It's just a thought...
Attend a seminar as a starting point to learn more about the lifestyle of each country, their general migration process and a broad overview of Visa categories.
Migrating is more than just filling in forms and submitting paperwork; its a complex process that will test even the most resilient of people. Understanding Australia & New Zealand at a grass-roots level is paramount to your immigration survival, and to give you a realistic view of both countries, its people and how we see the world, as well as updates about any current or imminent policy changes, subscribe to our regular blog posts by entering your details below.
Posted by Myer on May 28, 2021, 10:38 a.m. in State Sponsorship
We’re talking occupations for Australia, not the movie. The question we constantly get from people we consult with is “what are good occupations to immigrate to Australia?”. By that they usually mean ‘what occupations does the Australian government want for the purpose of securing residence?’
A ‘good occupation’ is critical to your chances of success under a number of different residence scenarios. Why? Because Australia has a plethora of occupational lists of which one or more may apply to you and which will directly impact your ability to either secure state sponsorship (for most people that is now critical if the end game is residence) or to create a pathway to residence through working for an ‘eligible’ employer.
Because most of IMMagine’s clients leave home with provisional or permanent residence and they do not require jobs to secure their residence visa, we will focus on general skilled (‘points’) migration visas.
To be clear, if we describe your occupation as good, bad or ugly it has no bearing on the ease with which you could secure employment in Australia. Occupation lists are something of an artificial construct which may or may not reflect demand for those skills in the labour market.
Our focus today (and when we consult) is on those occupations that have a history of appearing on state sponsorship lists in the recent past. As Advisers we spend a lot of time looking in the rearview mirror – if a state has a history of sponsoring an occupation in the past year or two, this can be a strong indication they will continue to do so in the immediate future. Readers should bear in mind that at present very few states are sponsoring applicants based overseas (although in the past two weeks we have had two clients sponsored by a state government which is surprising as they are not living in Australia – we took that as a welcome signal that things are starting to ‘thaw’). We expect that a return to ‘normal’ will intensify over the next few months given the fact that the government recently announced that Australia’s borders will open to skilled migrants next year and Australia is experiencing worsening skills shortages.
One should also bear in mind that we can never know with 100% certainty which occupations will appear on state sponsorship lists in future because these details are never released in advance of the new ‘immigration year’ which begins on 1 July. We have had unexpected surprises, both positive and negative in the past. However, there are some occupations that always seem to appear on state sponsorship lists. We a few years ago we had a consultation with an Industrial Designer. We could not recall that occupation ever appearing on any state sponsorship occupation list but to his credit this client went ahead and obtained a skills assessment and lo and behold his occupation appeared on a state sponsorship list, and we’re happy to say he now calls Australia home.
As Randy Jackson of American Idol fame used to say: “you’ve gotta be in it to win it”. By that we mean you can’t wait until such time as your occupation appears on a state sponsorship list to make the decision or you’ve probably left it too late. That’s because each state sponsors a limited number of any particular occupation in any immigration year – they have strict quotas. If you wait until your occupation appears on a state sponsorship list to begin the entire process, chances are you’ll have missed the boat as the quota for that particular occupation is likely already have been filled. Cart before horse stuff. You’ll end up waiting another year to see what occupations appear on these lists in the next immigration year. That could delay your migration by 12 months.
There are 504 occupations that are suitable for general skilled migration ‘points’ based visas and we can’t hope to mention all of them here. We’ve only singled out certain standout occupations.
If the state governments are aware of the federal government’s initiative (and it’s a big ‘if’) one would assume that the 19 occupations on the Priority Migration Skilled Occupation List (PMSOL) should appear on state sponsorship lists.
The list is based on expert advice from the National Skills Commission and in consultation with Commonwealth departments:
We wouldn’t put too much faith in the state governments following the PMSOL and imagine that the state sponsorship lists will reflect the needs of their own economies just as they have in previous years.
