Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 38898
- 79 Comments
Refuse, refuse, refuse: 457 nominations and visas refused
DIBP are refusing 457 SBS, nominations and 457s for any reason
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) are doing their utmost best to refuse any component of the 457 application process, but most of all, 457 nominations.
Example of a large supermarket refusal
A large supermarket with more than 20 staff in a regional area is trying to sponsor a marketing specialist. The DIBP have refused the application on the basis that the salary offered is too low, at $55,000. However the market salary rates show $50K-$60K and TSMIT is $53,000. And yet the DIBP are still saying that $55,000 is too low and have refused the application without giving a chance for the sponsor to increase the salary. The sponsor is more than happy to increase the salary to whatever the DIBP want it to be as they need the person badly. See the end of this article for the interesting salary offered to ACS ICT case assessors in Sydney city. Proceed to roll your eyes.
Refusal on 'Genuineness' Criteria
Now let's look at the 'genuineness' criteria. The DIBP have for a while 'deemed' that a position is not necessary for the operation of a business and is hence, not a genuine position. Don't you just love the word 'deem' in the context of a case officer and their decisions?
Take the example case of Mr S. Mr S is a man who has given up a career in his home country and moved to Australia on a 457 visa in around 2009. Mr S qualified for permanent residency (PR) to Australia but the business Mr S was sponsored by was taken over by another company with a different ABN. The PR application could therefore not be lodged. Mr S originally started on his 457 as a project and programme administrator, but now to obtain a new 457 visa for the same job at the second company, he needs to undergo a skills assessment for the position of project and programme administrator (the position he currently holds and has held since 2009). Mr S holds a bachelors degree in nursing from Indonesia.
Refusal due to PAMS conflicting with ANZSCO
On closer inspection, there is a discrepancy between the skills assessment requirement (qualification plus work experience) and ANZSCO requirement. ANZSCO states that only work experience is required, and not necessarily a qualification.
In the case of Mr S, the DIBP case officer inflexibly applied PAMS. Whoever created this rule in PAMs is probably referred to as the 'PAM GOD' within the DIBP, such is the size of the brick wall for applicants and their sponsors. Registered Migration Agents are getting to the point where they just tell clients that applying is like gambling and say, 'do you want to go ahead or not?'
Refusal based on 'Training Receipts'
In relation to the Standard Business Sponsorship (SBS) it is interesting that refusals are coming through saying there is no evidence that the training receipt provided has been used to train Australians, even though the company structure chart shows that all employees are Australian citizens. This was previously not happening.
Refusal because a 'Small Business'
It seems that DIBP are prone to refusing small businesses. The DIBP case officers automatically assume that the small business owner should do the job themselves and do not need the employee or any managerial position. Typical refusals for small businesses are in the occupations of Customer Service Manager, Facilities Manager, Retail Buyer and other Managerial positions. DIBP case officers, with all their business management experience in the real world (cough) assume that the business owners can carry out these functions on their own, and hence refuse the applications.
Think about the feeling of a small business owner if they are forced to do the work themselves instead of expanding the business do do other upper-level development on their business. All because a DIBP case officer says they should be able to. Case officers are now deciding for small business owners who and what they need to run their businesses, stifling business owners and preventing optimum growth.
Refusals since the DIBP's name change to 'Border Force'
Agents are reporting that since the DIBP changed it's name to Border Force, their refusal rates are up as high as 80%. Migration Agents, do not lose heart. There is now a pattern of refusals that cannot be ignored. This blog post serves as a line in the sand and trumpet sound that something is going on in there. The legislation remains the same but the way the DIBP handle and decide assessments is at a completely different level now.
Refusals because of a disjointed assessment process
The process is now disjointed and haphazard within the DIBP.
First, 457 applications now go through initial division will have one case officer look at it and send a request for further information whenever they are not satisfied. The requested documents and extra information are then attached online by the RMA.
The application then moves back to the queue and is then allocated to a different case officer who will then make a decision on the information in front of them. The trend now is that the second case officer makes the decision without asking for any additional information.
