Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 4616
- 4 Comments
DIBP called on to stop inconsistency and bias
A report in this morning from a Migration Alliance member, who wishes to remain unnamed, will be used as the basis of a complaint to the DIBP:
"I have always felt that the inconsistency with DIBP was an issue for Migration Agents. However, I have seen this once too often and feel I need to speak out.
A client (company) of mine insists on lodging their own nominations for their 457 visa applicants. This is not a problem and we have been happily completing our dealings for 457 visas over the past four years. I also get copies of all nominations lodged.
While I work at compliance for my other clients nominations, to the point of the equivalent wages not able to be $1 under TSMIT or in some cases, the case officer not accepting a minor difference in wage, sometimes to the point of 8 cents an hour or worse. (One case officer in WA wouldn’t accept the difference of an annual cup of coffee as equivalent).
This company client of mine has had many nominations approved, with not only no equivalent wages, but the equivalent wages they do supply are under TSMIT!!! How can DIBP be so lenient when a company lodges themselves, yet so strict on applications lodged by Migration Agents. This has not happened just once, or with just one case officer. This has been an ongoing for a few years now on many applications with many case officers.
Where is the justice in this inconsistency??"
Comments
-
Thursday, 24 April 2014At last someone has taken notice. This kind of occurrence is not just restricted to 457 salary comparisons. It seems that the entire system is fast becoming heavily biased towards assisting individual applicants that it stinks. I have witnessed several occasions and heard of so many incidents where case officers have seemingly favoured direct applicants with excessive leniency whilst taking a ridiculously harsh and inflexible stance with RMA submitted applications. Whilst there are still a number of case officers who have an unbiased and professional approach sadly the majority are seemingly anti RMA.
-
Thursday, 24 April 2014
Bias and inconsistency against RMAs by DIBP officers needs to stop
Liana Allan
12:21 PM (0 minutes ago)
to ian.cheung@immi.gov.au
Dear Ian
Please accept this as a complaint from Migration Alliance.
http://migrationalliance.com.au/immigration-daily-news/entry/2014-04-dibp-called-on-to-stop-inconsistency-and-bias.html">http://migrationalliance.com.au/immigration-daily-news/entry/2014-04-dibp-called-on-to-stop-inconsistency-and-bias.html
Please let me know if you cannot read the complaint.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Inline image 3lianapassportpicture.jpg
Liana J Allan
Secretary
Registered Migration Agent 0104178
http://migrationalliance.com.au/
Level 7 , Suite 9
428 George Street
Sydney, NSW 2000
Ph: +61 2 9008 1306
Fx: +61 2 9221 1182
Follow me on Twitter @lianaallan -
Thursday, 24 April 2014
I believe its down to the regard that a case officer expects agents to know the exact laws and requirements exactly and don't allow us any errors as trained practitioners so we get no leeway
and we are also tarnished by illegal offshore unregistered agents they deal with giving us a bad reputations and the fact we challenge the case officers if they make an error and this is also distasteful which leaves them into an opinion we are all bad. its a case officer mind set. I.E let put the agent to task on his knowledge level continually. Bu on the other hand the person who individually makes a mistake is acceptable as he is not suppose to know all the legal requirements as he is not trained to so leeway is applied to him. Its just the plight of agents dealing with DIBP , it is what it is.
Immigration blog
DIBP are not agents' friends nor do they like us. There is no consistency and many agents who try to argue their case or stand their ground will have their name talked about at the Department and you will find that most case officers will treat you with spite. I met an ex-DIBP employee who has never dealt with me or my firm before but knows the name of my principal because of the bad words said about him around the Department. The Department is a joke. Has anyone else caught on about the flawed legislation regarding 457 LMT? I haven't received a response to my email from DIBP yet, even though it's been a few weeks, but my concern is that LMT only applies to "approved sponsors", yet if your sponsorship hasn't been approved and you lodge a nomination without LMT, DIBP will still request you to withdraw the application as it will be deemed invalid or refused.