Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > Australia
Reload this Page >

Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Old Mar 23rd 2011, 9:46 pm
  #91  
Inverted Firkin Inventor
 
Watt Dabney's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 757
Watt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by jimmyoz2010 View Post
guys this thread is getting silly.... Can I ask no one else reply to this any more ? Be they Ozzie, Pom or Kiwi or any mixture of the 3.

Jim

(Dual Pom and Kiwi living in OZ)

Shame ..........I hoped we were gonna end up with a thread about the slightly odd feeling of being here on a 444 and the trials and tribulations of converting to PR.

Paula

(dual Pom and NZ'er living in Oz)
Watt Dabney is offline  
Old Mar 23rd 2011, 10:03 pm
  #92  
Account Closed
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,188
iamthecreaturefromuranus is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by Watt Dabney View Post
Shame ..........I hoped we were gonna end up with a thread about the slightly odd feeling of being here on a 444 and the trials and tribulations of converting to PR.

Paula

(dual Pom and NZ'er living in Oz)
Problem is, we have seen lots of foot stamping threads of late, from Kiwi's, complaining how their human rights are being impinged upon by Australia, not handing everything they think they deserve, to them on a plate.... and we are the wrong sort of audience for that.

All the rest of us have jumped through a whole set of hoops to move to Aus, and yet Kiwi's just waltz in and then start complaining about how 'disadvantaged' they are.

It doesn't sit well.
iamthecreaturefromuranus is offline  
Old Mar 23rd 2011, 10:26 pm
  #93  
Inverted Firkin Inventor
 
Watt Dabney's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 757
Watt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by iamthecreaturefromuranus View Post
Problem is, we have seen lots of foot stamping threads of late, from Kiwi's, complaining how their human rights are being impinged upon by Australia, not handing everything they think they deserve, to them on a plate.... and we are the wrong sort of audience for that.

All the rest of us have jumped through a whole set of hoops to move to Aus, and yet Kiwi's just waltz in and then start complaining about how 'disadvantaged' they are.

It doesn't sit well.


HAVE YOU REALLY HAD A LOT OF THREADS LIKE THAT!!!!

Just shows I don't pop my head in often enough!

Well for the record....I don't feel disadvantaged at all I feel damn lucky, and quite willingly take on board the limitations of my visa like not being eligible for HECs for my recent degree so I paid for each semester up front. The onl problem can be with 444 is sometimes your not 100% sure what the limitations are and officaldom often don't know either.

We would however like to convert to PR but are faced with the problems of advancing age, recent job changes, and no longer in the same field of employment as we were when we did NZ PR. I was hoping there would be some others in the same boat with whom to compare notes. PR and Oz citizenship is our ultimate goal, this is home and my son has a hankering to join the forces which he can't do on his NZ passport.


Paula - a Pom/NZ'er who feels damn lucky and a little unsettled with her immigration status and want to make Australia officially home.
Watt Dabney is offline  
Old Mar 23rd 2011, 11:28 pm
  #94  
BE Enthusiast
 
Fluid36's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 576
Fluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to beholdFluid36 is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by iamthecreaturefromuranus View Post
Problem is, we have seen lots of foot stamping threads of late, from Kiwi's, complaining how their human rights are being impinged upon by Australia, not handing everything they think they deserve, to them on a plate.... and we are the wrong sort of audience for that.

All the rest of us have jumped through a whole set of hoops to move to Aus, and yet Kiwi's just waltz in and then start complaining about how 'disadvantaged' they are.

It doesn't sit well.
Foot stamping but no handbags?
Fluid36 is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 12:25 am
  #95  
Victorian Evangelist
 
Buzzy--Bee's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: Melbourne, by the beach, living the dream.
Posts: 7,702
Buzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond repute
Smile Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by Watt Dabney View Post
We would however like to convert to PR but are faced with the problems of advancing age, recent job changes, and no longer in the same field of employment as we were when we did NZ PR. I was hoping there would be some others in the same boat with whom to compare notes. PR and Oz citizenship is our ultimate goal,
Hi Paula, we arrived on the TR444 and TR461. As I'm sure you know, you can't "convert" you have to start all over again to get PR the same as someone who has never lived in Australia.

The only advantage I obtained was being able to claim extra points for already having worked in Australia. Apart from that I was starting all over again.

