Rockey

Hi All,

I have a quick question..Me and My husband both can apply for SMC as main applicant with enough points. I do not want to work after going to NZ . If I become main applicant then is it necessary for me to do job after getting PR/WTR ? or secondary applicant (my husband ) in my case is ok if he work and I do not ?

hazeandsteve

No.
I qualified as main applicant on points alone, and explained during my telephone interview that as a skilled engineer, I was confident I would find work.
Came over, found work.

Good luck.

chippy64

I think it would depend. On our SMC visa, there was a proviso that my OH (who was the main applicant) had to work within 3 months for a period of at least 3 months. He then sent proof - wage slips etc to show he had done this. Immigration then said that he now had to prove that his employment was sustainable (?) or something. So his employer wrote a letter saying he envisaged that he would be working for them long term.

Haven't had a reply as it was all given into ChCh office a week before the Feb Earthquake.

So, just make sure you read the small print on your blue sticker!

robbyarg

Forgive me, but this is a bit unfair on NZ to get someone who does not work and applies as the main applicant. The whole idea behind migration is for a country to fill the gap where it lacks expertise. If you do not wish to work in NZ after migration, then perhaps someone else should be the main applicant.

But there is NO RULE to ensure that you are working there after your PR is granted. However, your intentions for me are not right.

To mitigate these kind of circumstances, I would suggest that your spouse be at least be working even if you remain the main applicant in all fairness.

In fact, neither of you need to be employed despite getting the VISA. It's just unfair on the SMC process overall and there are many other genuine candidates whose place you would be taking.

Forgive me for being so straightforward here.

BEVS

You have a PM Robbyarg. The courtesy of a response has been required. You have also been asked to clarify your own status as you have claimed " this is my job" .

Once again, you have not read the OP's opening post correctly.

It is not for you to judge the applicant. If they have the points for SMC, then they can apply. The most that any main SMC applicant need work for an NZ employer is 3 months. After that they are free to work or not work. They are also free to never work again at their profession, occupation or trade after that 3 months if they so choose.

This is emigration not bondage.

It's not just about SMC. NZ needs people

Rockey

Thank you BEVS for describing your point of view...Actually My husband is capable to do work and surely he will work, I have to be main applicant in the case my husband get Level 8 instead of 7. Being mother of little kids I do not want to do job after going there. That is why I asked that question.
We should not pass negative comments without knowing the whole situation..
Further more my question is , in PR and WTR both cases , three months job is compulsory? or just in WTR?

chippy64

My OH had the 3 month work requirement on his visa. The visa is PR through Skilled Migrant route. He has just had that removed, after providing wage slips and a letter from his boss.

rif

Curious :

How does it work? Read somewhere that initially visa is granted for 2 years and your case would be reviewed after 2 years to grant PR. And you should be in NZ for some 184 days and have worked there at least for 3 months (on WTR) to be able to get PR.

How is application classified WTR /PR?

Someone please elaborate on this, It seems that initially SMV is not PR, Please correct me if I am wrong.

BEVS

I'm not sure I understand here. There again it doesn't take a lot to confuse the likes of me.

Can you tell me more about your husband and the level 8 or level 7 thing please?
Why is this a concern.

PR
If one is granted PR - Permanent Residency - under the SMC -Skilled Migrant Category - AND that application was with an NZ job offer in place, then a condition will apply where that person must work in that job for 3 months. Once the 3 months is done, the condition will be removed on application . This then leaves that person free to do whatsoever he likes by way of employment or not.

WTR - under an accredited employer where the occupation is not on the skilled list.

The person needs to remain in the job for 2 years with a salary of $55K pa , after which, they can apply for PR.

WTR - under an accredited employer where the job is on the skilled occupation list.

The person is granted a WTR visa to get them here and working, however, if they have the points for a PR application under the SMC, then they are free to apply for PR under that route.

WTR - under the PR SMC route. If a person applied for PR under the SMC route - skilled migrant- but without an NZ job offer in place then NZIS might worry how the applicant will support him/herself, so they won't give a PR visa straight off. What they will offer instead is for the person to go out to NZ & find a job.

This may happen where the occupation/trade is on the skilled list BUT there is no labour shortage here in NZ so it does not appears on the shortages list.

Some people will have enough points to apply for PR under the SMC route without either a job offer or their occupation being in shortage here. NZIS have a duty to make sure that people can settle well and one of those ways is to have income, hence the possibility of WTR being issued in some cases.

Once that person has been seen to be working in that job AND has held that job for 3 months , then the applicant can apply to have the 3 month condition removed. They will then be given full PR.

BEVS

Forget this. I've seen the posts from your husband Imaan now.

His assessment came back at 8 instead of 7 which may have made the level higher than for the skilled occupation he would have applied with so the concern was that an application might be rejected as the qualification level didn't match the skilled occupation level required. Is that correct ?

Per this ? From HERE

jaynepc

Hi, I have been here and working now for over 4 months. Can I ask what benefit it is to have the 3 month requirement removed from my visa as i have already fulfilled the requirement. I had not heard of this being done and am a bit confused about it. Hope this makes sense???

chippy64

As far as I understand, if you do not fulfil the requirements then the visa may be revoked. So, having it removed feels a lot more secure!