mrsgreenstar76

Nonsense. People with your attitude annoy the hell out of me. Bandying the word "discrimination" around willy nilly just because you can't get what you want. Prove that they're discriminating against you. Dorothy's right - you're only complaining because it affects you. Last time I was in Australia there were plenty of computers. Now, unless something has drastically changed, what's to stop you from getting a job that won't have an effect on your citizenship eligibility? Nothing. You are choosing to stay in a job that you know will make you ineligible for citizenship, and then complaining that "it's not fair".

verystormy

I dont mind paying tax because i am resident in Australia. But the goverment wants its cake and eat it. It wants to claim i am resident for tax, but not resident for citizenship. That isnt fair. If they dont want me resident for one then it shouldnt be for the other.

So, we will make a decision over Christmas of if to stay in Oz. The alternative being to move back to the UK where i would not pay tax if i am fifo from there. Hence why a lot of brit geo's have headed back recently.

As for your comments for the IT guy i completely disagree. A lot of proffessionals HAVE to travel a lot as part of their job. Many years ago i worked for an IT company and my boss did more miles than a pilot - return by concorde twice a week to NY from London. A pilot does not have to be international. They can work on domestic routes only.

sonlymewalter

It's all about choice mate. You know the rules, there's no surprises. Good luck whatever you choose to do

madankumars

Dorothy's right - you're only complaining because it affects you

:-) mate... this is discriminatory against everyone who is not a pilot or a ship crew or resources worker or a sports person, and travel for work reasons.

many other professions need to travel due to work reasons.

if it is skill related then i agree. but some of the other professions make a lot more and pay a lot more taxes. it is not acceptable on the governments part to say if you dont belong to one of those listed professions you can take a hike, but pay taxes.

govenment legislation is not made by computers. it is made by people and people sometimes make mistakes.... to err is human. and when that happens it needs to be pointed out.

Pollyana

Yep, many other professions do need to travel due to work reasons, and as this includes many people who work for the government I'm sure DIAC is aware of it. However rules are rules and having had a big overhaul of the citizenship application system not long ago I doubt they will be changing it again any time soon so you will just have to live with it.

mrsgreenstar76

I don't know you, so I'd appreciate it if you'd not call me 'mate'. There's a difference between having to travel for work, & spending so much time outside the country that you've made yourself ineligible for citizenship. Try it from a different perspective. Sportsmen & women have the opportunity to bring prestige & recognition for their country by participating in events overseas. Last time I checked, there was no Olympic medal for computing! So, pray tell, what makes your profession so remarkable that you're entitled to be exempt from the rules?

Ultimately, those other professions that have to travel (apart from the aforementioned exceptions) will have to adhere to the rules too. It's not discriminatory, you're just whinging because you don't want to abide by the rules that Australia has (and is fully entitled to) set.

Red_V_Roger

I work for a company that exports a fair amount outside Oz, that means I have to travel outside Oz to get the work that supports the jobs of the people here in our factory.

I just put in for citizenship yesterday and am under the 90 day rule, but a couple more trips could have seen me over.

It wouldn't be fair that helping employ Australians and keep the balance of trade through exports excluded me from applying for Citizenship.

mrsgreenstar76

Those are the rules though. Surely you knew them when you got your visa/took the job. Why should people that are willing to do jobs that are within the rules of residency have to follow them but others not?

verystormy

Because the rules are stupid, manifestly unfair, putting my legal head on, open to legal challenge and potentialy damaging for the country. How many more arguments would you like

Bermudashorts

Well having read the arguments made, I would be prepared to say that the rules are a little unfair. But they really do not seem manifestly unfair to me, because with a couple of exceptions we all have to clock up our time in Australia to progress to citizenship.

If they make exceptions for people who travel overseas with work where would it end, why shouldn't there be exceptions for people who travel overseas for extended periods to tend sick relatives for example. And then how would it be vetted, what kind of system would have to be implemented to ensure that the time overseas was "allowable"?

At least it is simple and easily validated at the moment.

verystormy

In the same way that they do now for those who they allow to travel overseas. They manage to police it for some catergories so why not others. The vetting system is simple. Are you demostratably resident in Australia? Do you pay Australian taxes? Is you main home in Australia. The UK manages it fine.

mrsgreenstar76

You believe they're stupid as they're affecting you. If you feel so strongly, challenge it legally, but they are entitled to make what rules they will - whether you like them or not.

mrsgreenstar76

It always amazes me. People that move overseas & yet expect it to work the same as the UK. Also, the UK tax system is hardly fine at the moment, but that's a completely different subject.

verystormy

I dont expect it to work the same as the UK. Just giving an example. I could as easily have also pointed out that Peru manages it and that is a developing nation. The point was that you had tried to say it was not a system that could be managed. I simply gave an example of one place that it is. There are a number of countries that do so.

Bermudashorts

Are you saying that in Peru and the UK there is a system such that people are required to spend X days in that country over a period of 4 years however there are exemptions if they are carrying out certain work duties overseas and this is monitored to check that the days spent overseas are indeed all spent on these work duties and further that there are checks to ensure that the certain work duties are "eligible" and if so they are allowed to count them as if they were in the country.

Or do they just have a completely different system?


To be honest, I don't see the point in moaning about things like this. These are the rules. Either launch a legal challenge or get over it.