Changes expected for the 457 visa

rightyabe

markymark21 wrote: »

Nah I think once you've lodged your application before July 1st your visa applications bound by the current rules

I haven't lodged my actual visa app just my employed told me they put the nomination in. I hope to god I'll be pre July 1st but I got a sinking feeling.

markymark21

rightyabe wrote: »

I haven't lodged my actual visa app just my employed told me they put the nomination in. I hope to god I'll be pre July 1st but I got a sinking feeling.

Is this going to be the first time they've sponsored someone? I've been told the first application can be an absolute mare for a business...

rightyabe

markymark21 wrote: »

Is this going to be the first time they've sponsored someone? I've been told the first application can be an absolute mare for a business...

I'll be the second, there first sponsorship was approved last week.

Mellor

rightyabe wrote: »

What if your employer lodged your nomination last week? Will they still have to adhere to these new laws?

The rules regarding training, looking for an Aussie, benchmarks etc are related to the nomination, if they've already lodged the nomination it's probably ok.

The visa charge is related to the visa lodge date, get it in today to save money. The obligations and conditions of the visa are related to the grant. So you will pissup ably get the benefit of the 90 days time to find an employer (if that cones in next year) without the increased fee.

irishmover

markymark21 wrote: »

Is this going to be the first time they've sponsored someone? I've been told the first application can be an absolute mare for a business...

I joined a company a number of weeks ago now. They lodged an application for nomination and it took 3.5 weeks to come through due to the time of year and the fact the visa costs are changing (so alot of companies are putting nomination applications in). But typically it would take 1-2 weeks with application in. It took the company a couple days to gather the info needed. So at a normal time of year it wouldn't be too much of an issue as long as the company are legit and meet the criteria.

Once they're a nominating company it took a day for my transfer to happen.

Mellor

irishmover wrote: »

I joined a company a number of weeks ago now. They lodged an application for nomination and it took 3.5 weeks to come through due to the time of year and the fact the visa costs are changing (so alot of companies are putting nomination applications in). But typically it would take 1-2 weeks with application in. It took the company a couple days to gather the info needed. So at a normal time of year it wouldn't be too much of an issue as long as the company are legit and meet the criteria.

Once they're a nominating company it took a day for my transfer to happen.

You are missing a step.
If its a companies first 457, or first in 4 years, they must lodge a SBS approval applucation before they can lodge a nomination. Once they have both of then lodged you can lodge the visa application.


You don't need to wait for each step to be granted before lodging the next. I lodged my visa the day after SBS and nomination were lodged

The_Hustler

I am sponsored by my recruiter, and the 28 day rule applies between the roles they get me. If this rule that the job has to be advertised for 4 months before someone can sponsor, I wonder will that apply to any role the recruiter gets me in future. If that's the case, I think my time here is coming to an end

irishmover

Mellor wrote: »

You are missing a step.
If its a companies first 457, or first in 4 years, they must lodge a SBS approval applucation before they can lodge a nomination. Once they have both of then lodged you can lodge the visa application.


You don't need to wait for each step to be granted before lodging the next. I lodged my visa the day after SBS and nomination were lodged

Sorry yeh all three were lodged pretty much the same day. But it took an additional day for my visa to go through after the SBS and nomination was approved. But overall it took 3.5 weeks. Which was about at least 1 week longer than normal. All in all the point was that its not as daunting a task as people think for the company as long as they have been running their company correctly.

Mellor

The_Hustler wrote: »

I am sponsored by my recruiter, and the 28 day rule applies between the roles they get me. If this rule that the job has to be advertised for 4 months before someone can sponsor, I wonder will that apply to any role the recruiter gets me in future. If that's the case, I think my time here is coming to an end

It only applies to future visas granted. They can't back date the conditions

gabberific

Mellor wrote: »

It only applies to future visas granted. They can't back date the conditions

I'm almost positive after reading an article by a well known migration agency that the conditions affect current visa holders too - the 90 days does for sure, as does the salary increase.

massdebater

gabberific wrote: »

I'm almost positive after reading an article by a well known migration agency that the conditions affect current visa holders too - the 90 days does for sure, as does the salary increase.

