Bev MK

We finally have contact from our case officer and it's depressing.

170 points, job offer paying nearly $200k and on the shortage list, both qualified accountants with 2 masters degrees each, extensive experience, medicals clear, clean police records.

Problem is that, because of the sector my husband works in, the job offer is a 3 year contract with the possibility of extension by mutual agreement. It's the norm in his field to have 1-3 contracts because of the way things are funded. He has a CV showing a string of back to back 1-3 year contracts which we figure complies with the requirement in 7.15 to show that if the job offer is not a permanent contract you have a history of sustainable employment and contracts. NZ House say nahhhh, if it's not a permanent contract it doesn't count.

We can't apply for WTR because neither of us have an accountancy degree and he'd need one to meet the rules on this for this job. Very daft from our perspective as we're both chartered accountants and most chartered accountants in the UK do not have an accountancy degree, that's not how it's done here. In the UK, the professional qualification outranks the uni one by miles, as it does in many other fields. However, the NZ process is only interested in our degrees and rules are rules...

We can see a position where we end up giving up on this soon as we seem to have hit a brick wall.

I'm wondering if anyone else has successfully dealt with this sort of impasse? We wonder if this is the sort of specific problem where an immigration advisor could be of use but are wary of how difficult it can be to find a good one. We're not after someone who does the package of forms etc, but someone to pay for specific advice by the hour.

MrsFychan

so sorry to hear this.
sorry don't have any personally knowledge of adviser but know someone who used one successfully so I will ask her if she can get her information and pass it on.

MrsFychan

have pm'ed as my friend responded already

thepinkone

Sounds petty, but as I know (from bitter experience) they seem not to want to look outside the box at all and are adamant on sticking to the rules. I hope it goes well for you and that they recognise that there are different 'rights' rather than just 'wrongs', fingers crossed

Bev MK

Thank you both. The WTR rule seems particularly daft to me as an accountancy degree does not entitle you to work as an accountant - it's an accountancy qualification that lets you do that. The ICAEW and NZICA have an agreement that recognises each other's qualifications with no need to do anything other than fill out a 2 page form and pay $15. And we'd be allowed to work as accountants there without reregistering anyway - if they were to let us in, that is!

Anyway, what we actually want is PR not WTR but it doesn't look like is going to happen. Case officer is a complete brick wall. Will not discuss the matter of non-perm contracts, despite what's in 7.15. We will go back to the employer but apart from the fact that they just don't do perm contracts, there will of course be the issue that like most employers, they don't really get the visa process and how important the wording of offers and contracts are.

To me, perm contracts aren't that important. Nowadays they don't represent a job for life anymore, people move, companies fold, redundancies happen. All my jobs have been perm ones and I've usually moved on between 2-3 years as I get bored. OH on the other hand has had several fixed term contracts and has completed all of them and then gone on to others, often with the same organisation. Despite my work history being perm and his being fixed term, his work history is just as continuous as mine (though I'm staying home with the kids for now) and he's actually done longer periods for the same employer than I have.

But this is government, and the job of government employees is all too often to apply the rules mindlessly. This is the main reason I've always worked in the private sector, working in government bureaucracy would frustrate me too much.

We will ponder on this for another couple of days, talk to the employer and maybe seek legal advice to see if there's any other way round this but if I was to bet now, I wouldn't be putting money on us getting to NZ. I'm sad about that as we've put a lot into this and the job would be very interesting for OH and we liked NZ. But there will be other jobs in other places.

It also doesn't seem to me that this is a practical way to fill shortage jobs but hey, ho...

skends

so sorry to hear this bev mk, keep pursuing, there must be someone to advise you, especially after all the costs involved at this stage - our biggest fear is rejection - all our hard earned money has gone on this application too.
sorta know how your feeling right now.

BEVS

Yes.This is exactly where a quality Immy Adviser/Lawyer could help.

Lane Neave did good stuff for Jan and Neil

Peter Croxson did the business for a Hungarian friend of mine. NZIS were stating his quals didn't match his job & that his job wasn't what he said it was. He gained PR.
I believe Peter Croxson strength is in his attention to details.

Bad news. Sounds like the person needs more training. I'd go over this person's head and ask to liaise direct with the head of the branch or have the Immy Lawyer do this.

For others. Here is the 7.15 BevMK refers to.

simonsi

Bizarre - "or for a stated term of at least twelve months" covers it perfectly!

Agree go to branch head ASAP

Bev MK

Thanks for the recommendations, I really appreciate them as the last thing I want to do is waste our money on someone who just does formfilling. I'd feel very awkward about going to the head of branch, do many people do this?

Yep, and he also has a history of successful gap-free contract work, it's the norm for his field. This person keeps saying that perm res requires a perm job. That's not what I read in 7.15.

I also find it very bizarre that he doesn't qualify for WTR because he doesn't hold a Bachelor's in Accountancy - he holds a chartered accountancy qualification - this is like telling a doctor he doesn't get in because he doesn't have GCSE biology! The case officer said he could get his quals assessed by the NZQA but all his quals are already on the list so why would he get them assessed? Surely assessing is for quals not on the list? But again - parrot and brick wall.

MrsFychan

I personally would ask your current CO to explain to you why what you read as relevant and correct for the Visa is not how they are reading it. If the response is not satisfactory then I would ask for someone else to review the case as you do not understand clearly what the CO is saying.

or you could go to complaints procedure
http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migra...ntsprocess.htm

It's a lot of money to be losing especially if you feel you meet the criteria

skends

my quals were on the list as accepted but i still had to have them assessed by the NZQA - took 8 weeks and cost another £400!!

Bev MK

Any queries on why they are saying what they're saying is met with the response that they don't explain it as they're not immigration consultants. It seems a pretty hostile and brick wall kind of process - is it usually like this?

Bev MK

Mind if I ask why? I thought if your qual was on the list (and hubby's and mine are on the list, very specifically for the institution, the year and the quals - an exact match) that exempted you from going to the NZQA. We have no quibble with the points the listing gives.

I would be very interested to know more if you don't mind telling me, PM me if you prefer. It could help me understand what the CO is on about as they won't explain.

thepinkone

Our CO has informed me that she will be discussing our case with her manager - I believe that is due to a few unique factors and because I have openly explained our situation to her. I didn't ask her to refer to her manager, she just said she would, but I'm pleased because at least then I know our PR has been thouroughly considered. I'm sure they would be fine if you asked for your case to be considered by your CO's manager at the least. Sounds like BEVS chap could also help - fingers crossed for you.

skends

hi bev mk, - although my qualification is accepted in NZ, it states it on the ISSL next to my profession, it dosent tell you that it still has to be assessed further. - because it is not a NZ qualification it had to be assessed, it wasnt on the exempt list though. Hope this makes sense.
I think it is really unfair as alot of people already in NZ are working on the same qualifiaction as mine so it should be recognised and exempt - i have no idea why. when we were selected from the EOI they sent us a specific list of documents they required and the NZQA assessment was one of them. Also I have had to register with the professional body in NZ - that was an extra £300. - seems pointless to me because if we get declined there will be no use for it! Some of the NZIS rules and procedures are not common sense and not practical.
keep fighting bev mk x