Martin72

I have managed to get assessed as 2231-79 (.Net Technologies) although my actual job title is "Technology Manager". I have been an Technology Manager is various companies for the last 10 years, but for the last 5 years or so I tend to spend about 30-50% of my time writting custom applications in .Net.

The basic question is does "Technology Manager" still fall under the Closely related occupation and so get the extra 10 points? I need this to get the 120 and so go for a 175 Visa.

With the new changes to the system may it be better to get sponsered? I can currently get sponsored from NSW and Canberra. Both of these area's I was considering locating to. (Myself, Wife + 5 kids, 2,3,4,5 and 8 years old)

Any advise would be great.

Thanks

JAJ

You won't get that level of detailed advice on a free forum, most likely. Professional assistance needed etc.

If you mean state sponsored for the 176 visa, it should be an option if you are happy to commit to settle in that state for 2 years.

Martin72

Thanks,

Its mainly the definition of "Closely related occupation", from my point of view they are closely related, but from the assessors view they may not be. In which case it would be safer to go for a 176 as opposed to a 175.

ex_exile

If you spend half your time writing code and have detailed references that state that this amongst your duties and have been assessed as .NET by the ACS with those references I doubt that DIAC will try to substitute their judgement for that of the assessing authority.

As you know in IT your job title dosen't always reflect what you actually do day to day.

msi geek

I have asked DIAC - definition of Closely Related - their answer is: discretion of the case officer.

This is the single biggest reason many applications are rejected and is the cause of many appeals.

JAJ

Case officer must use discretion in a reasonable manner.

However, offshore independent applicants cannot appeal to the Migration Review Tribunal and the only recourse is to the courts.

Work experience in general is the reason for rejection. The issue of closely related occupation only affects a minority of applicants because in most cases, nominated occupation and work experience are the same.

msi geek

One does not understand why DIAC is so particular about closely related?

A person may migrate to Australia under one occupation and work under another occupation

All occupations that fetch same points (60,50,40) carry same importance. Any person working in any occupation - if paid well - contributes to the Aussie economy.

JAJ

Because it's the law, probably.

ex_exile

I thought that offshore applicants were stripped of access to Australian courts in all instances apart from where the law have not been applied correctly to the application. Can you really go to court and argue the definition of "reasonable" in an instance such as this?

Logic would dictate that the OP should be ok in this instance anyway.