Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 10923
- 15 Comments
Customer Service Manager for 457 visas is doomed
At the end of July 2015 I wrote an article titled 'Refuse, refuse, refuse: 457 nominations and visas refused'.
The DIBP kindly responded to my tweets on the above article, stating that DIBP approval rates sat at over 90%.
Mistakenly, I should have cited the 'most-popularly-refused' occupation, and asked for the approval/refusal-rate for that particular occupation. That 'popularly refused' occupation is none other than Customer Service Manager.
Having had a close read of recent Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia (AATA) Migration and Refugee Division decisions, I have come to find two decisions which confirm my worst suspicions. Standard and uniform decision-making is missing.
Could Registered Migration Agents please let me know how:
A/ This nomination can be approved?
and yet;
B/ This one can be refused?
I will put this to the Minister today. Something needs to be done about the lack of consistency in decision-making. The goal posts constantly move. It is just not good enough.
Comments from other RMAs, plus suggestions as to what members would like MA to do would be most appreciated.
Comments
-
Tuesday, 11 August 2015Liana we should as RMA's get together and take this constant inconsistency and visa refusal to the Media. The DIBP, a Government body should be held accountable for its process and decisions making like any other Government body.
Any person applying for a visa should feel that there is a process in place in determining applications which is fair and consistent and that decision making is based on legislation not on the biased opinions of delegates of the Minister.
We need to complain and request an inquiry into the process within the DIBP.
As RMA's we should be able to contact an independent person within the DIBP who can rectify errors made by Delegates without the need for clients to spend further money appealing decisions to the MRT. -
Tuesday, 11 August 2015
Maybe it is a way for the government to raise revenue quickly to pay off the national debt. Just thinking out loud. Pay DIBP then pay AATA. I mean, DIBP have clearly determined that our economy clearly doesn't actually need skilled people. It just needs a quick band-aid cash injection, which can be achieved via visa applications appealing stupid DIBP decisions. Again, thinking out loud.
-
Tuesday, 11 August 2015What must be stopped at the first place is decision-making process based on delegates “believe" or "satisfaction" and murky policy, rather than regulations and act. Rules must be clear in order to maintain consistency in decision making. How on earth, the case officers dare to accuse employers for lying in relation to staffing need of their business in absence of any evidence.
It is business owner who takes financial responsibility for employment of nominated person, signs sponsorship obligations and risks his/her own money.
How it is possible, that often low skilled public servants instruct experienced business people how to run own business:
“While organisations may require some degree of customer service management, in smaller companies the customer service functions are typically carried out by a range of other staff including other levels of management or directors”.
Does it mean that there is hidden policy in place that instructs officers to refuse customer service manager position in all small businesses?
Why restaurant manger can be approved while nominated by start up business that just opened the door the customer service manager can not?
Although these existing financial figures are understandable in light of the recently established business, the staffing and financial information provided indicates the applicant is a new business that lacks the scope, scale and high-level operations requiring the employment of a Customer Service Manager – ANZSCO 149212./
Does it mean no chance for approval for start up business, even though
” financial figures are understandable in light of the recently established business”?
It is role of Compliance Department to make sure integrity of the program is maintained not processing officers. I find inappropriate to use refusal of specifically targeted occupations as preventive measure in order to maintain integrity of the 457 visa program. -
Tuesday, 11 August 2015
One cannot help but think that it very much looks that way - a quick turn turn around to collect much needed funds from those who cannot complain nor desist (to pay) when others are allowed to use obscene amounts of funds in the name of democracy - oops (!)
We must look at this from the point of consistency in policy implementation - we CANNOT allow a decision by a ministerial delegate who has the authority to say yay or nay to a decision, to use language, opinion and information which is not terribly consistent with Regulation, PAMs and legislation (or public service instrumentalities for that matter) - I am flabbergasted about decisions which are refused on little more than a case officer's opinions about 'something that must be thus, bearing little semblance to legislative, regulatory or procedural considerations and, and if so refused, 'go and merit review it' - it is, like many aspects of this day and age's public administration, based on poor decision making - reflecting badly on those who do it and making a mockery of departmental officers who take their job seriously and look at the merits of the case, taking their time to get more information so that the correct decision is arrived at. Just refusing so that IF the applicant decides to (or can) apply for merits review, to have it remitted is, to me, VERY POOR FORM. -
Wednesday, 12 August 2015
I have been doing this for many years and frankly I have not seen such flagrant disregard for the lives of those people they serve! I say serve because they are public "servants", GOD lives elsewhere. These poor people come to RMA's for advice and guidance, they pay a lot of money to have a professionally prepared application bundle lodged on their behalf, one that will address legislation and give them the best chance possible at achieving this life-changing event. I will preface this next part by saying that there are still some very nice, dedicated and reasonable Delegates within the halls of DIBP but I fear that the root of the problem with Delegates is the poisonous culture that has been allowed to fester and grow over the last few years. In the past, any Delegate that jumped ship and became an RMA was jokingly referred to as "Going over to the Dark Side" sadly, we seem to be viewed as an evil toxin that has to be tolerated and expunged wherever possible. I recall my youth when I questioned a local relief police officer in our town (in rural NSW) as to why he booked me for parking my ute on the grass (as we all did) and not on the road - his rely was "Because I Can" - Bottom line, the Case Officer attitude is (as Liana "thought out loud") if you don't like my decision, tough! There are mechanisms in place to change my decision if you wish, trouble is, not always is there rights to appeal a surreptitious and baseless pronouncement - I do not say "decision because a decision is a determination arrived at after consideration. As an aside, what is all this DIBP garbage about "I give little weight......" bit like "basically" overused, little understood.