The following is a typical example of the disjointed assessment process:
The first case officer asks for extra documents A C and F.
The second case officer refuses the application because B, D and E do not satisfy them.
The fact that the first case officer did not ask for B, D and E along with their request for A, C and F deprives the sponsor / applicant of the opportunity to provide what is actually needed. The second case officer requests nothing and therefore deprives the sponsor / applicant of chance to have their application/s fairly assessed.
I call this 'case officers working in silos'.
DIBP case officers refusing cases like street rangers fine cars
DIBP are now acting like street rangers who must book and fine a target number of cars per day. The more you fine the more rewarded you are.
The greater scrutiny of 457 visa applications is leading to a fall in grants. Red tape has gone mad, with 457 applications even voided because of typos and spelling errors.
DIBP decisions are hypocritical
It is interesting to note that a full time 'Case Assessor - ICT skills assessment' position at the Australian Computer Society in Sydney city (non-regional) is being advertised on SEEK.com at $45,000. If that is not a kick in the teeth then what is? I rest my case.
My crystal ball prediction
If this continues, people desperate to stay will have no other option but to become unlawful because it is all too hard. Either that or other subclasses of visa will be rorted so that they can stay in Australia. No wonder 62,000 foreigners are now living in Australia without any visas.
DIBP....... QIN WO PI GU!
Comments
-
Friday, 31 July 2015Hi Lu-Jiao, it is interested to note that below occupations are required skills assessment for 457 purposes under PAMs and not backed by Gazetted Notice:
It is also departmental policy that all applicants nominated in the occupations of Program and Project Administrator (ANZSCO 511112) and Specialist Managers nec (ANZSCO 139999) will be required to demonstrate that they meet 457.223(2)(d) by providing evidence of having completed a skills assessment for migration purposes conducted by VETASSESS (Skills Recognition – General Occupations) - a VETASSESS 485 skills assessment is not acceptable for this purpose. -
Monday, 03 August 2015
Hi Jennifer, thank you so much!
-
Tuesday, 04 August 2015
The important question is, how can we stop such unfairness from continuing?
-
Tuesday, 11 August 2015The case officer Surjadi SADELI Position Number: 60031000 provided us with following statemnt in visa decision related to position of Customer Service manger : "On 5 June 2015, the Agent provided an email from Australian Bureau Statistic (ABS)" dated 20 February 2013. “Whilst I acknowledged this email is from ABS and mentions the occupation of Customer Service Manager, I place little weight on the statement by ABS as the nomination application must be assessed under the Migration Regulation and policy guidelines".
I was under impression that under PAM3, ANZSCO and ABS advices suppose to be used by Delegate as guideline associated with nomination and skills assent. I was obviously wrong....
Delegate says "I place little weight on the statement by ABS" . Border Protection knows better than ABS! -
Tuesday, 11 August 2015
They are totally irrational and paranoiac and...... Shall we hold our nomination applications until they correct their attitude? How on earth can with change that?
-
Wednesday, 09 September 2015
I am Yazidi ( Yazidi means is a religion which is different from muslms like Christianity religion). I am an english teacher. I have worked with EXXON Mobile ( An American Oil company). I have worked with one an Autrallian safety trainer Doug Willian from ( Beyond break company).
You know I am from Sinjar( Sinjar is that place which ISIS attacked it in 2014, handreds of children died in the mountain, because there was not water and food for 4 days, ISIS has kidnaped handred of our women and they are raping and buying them everyday in Syria and Iraq, they killed handreds of our men on our own land) all that happened to us, because we did not change our religion to Islam religion and they did the same with chritians as well. Now we live in a refugee camp for more then a year in hot and cold tents without homes.
I want to get immigration visa because i want to live in save place and to make better future for my little daughters. i don want to see one day my daughters and my wife are raping and buying by ISIS like now what they do with our Ladies in Syria and Iraq.
Can anyone of you help me, please? -
Wednesday, 30 September 2015
We received the second nomination refusal for position of retail buyer. The sponsor is an online store selling thousands types of product. The first refusal is based on the business is a small business, the position is not necessary required by the business (genuine position issue).