The good occupations
Any trades or anyone in a technical role, construction managers, environmental consultant, internal auditor, actuary, economist, management consultant, architect, engineers, quantity surveyor, agricultural consultant, chemist, food technologist, life scientists, medical laboratory scientists, veterinarians, teachers, most healthcare related occupations (but sometimes registration issues may complicate matters), IT occupations (but numbers are usually quite low meaning it’s highly competitive but if Australia doesn’t want you, New Zealand almost certainly will), solicitors, psychologists, farmers, corporate services managers, specialist managers, senior managers, manufacturer, production managers, supply and distribution manager, quality assurance manager, laboratory manager, customer services manager, facilities manager, mathematician, statistician, social workers and anyone in a related occupation.
The bad occupations
Flower growers, music professionals, photographers, book or script editors, directors, film and video editor, program director, stage manager, technical director, video producer, print journalist, technical writer, television journalist, commodities trader, ICT trainer, gallery or museum curator, patents examiner, fashion designer, meat inspector.
A great example of the swan becoming the ugly duckling. Around five years ago accountants used to account for 30 – 40% of all the skilled residence visas but successive cuts to the annual migration quota or occupational ceiling have seen the annual quota fall from 14,000 a year to just 1000 in the current immigration year under general skilled migration OR the work to residence pathway.
That’s not to say that there is no demand for accountants in Australia, ask any employer in an accounting practice and they will tell you that they cannot find experienced accountants in Australia. In fact, the Australian Tax Office recently granted extensions to companies to allow them to file their audited financial reports because of the severe shortage of auditors in Australia. Yes, I know that it’s technically a different occupation but related in the visa sense.
We have no doubt that accountants will make another comeback, just as hairdressers, cooks and chefs have done. These occupations too were ‘ugly’ occupations circa 2012 but have made a strong comeback.
Of course some accountants can be ‘packaged’ and presented, quite legally, by the better immigration advisers as finance managers which has been a reasonable occupation as far as state sponsorship is concerned, and New Zealand has always welcomed accountants in the past if it doesn’t work for Australia (New Zealand is also particularly short of auditors)
Some occupations with a bit of cosmetic surgery can become beautiful and just because you are working in a particular occupation doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to obtain a positive skills assessment in that particular occupation. The tasks against which an occupation is assessed can often overlap with other occupations opening up opportunities for ‘repackaging’. The accountant/finance manager is a good example. Or you might find someone had previously worked as a tradesperson/artisan who went on to be a production supervisor or workshop manager. The trade occupation would be a much ‘better’ occupation than production supervisor or workshop manager and that person might still be able to obtain a positive skills assessment in the trade occupation and state sponsorship, thereby enhancing their chances of obtaining residence.
As with all this stuff it is seldom black and white and expertise an be the difference between success and failure. Given you cannot get the process 98% right and get a residence visa (it is a test you only pass if you score 100%) understanding these issues is what leads to the solutions we offer.
If you’re interested as to whether your occupation is good, bad or ugly for Australia you can complete one of our free preliminary questionnaires on the following page of our website https://www.immagine-immigration.com/assessments/free-evaluation/ and within 24 business hours we will provide you with a preliminary assessment report to tell you whether it’s worth your while paying for a detailed and private 90 minute eligibility and strategy consultation.
Until next time
Myer Lipschitz and Iain MacLeod
Posted by Iain on Oct. 2, 2020, 1:20 p.m. in Elections
Two weeks out from our general election we continue to see pressure being brought to bear on our political leadership to acknowledge and perhaps do something about immigration policy settings and what skills should be allowed to enter the country. Too late me thinks. The silence of the major parties in addressing our skills shortages and what we want out of immigration over the next few years is deafening.
Only this week the head of NZTech echoed my recent thoughts - (slowly) rising unemployment and a commitment to spend more on tertiary education is not a short term fix to the chronic and worsening shortage of IT skills. Labour market shortages and skills shortages can be quite different beasts. Unemployment might still be 4% (and potentially slowly rising) but that does not fill vacancies for software developers, systems analysts, testers, architects and the like. In the short term there’ll be some ‘musical chairs’ as locals lose one opportunity and take up another. Overall however we are not adding to the skills pool.