Have you got a link for that? Changes are always for future applications, never for existing applications. No chance of changes affecting existing visa holders.

rightyabe

I would be thinking that the 90 days would be for all 457 holders, it makes sense. Why give a person who was sponsored pre 1st July a unfair disadvantage against another person sponsored post July it's a bit stupid.

gabberific

Sorry, i can't find the link. I accessed at work, so it may be restricted or something.
I could be wrong about it, but I'm nearly sure.

Batgurl

gabberific wrote: »

Sorry, i can't find the link. I accessed at work, so it may be restricted or something.
I could be wrong about it, but I'm nearly sure.

90 days is retrospectively applied to all 457 visa holders but labour market testing conditions are not. Otherwise every employer in the country would need to advertise the thousands of jobs filled by 457 visa holders. Local newspapers would have a field day!

However new powers of inspection will apply to current holders and if your company is investigated and found to be in breach then that could spell trouble.

Mellor

gabberific wrote: »

I'm almost positive after reading an article by a well known migration agency that the conditions affect current visa holders too - the 90 days does for sure, as does the salary increase.

Afaik The 90 condition applies to the visa grant. As does the salary.

http://www.irishecho.com.au/2013/06/06/457-visa-bill/26200

If passed, the legislation will take effect on July 1 and the 90 days amendment will apply to visa granted from this date.

rightyabe wrote: »

I would be thinking that the 90 days would be for all 457 holders, it makes sense. Why give a person who was sponsored pre 1st July a unfair disadvantage against another person sponsored post July it's a bit stupid.

Because its tied to the legislation relating to the visa. They can't retroactively alter the conditions. The same applies to negative changes.


However, immigration might be more lenient with people who have 28 days once the new law is approved. They'll probably take it case by case.

gabberific

Batgurl wrote: »

90 days is retrospectively applied to all 457 visa holders but labour market testing conditions are not. Otherwise every employer in the country would need to advertise the thousands of jobs filled by 457 visa holders. Local newspapers would have a field day!

However new powers of inspection will apply to current holders and if your company is investigated and found to be in breach then that could spell trouble.

That's what I thought. I think conditions that can be applied, are, i.e. the 90 days, but the labour market testing could never be applied to current holders as you said - it would be mental.

markymark21

gabberific wrote: »

I'm almost positive after reading an article by a well known migration agency that the conditions affect current visa holders too - the 90 days does for sure, as does the salary increase.

Yeh well I went through a 'Well Known Migration Agency' and he informed me I needed health insurance to apply for the 457!

Now we all know that's not the case, so don't believe everything these guys tell you

...either way I got health insurance cause I'm a clumsy bollix

ArseBurger

massdebater wrote: »

Changes are always for future applications, never for existing applications. No chance of changes affecting existing visa holders.

Excellent! Where do I claim back the last two years of LAFHA then?

massdebater

ArseBurger wrote: »

Excellent! Where do I claim back the last two years of LAFHA then?

Okay okay - I didn't fully think this through before I posted it :P

In fairness, it is very rare to see changes affecting existing visas. And I still haven't seen a link showing that these new changes will effect existing visa holders.

Mellor

ArseBurger wrote: »

Excellent! Where do I claim back the last two years of LAFHA then?

LAFHA is anything to do with a the visa conditions.
When they change the ruled it affect all future Lafha payments. They didn't make you pay back previous payments.

ArseBurger

Mellor wrote: »

LAFHA is anything to do with a the visa conditions.
When they change the ruled it affect all future Lafha payments. They didn't make you pay back previous payments.

I know. My point was that it affected current 457 visa holders when they changed the rules. Not just new visa entrants.

mandrake04

ArseBurger wrote: »

I know. My point was that it affected current 457 visa holders when they changed the rules. Not just new visa entrants.

