Marisawright

You would be surprised how many do. They want to migrate but are scared to move without a job, or they can’t afford to pay the relocation costs, so they see the temp visa as a way to get around that - which they often live to regret

I thought I had already answered this. If you bring it as a lump sum, you will lose a huge chunk in tax. Australia doesn’t tax it, but the Inland Revenue will. I looked into it and the only sensible option was to convert it as a pension. Again, it won’t be taxed by Australia. You’ll have to declare it as income on your UK tax return and if you earn more than the tax free threshold, you’ll be taxed on it. However I think the tax rate on pensions is slightly lower than the tax on salaries.

I agree. A few times recently, we've had people posting about moving to Sydney, with a rental/purchase budget that's woefully inadequate. I always ask if they have a strong reason for moving to one of those cities - and if not, I'll try to steer them towards a regional city. Sadly, I often see them continuing to ask questions about Sydney - it's clear my suggestions have made absolutely no impact. I always fear they'll end up in the wilds of Mount Druitt, or burdened with impossible debt, and they'll be miserable. I would class Mildura as country living and it doesn't suit me - but for those who prefer more of a city life, there's places like Newcastle, Wollongong, Ballarat, Bendigo, etc.

I suggest you contact your employer again and ask them to explain exactly HOW you failed to follow procedure. You are entitled to know. Like I said, sick leave and carer's leave must BOTH be supported by medical evidence (for you or the person you're caring for). Also, carer's leave is not a separate entitlement - it comes out of your sick leave. Had you taken any sick leave already this year? And how long have you been in the job (you are only entitled to pro rata leave in the first year). I don't know of any employer-sponsored visa where your sponsor can fire you and it doesn't matter. Are you sure?

Did you check your leave entitlement with your employer?

To be clear: You took some leave to go to the funeral. Was that compassionate leave or annual leave? Did you get approval for that before you left? Then you were sick and you got a medical certificate to cover that absence. Did you call or email your employer to notify them that you were going to be off sick, and how long for? Then you took carer's leave. Did you call your employer to notify them you needed to take that leave? Have you supplied a medical certificate or other evidence that your mother was unwell and needed care? Notice that in most companies, carer's leave is not a separate entitlement. You get sick leave which you can use EITHER for yourself OR to care for someone else. So if you took a week off sick plus 5 days carer's leave, that's your whole sick leave allowance used up. Also, how long have you been employed there - you are not entitled to the full amount of leave in your first year?

Did you make a formal request to use your leave before you left? Do you have an email or other evidence that your leave was approved before your departure?

Building a canal from where? They're already taking too much water from the Murray-Darling system

But where will the water come from? Libya has built vast artificial reservoirs but scientists are now worried that it will drain the underground aquifers (which took thousands of years to fill).

But you don't. I think you're labouring under a misapprehension. The 457 visa was NEVER meant to be a way for an employer to hire someone "on approval" with the aim of keeping them permanently. It was ALWAYS a temporary visa. The "pathway" to PR was routinely misinterpreted, but it was always just the POSSIBILITY of PERHAPS being eligible to apply for PR at the end of the contract. As Ramot says, while some people managed it, large numbers did not make it. All the 482 has done is make the situation clearer.

Do you really think the process in the UK is any simpler?

I disagree. The smart worker will not take a temporary contract imagining that it might be a pathway to a permanent job. He accepts that he has an opportunity to work in a foreign country for a few years, then he can go home. If the worker wishes to move to that other country, then he needs to find a permanent visa. If there are no permanent visas then he makes up his mind to stay in his home country, or he looks for another country that does offer permanent visas.

You are right, it's never a good idea to ask the ATO or the Immigration Dept because in both, you end up talking to some call centre person who is just reading off a screen. Ask them anything complicated and you're liable to get the wrong advice. Your best bet would be to consult a migration agent about your eligibility for a parent visa. There are several good agents on these forums and most of them will give you a free initial consultation, which will answer your main question. Then you'll really know where you stand. As for the superannuation - I don't think the tax is as bad as 51% but it is hefty.

450% threw me for a minute, until I realised it only means 4.5 times! You have a point. Sorry, I was assuming that you (like a lot of people) assume the arid inland was also habitable. It's true there is over four times as much habitable land in Australia as in the UK, but that's not the whole story. There is another problem - the carrying capacity of the land. It's one thing for it to be habitable, but at what density? The habitable part of Australia could never carry as many people per hectare as the UK because there isn't enough water. Melbourne and Sydney already have desalination plants, in spite of being built on large rivers. Much of inland Australia relies on groundwater, which is declining - if we built large settlements, it would disappear even faster (as is now being experienced in the Middle East). The Murray-Darling river complex can't be relied upon to feed new towns either - it's already in crisis, with thousands of fish dead due to inadequate water. There have been lots of studies of the population that Australia could support, with lots of different opinions on the limit, if you're interested. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-18/eamus-declining-groundwater-is-a-big-problem-for-australia/6556586