Thanks to the border closure around 5000 fewer highly skilled IT workers will not be coming to NZ this year. There was, earlier this year around twice that many IT jobs being advertised each month across the country. Already medium to large employers in this sector are struggling to fill vacancies. Our Universities only produce half the graduates needed to fill the thousands of jobs being created in this sector every year. Even if a few thousand 2020 school leavers decided they’d like to enter this field and went to University in 2021 we won’t see them graduate for three years and possibly four. Even then they are going to need a few years in the real world developing and hiring their skills because employers are not looking for truckloads of junior developers, they need the six or seven years of experience most skilled migrants bring with them.
To the IT sector you could equally add Construction with calls this week from employers struggling to fill construction and project management roles - all paying six figures. Then there’s the education sector with the country still 1500 teachers short across pre, primary and secondary schools. To that we can add agriculture with over 1000 manager jobs available and unable to be filled. Companies are still screaming for tradesmen/artisans - another workforce rapidly ageing and moving toward retirement.
If we don’t import the skills, how will these sectors thrive?
When every mid leveled IT job supports 4.5 other jobs what’s the downside?
The Government recently announced a $1.6 billion increase in spending on free apprenticeships. The only problem is they are about four years too late - the critical shortage in this area has been around for 30 years. Why did it take Covid to spur the Government into action? Even if young and not so young people take up the call (and history suggests they won’t with 74% of subsidised apprentices not completing their trade certificate) the labour market is still around four years away from them being qualified.
With a very a recent and widely unreported survey showing that New Zealanders support for immigration as a positive influence on the country running at a historical high it still perplexes me why no political party has published any sort of detailed immigration policy for the Covid world in which we now live. Plenty of promises about virtually everything else but nothing about what each party’s immigration policy might look like given the upheaval of recent months.
Every three years Government undertakes a ‘first principles’ review of our major immigration policies. Parents one year. Business Investors the next. This year the turn was to be for the Skilled Migrant Policy. As far as I am aware that has not taken place. No doubt the functionaries will tell us its because of Covid disruption, a very convenient excuse for no action. This Government wasted its first two years making a song and dance about the relatively insignificant issue of ‘migrant exploitation’. There was never any real evidence it was a significant issue, yet it tied up whatever Ministerial interest there was in this portfolio until the Minister resigned.
There could not be a better time, nor a greater need for that first principles review of the skilled migrant policy.
We should be asking ourselves if the policy is working. How it could be improved? How we might better integrate work and visitor policy with the labour market driven skills migrant policy in which getting a job is critical to success? How does international ‘export’ education feed into the migrant flows? Should we be dishing out graduate work visas to International students? Where do the lower skilled but no less valuable occupations like aged care or teacher aids fit into our long terms needs with an ageing population?
Is the policy even working?
I’d argue that the skilled migrant pathway is net positive for New Zealand but very hard on migrants. I often describe the process as ‘Darwinian’ and the survival of the fittest - those that are successful have the linguistic skills, the cultural capital, personal resilience, the financial wherewithal and skills to pass the ‘test’. Even for them the process takes its toll and migrants get precious little credit for bringing us their skills, energy and enthusiasm. Lord knows we make it hard enough to get the best. The country gets people that not only really want to build a future here but are wanted by the labour market. On paper it works for us.
That is not to say it couldn’t be improved in terms of a process as I have written about before.
Immigration policies this election, perhaps more than any other, demanded a rethink about who we let in, why we let them in and in what quantity we let them in. So much flows from that - think about housing, how many new schools we might need to build, infrastructure planning and build, health needs, hospitals and so on. Every decision any government must make flow from the number of people it is elected to serve.
I cannot fathom a country where immigration is viewed as a positive force for good by the significant majority, a country that so overwhelmingly welcomes new migrants, but that keeps squandering the opportunity by planning an active immigration policy rather than one that is reactive.
This is yet another missed opportunity by all the major and not so major parties to articulate a long term vision of what New Zealand might look like, literally and figuratively, in 10, 20 or 30 years from today. And to then plan for it and deliver it.
Alas we continue to be caught in this three-year electoral cycle where change is incremental and at snails pace.
All the while skills shortages will grow worse and that will hold us back as we grow our way out of this Covid induced recession.
Until next week
Posted by Iain on April 6, 2018, 1:47 p.m. in South Africa
For many years, I have struggled to understand why the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) provided different comparability outcome assessments on “Red Seal” South African qualifications depending on the pathway the artisan followed to secure it in South Africa.