In second nomination, we provided the company's turnover is over $2.5 million, company's procedures in relation to selecting goods, deciding prices, promoting products etc. We also provide the evidences to support company sales, operating, staff etc. However, the second nomination was still refused due to:
"On assessment of all the information supplied by the applicant, I am satisfied that the
nominated position of ANZSCO 639211 - Retail Buyer, does not appear to be a position
necessary to the operations of the business.
In making my decision, all the information provided before time of decision has been
considered. I have considered the information provided with the application but find
there is insufficient evidence in the documentation to support a finding that there is a
genuine business need for a Retail Buyer. I have formed this view after consideration of
all the information provided pertaining to the operating environment, current practices,
commitments, staffing composition, and evidence to support claims regarding the current
and projected growth. No independently verifiable evidence was provided by the applicant to
support the need of a Retail Buyer.
I have considered all the information provided, and given the size, scope and nature of the
business as evidenced by the information provided, I am not satisfied that the nature of the
business is sufficiently large and complex enough to demonstrate the need for a Retail Buyer
performing the duties as defined by ANZSCO on a full time basis.
Consequently, as the position of ANZSCO 639211 - Retail Buyer does not appear necessary
to the operations of the business I do not consider the position associated with the nominated
occupation to be genuine."
DIBP knows better to run an online store with $2.5m turnover??? -
Wednesday, 30 September 2015
It seems to be a refusal template. I've received one recently on a 457 renewal where the business wasn't a concern a year prior and apparent the occupation was needed when the turnover was 20% of the current turnover...
MRT-AAT will be flooded with these sooner or later. -
Thursday, 01 October 2015
It would appear that DIBP want to close down the 457 visas.
I have just had a 2nd refusal for a 457 visa nomination stating that the company was not big enough (they are trying to expand) to warrant an Advertising Manager. This person they wanted for at least a 5 year period for their expansion plans.
The refusal was that the DIBP did not consider it genuine.
Why on earth would a company go to the expense of getting a first time sponsorship for 457 visas for the fun of it.
I have been a Registered Migration Agent for over 13 years and I must admit this is the first time I have felt so disappointed with the professionalism of DIBP. -
Friday, 16 October 2015
Hi guys, interesting thread. I am from the business side of things. We are a public ally listed company with over 60 Australian staff. Have a staff member who is integral to our growth and expansion so we went for 457. Got told today it was rejected but yet to hear the reason. We currently have 1 other staff member on a 457 and this was accepted 2 years ago when we were still a start up... Does this mean if it is rejected because of us (nomination) the other staff member is stuffed as well? It's hard enough finding good staff let alone great staff like the one we applied for. These pricks are going to harm our business if this continues.. If there is an Australian out there that speaks 4 language, has the work ethic of a ant, and the skills to match, I'd love to meet them. It's fucking ridiculous.
-
Friday, 16 October 2015
I sent an email to the Prime Minister. I know it is wishful thinking that action is going to be taken to give businesses a "fair go".
But I have heard that miracles can happen. -
Friday, 16 October 2015
For those who wish to send this higher:
If you wish to SEND COMMENTS to the Prime Minister please use the facility at:
http://www.pm.gov.au/contact-your-pm -
Wednesday, 25 November 2015
after getting refused in 457 can i apply again for nomination in 457 visa by another sponsor??
-
Friday, 11 December 2015
I wish I read this sooner, the 457 department are a disgrace! and yes lets out the offending case officers, as theres one in particular I know that's a right *****!!!!! We RMA look like absolute fools, as we are too blame if the client receives a refusal, and believe me I'm nearly out of business because of all the refusals! Its not like I don't know my stuff, its the department making right fools of us RMA, its not fair, its not just and its absolutely wrong!
-
Wednesday, 13 January 2016
seriously. Its beyond a joke now. Nomination refused for retail buyer in one of Australia's largest retail stores with a payroll of over $1.5 mil and a turnover of over $27 mil.