BB
Buzzy--Bee is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 1:01 am
  #96  
Inverted Firkin Inventor
 
Watt Dabney's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 757
Watt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by Buzzy--Bee View Post
Hi Paula, we arrived on the TR444 and TR461. As I'm sure you know, you can't "convert" you have to start all over again to get PR the same as someone who has never lived in Australia.

The only advantage I obtained was being able to claim extra points for already having worked in Australia. Apart from that I was starting all over again.

BB

Yep I know I can't convert in the technical sense, was just using the word cause we are already here and on 444, meaning there are other options such as ENS and state spons etc.

PR won't work for us because of age, loose too many points, and state seems to be an issue cause husbands job not on the list, mine is but I have not got the 5yrs experience needed and my job is temporary for a yr. ENS I can't do on a temp job and hubby can't do cause he has just changed jobs, in the meantime we are getting older.

I don't mind starting over on the visa application but I can't find one that we can qualify for. I think age is our biggest hurdle, which gets more of a problem as time ticks by.
Watt Dabney is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 1:59 am
  #97  
Inverted Firkin Inventor
 
Watt Dabney's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 757
Watt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by Watt Dabney View Post
Yep I know I can't convert in the technical sense, was just using the word cause we are already here and on 444, meaning there are other options such as ENS and state spons etc.

PR won't work for us because of age, loose too many points, and state seems to be an issue cause husbands job not on the list, mine is but I have not got the 5yrs experience needed and my job is temporary for a yr. ENS I can't do on a temp job and hubby can't do cause he has just changed jobs, in the meantime we are getting older.

I don't mind starting over on the visa application but I can't find one that we can qualify for. I think age is our biggest hurdle, which gets more of a problem as time ticks by.


Oh and I forgot to add my daughter recently suffered from an incredibly rare (in kids) medical condition, which was life threatening. This we are pretty sure (pending blood tests) successfully treated by emergency surgery (which we got through medicare).
However how this condition will be received through an immigration medical is worrying, especially as it is so rare in kids there is very little evidence of long term prognosis, her consultant has only ever seen 3 cases in her whole career of which my daughter was one.
Watt Dabney is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 2:51 am
  #98  
Victorian Evangelist
 
Buzzy--Bee's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: Melbourne, by the beach, living the dream.
Posts: 7,702
Buzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

I reckon your best hope would be that New Zealanders living here already on TR444s would be grandfathered under a change in immigration law, permitting exisiting TR444s to obtain PR and new New Zealanders wishing to emigrate to Australia to qualify under a new visa process, whether it be TR or PR.

The blanket arrangement that is in place today has many failings as you are well aware, however the pre-Feb 2001 system wasn't perfect either as it permitted New Zealanders to arrive in Australia as PRs without further qualification.

BB
Buzzy--Bee is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 4:34 am
  #99  
Inverted Firkin Inventor
 
Watt Dabney's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 757
Watt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to beholdWatt Dabney is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by Buzzy--Bee View Post
I reckon your best hope would be that New Zealanders living here already on TR444s would be grandfathered under a change in immigration law, permitting exisiting TR444s to obtain PR and new New Zealanders wishing to emigrate to Australia to qualify under a new visa process, whether it be TR or PR.

The blanket arrangement that is in place today has many failings as you are well aware, however the pre-Feb 2001 system wasn't perfect either as it permitted New Zealanders to arrive in Australia as PRs without further qualification.

BB

I can always hope I suppose!

In the meantime the plan is to wait 1yr, by which time hubby will have been in his new job 1yr (even tho he will be 45), I will have hopefully secured a permanent position and we will have a better picture of our daughters health. Go and see a immigration consultant and lay our cards on the table and see if we can persue any options.

It is frustrating, I mean its not as if we drive taxis and wait tables for a living. I am a newly qualified nurse and the other half is a mechanical engineering draftsman (without formal quals).

Fingers crossed !
Watt Dabney is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 9:09 am
  #100  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
fish.01's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,039
fish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond reputefish.01 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Found this:

From 26 February 2011, non-protected SCV holders who have lived in Australia for at least ten continuous years since 26 February 2001 may be eligible to receive Newstart Allowance, Youth Allowance or Sickness Allowance for up to 6 months.
fish.01 is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 10:18 am
  #101  
Victorian Evangelist
 
Buzzy--Bee's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: Melbourne, by the beach, living the dream.
Posts: 7,702
Buzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond reputeBuzzy--Bee has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by fish.01 View Post
Found this:

From 26 February 2011, non-protected SCV holders who have lived in Australia for at least ten continuous years since 26 February 2001 may be eligible to receive Newstart Allowance, Youth Allowance or Sickness Allowance for up to 6 months.
I reckon that is the first step towards recognising them as PRs.

