mrsgreenstar76

I'm not sure. Is there no chance that your current role could be considered to be closely related?

monkeyboy3

Unfortunately. not...... its still within telecoms but I am now office based, I wish you could just trade passports LOL

mrsgreenstar76

LOL Yeah, that'd be easier!

Bermudashorts

They have to draw a line somewhere and have easy to follow and enforce rules. How does DIAC know that you can do the job with your eyes closed, how can they have a rule that says 12 out of 24 months unless the applicant can do the job with their eyes closed ....

As well as the "forgetting skills" argument, there is another one around whether somebody is likely to stay in the occupation or not. If somebody has been out of their occupation for 12 months then it could be because they have decided to have a career change, take early retirement, raise a family. it isn't just about whetehr you can do the job, whether you *will* do the job also matters. This way DIAC improves the odds of skilled migrants providing the skills that are in shortage.

Bermudashorts

They cannot monitor every immigrant to check they are working in the nominated occupation, so this is the only practical solution.

If people are working in the nominated occupation before they apply, then they are more likely to work in the nominated occupation when they arrive. It isn't fool proof by any means, but it increases the odds.

It sounds like you have moved onto something else now, it might be more senior, but if you are unable to emigrate on the strength of the current role, then it sounds like it something that Australia does not require.

To the original question, I also cannnot see the 12 out of 24 months requirement being removed.

monkeyboy3

Hi,

Yeah I have moved onto a more senior role and there is jobs for it is OZ but just cant secure a business sponsor and its not on the SOL list......thinking of taking a back step and returning to the field for 12 months

monkeyboy3

I hear you and agree but also feel that maybe they should take it on a case by case basis i.e I am young, last worked in the role in 2008, and I did complete a 3 year apprenticeship not just the average Jo 6 weeks training kind of thing.

I just find it frustrating that this is the case, and also the fact that you are not forced to work in your selected skill once you arrive for any period of time.

Bermudashorts

How does taking it on a case by case help? They are after recruitment in specific areas they are not after people just because they are "young". If you are working in an area they wish to fill then you would qualify. What is special about your case?

It is not realistic to expect there to be different interpretation of the rules for different individuals. It would bring in far too much subjectivity, nothing would ever get finalised, there would be endless appeals. They need to have a structure to work to and this is the one that has been decided upon.

For similar reasons, it is impractical to check and force migrants to work in the nominated occupation. There would have to be an army of people employed to check on such a thing and another army to deal with "breaches" etc etc.

As I mentioned before, the way they can increase the chances that people work in the nominated occupation is to ensure that it is something they have worked in recently.

In fact you are almost a proof that there is good reasoning behind this rule and it is working; you do not have recent work experience in the occupation you propose to nominate and you have also indicated that you have progressed from it and would be unlikely to work in it.

moneypenny20

If you want to move here on the skills you have, simply work for 12 months in that trade and then apply. A visa is not an entitlement, it's a privilege. We've all had to jump through the hoops that DIAC set us, we all consider ourselves special and some people, even with the right skills, still get refused. It's not supposed to be easy.

moneypenny20

Threads merged. Don't need two on the same subject.

monkeyboy3

I can think of manys ways to describe you just now

mrsgreenstar76

Why? Just because you dislike the answer? DIAC aren't going to change the rules because YOU don't like them. Either get the recent work experience or don't. That's your choice - not DIACs. Bermudashorts' answer is perfectly valid.

moneypenny20

Yup, the words are helpful and realistic. Oh and factual.

Bermudashorts

You have shown a lot of immaturity over this last day or so but that probably takes the biscuit. I have visions of you standing in the middle of a room bawling "I want, I want, I want".

The rules aren't wrong just because you don't qualify. The IELTs rules shouldn't be changed because you don't see why you should take it. In this life we can't always have what we want, it isn't always handed to us on a platter and if you want this you are going to have to work at it. Thinly veiled insults to members of BE who have done nothing but attempt to explain rationale to you, ain't going to help.

monkeyboy3

Apologies on my part.......sorry if I caused offence and you are right these are the rules.