LAFHA is under the ATO, nothing to do with Dept of Immigration or the legislation of granting visas or the rules of keeping visa valid.

It was the Tax office that clarified the correct use of LAFHA, 457 holders were using a loophole based on the definition of the word home.

Mellor

ArseBurger wrote: »

I know. My point was that it affected current 457 visa holders when they changed the rules. Not just new visa entrants.

The point you are making makes no sense.
LAFHA is nothing to do with a visa.
When they changed it, it affect all lafha payments from then on, it had no effect of lafha payments made previously.

PS1985

markymark21 wrote: »

Yeh mine got lodged today..such a relief. I've got the missus as a De Facto so hopefully there are no hiccups.

Hi Mark just wondering how you got on, have you been granted your visa yet? I'm in the same boat lodged on the same day as you and am a bit worried as I hear if you lodged before the 1st July but your visa is not finalised by that date it is subject to the new rulings. I have also 2 friends on a similar timeline already been rejected.

Has anyone on here been granted a 457 since 1st July?

browne_rob5

PS1985 wrote: »

Hi Mark just wondering how you got on, have you been granted your visa yet? I'm in the same boat lodged on the same day as you and am a bit worried as I hear if you lodged before the 1st July but your visa is not finalised by that date it is subject to the new rulings. I have also 2 friends on a similar timeline already been rejected.

Has anyone on here been granted a 457 since 1st July?

I got granted mine last Thursday. It was submitted in the last couple of days off June. Can't remember exactly. I didn't have anyone going de facto it.

Kenny_D

browne_rob5 wrote: »

I got granted mine last Thursday. It was submitted in the last couple of days off June. Can't remember exactly. I didn't have anyone going de facto it.

My application was granted in 1 day. Submitted end of august. Was expecting 8-12 weeks so no idea how I got it approved so quick. Wasn't a straight forward one either I imagine due to de-facto application.

PS1985

browne_rob5 wrote: »

I got granted mine last Thursday. It was submitted in the last couple of days off June. Can't remember exactly. I didn't have anyone going de facto it.

Thanks Rob, if you don't mind can I ask what ANZSCO group you belong to, 1,2,3 or 4?... It seems 1 & 2 are getting through.... Also did you get 4 years? a pal of mine and his employer specified 4 years in the application but the immigration wouldn't accept it and only give a max of 12 months and he will have to apply from scratch after a review after a year.

Is this common?

browne_rob5

PS1985 wrote: »

Thanks Rob, if you don't mind can I ask what ANZSCO group you belong to, 1,2,3 or 4?... It seems 1 & 2 are getting through.... Also did you get 4 years? a pal of mine and his employer specified 4 years in the application but the immigration wouldn't accept it and only give a max of 12 months and he will have to apply from scratch after a review after a year.

Is this common?

I've never heard of ANZSCO group. Work had a migration agent so wasn't too involved. I work as an accountant if that helps.

Yes I got a 4 year visa and I have never heard of someone getting less.

Noo

Ive heard of someone getting a year 457 because the company had just started, basically immigration being cautious. But after the year was up they had to apply again for immigration to extend it, didnt have to do it from scratch I dont think.

Mellor

Kenny_D wrote: »

My application was granted in 1 day. Submitted end of august. Was expecting 8-12 weeks so no idea how I got it approved so quick. Wasn't a straight forward one either I imagine due to de-facto application.

It was probably already approved based on the nomination.

PS1985 wrote: »

Thanks Rob, if you don't mind can I ask what ANZSCO group you belong to, 1,2,3 or 4?... It seems 1 & 2 are getting through.... Also did you get 4 years? a pal of mine and his employer specified 4 years in the application but the immigration wouldn't accept it and only give a max of 12 months and he will have to apply from scratch after a review after a year.

Is this common?

Did immigration tell him that directly, or was it from the employer/agent.

They'll can only grant a visa for a long as the nomination term. If would only give 12 months, it sounds like that's what they employer put down on the nomination form.