Historically in South Africa, an Artisan would follow one of two pathways to securing a Trade Certificate in terms of the Manpower Training Act. The applicant could enter into an indentured apprenticeship, complete five years of learning, sit their Trade Test examination and if they passed that, they would be granted a Trade Certificate (commonly known as a Red Seal). Alternatively, they could enter into an indentured apprenticeship, but complete their “N” studies to the level of N3, sit the Trade Test examination and that would result in the granting of the Trade Certificate (Red Seal). There were some other variations of that, such as those who completed a Technical Matric at school, but in South Africa the Trade Certificates were all recognised identically and represented the same skill set and level of Trade Qualification in that discipline.
For reasons they were never willing to explain, NZQA never recognised the pathway without the “N” academic study as being comparable to a New Zealand Level 4 Trade Certificate but downgraded that pathway to a NZ Level 3 Trade Certificate. For the most part, what that meant was no points could be awarded under the Skilled Migrant process for that qualification and that meant some Tradesmen, who were otherwise highly employable in New Zealand and clearly highly skilled, could not secure Work or Resident Visas.
About four weeks’ ago we received an International Qualification Assessment for a South African client who had not completed N3 but had only completed their apprenticeship, Trade Test, N1 and N2 and who holds the Red Seal Trade Certificate. NZQA provided an outcome showing that was comparable to a New Zealand Level 4 Trade Certificate.
That greatly surprised us and we wondered (and worried) NZQA had made an assessment error.
Initial enquiries by one of my colleagues led the NZQA to confirm that the assessment outcome was correct.
When I then made enquiries of a senior official inside NZQA whether that represented a change in their assessment processes and recognition was now being given to people who did not have up to N3 study, I was told that nothing had changed. That therefore suggested to me the assessment was, in fact, granted in error.
What followed was an incredibly frustrating exchange of emails with this senior official who refused to be pinned down and answer a very simple question as to why historically, citizens with identical qualifications and who followed the same pathway to secure their trade certificate had only ever received a Level 3 outcome but this one received a Level 4 outcome.
In a classic case of Government-speak, the official never directly answered the question directly despite it being a very simple one.
Me, being me, this wasn’t good enough! I therefore moved onto someone else within that Department and in very short order, she confirmed that in fact the assessment protocol had changed for South African Trade Certificates!
Their view now is that it does not matter which pathway a South African Artisan takes to achieve their Red Seal Trade Certificate, they will almost certainly all now receive a Level 4 outcome. While they didn’t absolutely guarantee it, that to me was simply Government-speak for “we may not be totally consistent but you can expect a Level 4 outcome”.
In terms of the implications of that, it now means that Artisans up to the age of 55 should now be able to get enough points to secure a Resident Visa with a job offer in Auckland and it also means that the younger Artisans who currently need to find jobs outside of Auckland to boost their points to get to the pass mark will now be able to look for work in the Auckland market.
This is absolutely critical because for those Tradesmen, especially in the Construction sector; not only does it probably double the available vacancies they can apply for, the money in Auckland is significantly higher than the money being paid outside. Electricians are a good example and we are now seeing clients receiving salaries of around NZ$90,000 per annum in Auckland where those people can reasonably expect to earn around $70,000.00 per annum in the rest of the country. Setting aside differences in the cost of living between Auckland and the rest of New Zealand, that is still a significant income difference.
What is amazing to me is that NZQA has not made this change public; I can find nothing on their website and even the senior officials were trying to deny that they’ve made the change.
So you may well have heard it here first and if you are an Artisan with a “Red Seal” Trade Certificate and you’ve previously been advised by anyone (including us, I should add) that you will not get points for your qualification, you may well now get the point previous 40 points and the door to Residency may now be open to you.
A good news story to end another busy week at IMMagine Australia and New Zealand.
Attend a seminar as a starting point to learn more about the lifestyle of each country, their general migration process and a broad overview of Visa categories.
Have a preliminary evaluation to establish which Visa category may suit you and whether it’s worth your while ordering a comprehensive Full Assessment.
Let us develop your detailed strategy, timeline and pricing structure in-person or on Skype. Naturally, a small cost applies for this full and comprehensive assessment.