-
Monday, 25 January 2016
Michael, can you please contact me asap. I am a lawyer and agent and totally agree with what you are saying! My number is 0405150558
-
Wednesday, 12 August 2015
Can MA please make this suggestion to be implemented for all decision making case officers in DIBP?
"If a refusal decision by the same case officer is overturned by the tribunal on 5 occasions, then that case officer be barred from assessing further applications for say...5 years."
This is to make case officer's accountable for their decisions and avoid unnecessary waste of time and money both of the applicant and the DIBP.
On another note, can MA please help RMA's get a dedicated phone line with DIBP as an inquiry line. Why are we as members of MARA treated like all and sundry holding for hours on end to finally get the most ridiculous uninformed delegate at the other end? -
Wednesday, 12 August 2015
Re Ivan's post. How lucky he gets on the phone and gets a delegate. I will get a delegate in 1% of cases. I wrote a complaint because I could not get any sort of confirmation from DIBP parent centre that they received my documents. No automatic message, no human message, no number to call, no delegate and the person from the 'service centre' could not tell me anything. In the end I received some stupid reply that they have an automated email service (which they didn't have). I think we should all fight for a line (like tax agents have) and for some kind of penalty system of delegates as suggested by Ivan. Also, whose idea was it to refund only half of AAT's filing fee on winning? How is that fair? Maybe the other half should be refunded by the delegate?
-
Wednesday, 12 August 2015
The fact is that the occupation of customer service manager is vilified by case officers for reasons that are unknown. Maybe because the occupation of Office Manager is no longer there to attack. If they hate it so much, why not cross it off the CSOL and let us look at alternatives? The [supposed] reasoning that is used to justify the each of the many refusals is an embarrassment to DIBP.
Inconsistency in DIBP decisions was brought up by a MRT member at a recent case I represented. She was clearly perplexed as to the lack of uniform guidelines and case officers' twisted interpretations of policy. That said, the number of MRT cases that have upheld crazy illogical decisions also shows that this craziness is leeching through the system. How and where does the need for a customer service manager hinge upon the number of outlets a company has? Mention "retail" and suddenly a position which satisfies all ANZSCO job description seems way more appropriate to retail manager whilst only touching on a few elements of that occupation's job description. -
Monday, 14 September 2015
This is further confirmed by comments of QT, Assistant Director, Temporary Business Entry at DIBP & Migration Practitioners Liaison Meeting on Tuesday 28 July 2015: "The Customer Service Manager occupation has been of concern recently and I acknowledge there are a number of other issues with assessing genuineness because it is a subjective criterion. As it is a subjective criterion it will result in what could be seen as inconsistent decision making. We are endeavouring to make those decisions as consistent as possible"
-
Monday, 21 September 2015
I am in !
For the first time after so many years, I got a refusal for a nomination of Customer Service Manager for a client who runs 2 business colleges over 2 states having over 250 students and over 20 staff. The delegate regarded the business as "a small business" and for that they do not need to have a full-time Customer Service Manager and their directors can do the job. Since when they dictate the way the sponsoring company manage the business ?
Their sponsorship was approved before and the application was for a nomination for their existing Customer Service Manager. I am pasting an extract from the refusal letter below. If the department has no intention to approve the nomination of Customer Service Manager, why don't they remove it from CSOL !?
We seriously have to do something about this.
I also note that the organisation chart indicates there are Chief Executive Officer (CEO),
a Chief Financial Officer (CFO), and an RTO Compliance Manager. While all businesses
require some level of workforce management, I am not able to ascertain how a business
of such a small size requires a position of Customer Service Manager with high level of
responsibilities in addition to the existing three layers of management.
The role of Customer Service Manager is normally associated with high level management
within a large organisation and not a small business. While all organisations may require
some degree of customer service management, in smaller organisations the functions of a
Customer Service Manager are typically carried out by directors. -
Wednesday, 24 August 2016
HI,
I am just wondering, is it a right profession to choose for 457 visa? If not, what will be the similar options.
Thanks -
Friday, 16 September 2016
Is Customer Service Manager being denied only for 457 ?? or is refused under 189 / 190 also ??
-
Sunday, 06 November 2016
For Australia 457 visa is the PTE score needs to maintain min 30% and overall more than 35% for both Communicative skills and Enabling Skills if one of the enabling skill is less than 30% do we need to write the PTE acadamic again?
Immigration blog
The case officer Surjadi SADELI Position Number: 60031000 provided us with following statement in visa decision related to position of Customer Service manager: "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! Liana, how you can expect consistency in decision making if they do not respect own policy?