seems illogical that employer has to pay if employee quits early, this excerpt would mean that employer would have to pay if somebody came out for a week and decided they didn't like it here.

bcworld

It might seem illogical but I think it's an obligation the sponsor has to the government (rather than the employee themselves) to ensure that the 457 holder doesn't become unlawful.

newjersey

Lets explore another wrinkle. Lets say the amount is due and payable, but they refuse to pay it *now* - you'd be up against 28 day limit to leave the country with no more income flowing in and potential cost of fighting this in court - my first thought would be - is it achievable in principle and what am I gaining, financially and morally? Sometimes even if you are 100% right, you may be forced by the situation to just leave it. Best to resolve the situation amicably if at all possible IMO.

bcworld

In that case DIAC would request that the travel be paid...I can't see the sponsor going to court to challenge DIAC for what is a clearly stated obligation. Amicable is of course best but that's essentially up to the sponsor.

Pomster

I was originally in Aus under a 457.

My contract with my employer said if my contract was curtailed by my choice, or by being sacked, I would be responsible for ALL repatriation costs.

At the end of my contract (incl if my employer chose to end the contract early) my employer was obliged to pay my repatriation costs.

So employer terminates- they are responsible; you terminate- you are responsible for costs.