Where do the UAE get their water from? Most of their drinking water comes from desalination plants. There is a limit to how far one can pump water inland from the sea. It's certainly true that Australia could manage their water better, but it is still a major barrier to development inland. Even Sydney and Melbourne need to rely on desalination plants at times, and they're on the coast with good rainfall. I wish councils in Sydney would stop releasing land, because the Sydney basin is some of Australia's richest farming land and they've already allowed far too much of it to disappear under housing. https://www.dailybulletin.com.au/the-conversation/15013-urban-sprawl-is-threatening-sydney-s-foodbowl Currently governments don't seem bothered by this - we just import the fruit and veg from Asia instead - but if there's ever any conflict in the region, Australia is at grave risk of not being able to feed itself.

Australia is relatively empty, but there is a very good reason for that - there's not enough water, and the land is too poor to farm. I used to live in the north of Victoria and it is quite a revelation how dry and barren it is - and that's not even classed as the outback. There is a scientific definition of "habitable land". If you apply it to the UK, it works out at 70% of the land surface. If you apply the same standard to Australia, it works out at 10%.

I don't agree. Put yourself in the same position with a British or European firm. You accept a contract for 4 years on the understanding that it's to complete a particular project. It is made clear that once the project is finished, there is no option for renewal. Do you feel aggrieved when the four years ends and that's exactly what happens? I've had contracts like that in the past. You go in with your eyes open at the beginning and then there are no disappointments.

The company may well be legit but that's not the point. It's what they've done in this case that sounds dodgy. As Ali says, I always thought there had to be a "permanent substantive position" to get a visa, not just casual work. That's why the agent said they had to give you a permanent, full-time contract - because the visa would be rejected otherwise. If the contract is signed by both parties, then you do have rights under Australian employment law and you should consult your local Legal Aid office for information on what you can do. You don't have to go to court, but if you tell the employer that you know your rights, that may be enough to make them back down and honour the contract.

Big business has too much of a stranglehold so I am pessimistic. Think of the petroleum companies back in the lead petrol days. The companies knew how dangerous lead was in the atmosphere, because their employees were dying, but they covered it up - and yet those same executives were living in that atmosphere. Didn't they worry that their own children's health was being affected by the lead belching out of car exhausts? Apparently not, or not enough to give up the money! The bosses of big business are the same today. Frankly I'm now glad that I never had children because I would be so fearful for their future.

I would start by going back to your agent and asking what the implications are if he used that contract to get the 186, but the employer is now saying it's not a genuine contract. To me, that sounds like using fraud to obtain a visa, and you need to know what the implications might be.

.....so if an employer in the UK offered you a contract for 4 years, what would you expect them to offer in terms of commitment at their end? On a TSS visa, you are not making any deals with the Australian government, you are making a deal with an employer. The Australian govt is just providing a visa to allow that to happen. So it's just the same as taking a job in the UK - what you get "in terms of commitment" is a salary. Because it's a job in a foreign country, you would also negotiate relocation expenses. Why would you expect anything more?

And there's me thinking it was the other way around. I need to do some research!

As others have said, she might be able to get a temporary employer-sponsored visa, but the big challenge will be finding an employer who is willing to offer her a job. The new temp visa (the TSS) requires more paperwork and more cost on the part of the employer than the old 457, so if they can find a local candidate even halfway suitable, they're likely to settle for that rather than go through the rigmarole. As I assume she'd want to come to the Gold Coast/Brisbane area, she could try approaching the private schools there to see what the prospects would be. However, that would only get her two to four years in Australia. For a younger person, there would then be an opportunity to apply for PR and stay - but (as MaggieMay and Raul say), the age limit for the PR visa is 45 with only a few exceptions for special circumstances. I have no idea how that provision works, and the best way to find out is to consult someone like Raul, who can look at your sister's case and advise if she's got any prospects. Has she considered a move to Asia somewhere? I have friends who worked in international schools in Hong Kong for many years. If she's able to find work in Asia, it would be worth her while to start paying National Insurance contributions to boost her eventual British pension, in case she has to return there in her retirement. She should also enquire about back-paying missed years. The good thing is that even if she doesn't return to the UK, she'll be able to claim her British pension from wherever she's living (unlike the Australian pension). Another option to consider is Europe. Currently, in spite of Brexit, UK citizens are able to settle in another EU member country. The EU has said that UK nationals who are settled before Brexit occurs, will be able to stay permanently, so she has a window of opportunity!

I didn't read it that way. To me, it sounds as though she isn't convinced she wants to settle in Australia and she may end up going home, but she does not want to jeopardise her husband's visa. So she wants to know whether she can bail early, or whether she will have to stick it out until the conditions are met.

No, the first thing investors do is don't buy, because they can't get the finance OR they think negative gearing is the only reason to buy property, so they won't do it. Serious investors won't be put off, but if house prices drop, then they can buy properties cheaper, so they won't need to charge higher rents.