BB
Buzzy--Bee is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 10:21 am
  #102  
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,555
IvanM is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Australia should cut the dole rate to less than NZ and both agree to treat each others citizens as PRs. Hopefully some our bludgers will go over the ditch.
IvanM is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 1:53 pm
  #103  
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 70
jimmyoz2010 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by Buzzy--Bee View Post
I reckon that is the first step towards recognising them as PRs.

BB
not really this was announced when changes came out in 2001....
jimmyoz2010 is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 2:27 pm
  #104  
Just Joined
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 18
JLK345 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Some people on this forum are so sour about NZers being eligible for a subclass 444 visa and can live in Australia. It's because there's an agreement between the two countries - and Australia benefits by having a large number of workers in Australia who have (almost always) recognised qualifications, and the large amount of tax that these people pay and contribute to the economy. Not to mention Australians can also live permanently in NZ (they may or may not want to), and can also invest in NZ.
If the UK had such an agreement then British citizens may also enjoy similar benefits -> but no Australian can go live in the UK now just like that can they?

And people should realise that making NZers already living in Australia jump through the "same hoops" is not exactly possible. NZers in Australia are in a different situation and applying for visas designed for foreign nationals who have no existing right to live in Australia indefinitely isn't always a fair situation.

ENS - Employers have far fewer incentives to sponsor someone who they know can live indefinitely in Australia. It might even be part of the reason why the person was employed in the first place. So should the NZer quit their job and find another one? Many employers would refuse to sponsor a NZer - to them these employees already have a right to live permanently so applying for another visa is unnecessary.

Post-study - international students completing studies in Australia have preferential pathways to applying for PR. There are separate visa categories available only to international students who have held a student visa. These are NOT available to NZers who study in Australia under subclass 444 visas - and no NZer would apply for a student visa if they would otherwise be eligible for a subclass 444 visa (I'm not even sure DIAC would even grant it). And things like transitional arrangements when the points test changes or the skilled occupation list changes? Nah - NZ students won't be eligible for any of that.

And the fact that NZers are required to apply for "offshore" visas even though they may be on in Australia mean that processing times are often longer than if they had been allowed to apply for a similar onshore visa.

And counting NZers already living in Australia who apply for PR within the current migration intake doesn't achieve much for Australia's migration program. It adds paperwork and administration, and Australia does not end up with a new migrants who'll add to the economy (or whatever else the migration program is designed to achieve), since that NZer is already in Australia.

NZers who have moved to Australia long term on a subclass 444 visa know very well they can live permanently in Australia - it therefore puts them in situations which other groups might not find themselves in.

E.g. young children who migrate with their parents and live for long periods in Australia. They can continue living in Australia, but may not ever be eligible for PR. Temporary visa holders know from the outset they can only live in Australia for a limited period of time and need to change their visa type to live permanently in Australia. NZers on the other hand have been given information specifically from DIAC (and also in announcements from the 26th of Feb 2001) that they 1) do not need to apply for permanent residence and 2) are welcomed to live and work indefinitely in Australia.

NZers are also eligible for Medicare - those who've worked for many years in Australia would likely have contributed significantly through taxes and the Medicare levy/surcharge. Yet they need to go through medicals when applying for PR... one might say it's necessary to filter out migrants who place excessive strain on the public healthcare system. But for NZers who've made Australia their home and would like to get PR/citizenship to formalise that, is filtering them out because they have a few medical conditions going to achieve anything?

And NZers who may have thought of only workin in Australia for a short period of time, but then over time decide to stay permanently. Initially they may or may not have thought about applying for PR, but after a few years they might have passed the age limits and would no longer be eligible, even though several years back they would've qualified. The years already spent working in Australia might not necessarily be able to compensate for that under the current points system.

And the confusion between state and commonwealth services is really appalling. The initial 2001 changes were only in relation to social security, in particular unemployment etc benefits which were no longer compensated (in part or in full) by the NZ government after the revised social security agreement. But now, various state services have been withdrawn from NZers in a haphazard fashion - so what should NZers living permanently in Australia, paying the same income taxes, stamp duty, GST etc be entitled to?