I would just love to be an immi officer assessing a nomination application for an immi officer in the 457 section. My decision would be as follows:
1. I would spend the first 5 pages of my decision reciting relevant legislation
2. i would then devote just one short para stating:
I have considered the size, structure and the nature of operations of the business as well as the ANZSCO description of the nominated occupation.
[b]i have referred to all relevant documents available in support of the nomination and based on the information provided, i find that the position associated with the nominated occupation is inconsistent with the nature of the business and as such i find that the position associated with the nominated occupation of immi 457 departmental officer is not genuine. The position is more aligned with that of a person whose role it is to refuse all applications regardless of the merit and strength of the nomination application without regard to the interests and requirements of the nominating employer. Consequently, no objective assessment or independent and transparent analysis is required nor is there any demonstrable need to exercise any skill or judgement in the decision making process. The position is not a skilled occupation and is more aligned with that of "junior office clerk" whose role is confined to following directions to refuse all nomination applications submitted" -
Friday, 15 January 2016
i hesitate to think of how many AAT (MRT) applications have now been lodged for nomination refusals.
Why doesn't Migration alliance encourage the establishment of some sort of insurance scheme that would enable all agents to appeal nomination refusals to the AAT. Maybe if all agents added say a $200 levy to their fees to be contributed to a appeal fund, this would result in enough money being raised to meet the costs of all AAT nomination appeals. A panel of lawyers could be appointed to run these appeals. The AAT would be inundated with appeals which would send a particularly strong message to IMMI and the government that the migration industry is no longer going to put up with the incompetence of IMMI and their clear strategy of refusing as many nominations as possible. If Immi were aware that every nomination refusal was going to end up at the AAT then just maybe this would change attitudes. In addition to this, the online register of immi officers who are notorious for their nomination refusals should be published so that we out these people. Let's get their names out there so everyone can see who they are. These gutless officers who refuse to put their names to their decisions still have positioned numbers which we can refer to so let's published these as well. -
Sunday, 17 January 2016
Amazing. Absolutely amazing !
My client who had worked for 1 year on a 457 visa for his employer applied to extend his 457 visa as the initial one was only approved for 1 year (new business). This of course involved renewing the nomination which expired after 12 months. Despite performing the same, work, with the same employer at the same premises (nothing had changed over the previous 12 months), the idiotic and mindless case officer refused the new nomination on the basis that she did not think the position was genuine or necessary. So my client had his first nomination and 457 visa approved, worked 1 year, applied again only to be refused.
So the first case officer was satisfied it was a genuine position but the second mindless twit of a case officer thought differently. What a gutless and cruel individual she must be.
We are dealing with vindictive and very nasty people who abuse their positions to find ways to refuse genuine applicants. -
Friday, 15 January 2016
In any AAT (MRT) appeal, we have found the very agent who prepared and submitted the primary application is the best person to prepare the appeal as the agent would, or should, have a through knowledge of the client's detailed background. For a thrid party to take over midway can be time consuming and may well loose the grit of the persuasion.
Secondly, in a number of appeals we have submitted that the business owner is best suited to make decsions on human resource requirement from the profit generationg business perspective and that a case officer lacks commercial experience to make a decsion on the needs of company. It is contententious point to submit but if carefully worded and illustrated with issues where ommission had occured in the making of the adverse decsion. -
Monday, 01 February 2016
I applied for retail buyer nomination from canberra on 17/09/15 and i am still waiting for decision... anyone have any idea what will happen with my case
Immigration blog
Hi Liana, it is a great article. I am a new migration agent, I appreciate the opportunity to learn. May I have a question regarding one case you mentioned above? It says"Mr S originally started on his 457 as a project and programme administrator, but now to obtain a new 457 visa for the same job at the second company, he needs to undergo a skills assessment for the position of project and programme administrator (the position he currently holds and has held since 2009). " I am confused here, why Mr S has to undergo a skill assessment for the new 457 visa due to the employer change? The skill assessment is for 186 visa purpose instead of 457 visa, am I correct? Thank you.