I'm not sure what is a reasonable solution, and i'm not asking for the pre-2001 type system where anyone from NZ can have full access to services on arrival in Australia, but I certainly don't think the current situation is satisfactory, esp for long-residing NZ migrants who're making contributions to Australia (and will nonetheless remain in Australia permanently or on a long term basis).
JLK345 is offline  
Old Mar 24th 2011, 2:34 pm
  #105  
Proudly Deplorable
 
Amazulu's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2003
Location: Alloha snack bar
Posts: 23,930
Amazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond reputeAmazulu has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Kiwi's discrimination complaint upheld by Aussie tribunal

Originally Posted by JLK345 View Post
Some people on this forum are so sour about NZers being eligible for a subclass 444 visa and can live in Australia. It's because there's an agreement between the two countries - and Australia benefits by having a large number of workers in Australia who have (almost always) recognised qualifications, and the large amount of tax that these people pay and contribute to the economy. Not to mention Australians can also live permanently in NZ (they may or may not want to), and can also invest in NZ.
If the UK had such an agreement then British citizens may also enjoy similar benefits -> but no Australian can go live in the UK now just like that can they?

And people should realise that making NZers already living in Australia jump through the "same hoops" is not exactly possible. NZers in Australia are in a different situation and applying for visas designed for foreign nationals who have no existing right to live in Australia indefinitely isn't always a fair situation.

ENS - Employers have far fewer incentives to sponsor someone who they know can live indefinitely in Australia. It might even be part of the reason why the person was employed in the first place. So should the NZer quit their job and find another one? Many employers would refuse to sponsor a NZer - to them these employees already have a right to live permanently so applying for another visa is unnecessary.

Post-study - international students completing studies in Australia have preferential pathways to applying for PR. There are separate visa categories available only to international students who have held a student visa. These are NOT available to NZers who study in Australia under subclass 444 visas - and no NZer would apply for a student visa if they would otherwise be eligible for a subclass 444 visa (I'm not even sure DIAC would even grant it). And things like transitional arrangements when the points test changes or the skilled occupation list changes? Nah - NZ students won't be eligible for any of that.

And the fact that NZers are required to apply for "offshore" visas even though they may be on in Australia mean that processing times are often longer than if they had been allowed to apply for a similar onshore visa.

And counting NZers already living in Australia who apply for PR within the current migration intake doesn't achieve much for Australia's migration program. It adds paperwork and administration, and Australia does not end up with a new migrants who'll add to the economy (or whatever else the migration program is designed to achieve), since that NZer is already in Australia.

NZers who have moved to Australia long term on a subclass 444 visa know very well they can live permanently in Australia - it therefore puts them in situations which other groups might not find themselves in.

E.g. young children who migrate with their parents and live for long periods in Australia. They can continue living in Australia, but may not ever be eligible for PR. Temporary visa holders know from the outset they can only live in Australia for a limited period of time and need to change their visa type to live permanently in Australia. NZers on the other hand have been given information specifically from DIAC (and also in announcements from the 26th of Feb 2001) that they 1) do not need to apply for permanent residence and 2) are welcomed to live and work indefinitely in Australia.

NZers are also eligible for Medicare - those who've worked for many years in Australia would likely have contributed significantly through taxes and the Medicare levy/surcharge. Yet they need to go through medicals when applying for PR... one might say it's necessary to filter out migrants who place excessive strain on the public healthcare system. But for NZers who've made Australia their home and would like to get PR/citizenship to formalise that, is filtering them out because they have a few medical conditions going to achieve anything?

And NZers who may have thought of only workin in Australia for a short period of time, but then over time decide to stay permanently. Initially they may or may not have thought about applying for PR, but after a few years they might have passed the age limits and would no longer be eligible, even though several years back they would've qualified. The years already spent working in Australia might not necessarily be able to compensate for that under the current points system.

And the confusion between state and commonwealth services is really appalling. The initial 2001 changes were only in relation to social security, in particular unemployment etc benefits which were no longer compensated (in part or in full) by the NZ government after the revised social security agreement. But now, various state services have been withdrawn from NZers in a haphazard fashion - so what should NZers living permanently in Australia, paying the same income taxes, stamp duty, GST etc be entitled to?

I'm not sure what is a reasonable solution, and i'm not asking for the pre-2001 type system where anyone from NZ can have full access to services on arrival in Australia, but I certainly don't think the current situation is satisfactory, esp for long-residing NZ migrants who're making contributions to Australia (and will nonetheless remain in Australia permanently or on a long term basis).
The setup is fine as it is - no need to change it

Everyone is a winner
Amazulu is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.