Danny&Em Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I agree - Based on this superb advice I hope we ALL take the time to complain to the Commonwealth Ombudsman! And we stand taller in numbers!... So,., lets hammer the b*****ds with complaints! >>>> HERES THE LINK TO COMPLAIN !!!! <<<< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny&Em Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Hoping this inspires folk - heres my wording of complaint to ombudsman - i`m no author / politician / journalist - but it to the point i believe! COMPLAINT: Thank you for reading this and hopefully taking note and action. The complaint is a very strong one towards the handling of the new ruling imposed dramatically by Chris Evans which as a result has had a significant impact on our Visa Application (176). (Along with 1000`s of others) We have been developing this process with an agent and have worked in conjunction with all you requirements fairly. This latest action imposed I believe is very unfair and not in keeping with the politics you work ever so hard on - to better your country and people life`s that are associated with it. We are upset, distraught, dumbfounded at this new ruling given the amount of hard work we have faithfully given to your system included all the adjustments to previous alterations you imposed. Surely you cant expect good honest hardworking people to sit on the fence till your newly proposed times? Would they have faith in your immigration system knowing the overnight changes which dramatically disrupt peoples lives. Chris Evans - Australia`s Minister for Immigration and Citizenship along with the department, seems to have no morals and has not respected the previous applications submitted in good faith on your very own system! ------ ACTION: To seriously reconsider the impact this has on your country. The impact on the families that have acted in good faith complying with your system of immigration. Ask yourself the very question about the new ruling - Is this fair? Y or N. Its not wrong administer changes - but please - surly you must introduce these changes and ween them into the system providing a smooth transitional period to avoid a farce. Now ask yourself this - Would that be fair? I suspect you have given yourself a different answer from above, and believe it is your job to act upon. I`m (we - 1000`s) as applicants are praying you do the right thing! Hoping others also get stuck in and bring us throught this fiasco! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest highlander Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 >>>> HERES THE LINK TO COMPLAIN !!!! <<<< Thanks Danny! I had just lodged my complaint .. praying for better news.. God help us !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spenny Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I just liked this, and i believe if enough people do complain something will have to change, so hopefully this will help you decide where and what the complaint can also consist of....:biggrin: 1. INTRODUCTION DIAC’s purpose statement is “Enriching Australia through the well-managed entry and settlement of people” Our business is broad and complex and we deal with a wide range of clients and stakeholders both in Australia and overseas. Underpinning the way the department does its business is the key focus of ‘people our business’. We will meet government and community expectations through being an open and accountable organisation, dealing fairly and reasonably with clients and having well trained and supported staff. We use other organisations to deliver a number of our services and monitor the quality of these specific services against agreed contract standards. Our Client Service Charter is a public statement of our service commitment. The Charter outlines: ? our commitment to quality service ? how to contact us for information on our products and services ? how clients can provide feedback 2. PURPOSE This policy supports and expands upon the commitments of the Client Service Charter. It sets out the principles that DIAC has adopted for the management of feedback –compliments, suggestions or complaints - received in relation to the services we provide and the client’s experience of the delivery of those services. It describes the principles that we follow to recover the client experience when our service delivery has not met the client’s expectations. Our policy recognises the role and responsibilities of each DIAC officer in resolving feedback at the first point of contact. It sets out the principles which will empower staff at all levels to effectively listen to the voice of the client, turning a potentially negative experience into a positive one. 3. OUR COMMITMENT Compliments and complaints are a valuable element in understanding our clients’ views of their experience with the department. We recognise that some client’s expectations will not always be met, and we encourage and promote the right of clients to provide us with their suggestions and complaints. This Policy replaces all previous advice and administrative circulars relating to clients and stakeholders providing feedback to the department. 3 Effective complaint management and resolution allows us to improve our services, prevent similar issues recurring, and rebuild the client’s relationship with the department. In the international environment in which we operate, an acknowledged and recognised complaint handling process provides confidence to the client of consistent treatment both onshore and offshore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny&Em Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 News feed - but think weve read as much as we can on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mylady Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Hi I found this ray of hope on BE Australia migration conference to be held next week Australian migration, of particular how those who emigrate to Australia can live, work and study, will be discussed in Melbourne next week as part of a national migration conference. The Migration 2009 Conference, to be held October 8 to 11, will be attended by migration advice professionals, lawyers, Commonwealth and state government agencies, skills assessment authorities, education providers, and community and refugee organisations. CEO of the Migration Institute of Australia, Maurene Horder, said the conference is attracting a range of professionals who are at the forefront of the Aust ralian immigration debate. "Immigration policy has been going through unprecedented change. People’s lives are being affected by the many recent amendments to all classes of visas. This conference will explore the economic and social impacts,” Ms Horder said. We can only hope for the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Justin JIANG Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 HiI found this ray of hope on BE Australia migration conference to be held next week Australian migration, of particular how those who emigrate to Australia can live, work and study, will be discussed in Melbourne next week as part of a national migration conference. The Migration 2009 Conference, to be held October 8 to 11, will be attended by migration advice professionals, lawyers, Commonwealth and state government agencies, skills assessment authorities, education providers, and community and refugee organisations. CEO of the Migration Institute of Australia, Maurene Horder, said the conference is attracting a range of professionals who are at the forefront of the Aust ralian immigration debate. "Immigration policy has been going through unprecedented change. People’s lives are being affected by the many recent amendments to all classes of visas. This conference will explore the economic and social impacts,” Ms Horder said. We can only hope for the best Hi Mylady, What a valuable information you posted it is! Hope it works!Tks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritu Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Meds and police checks are *normally* valid for a year. In practice the Aussie security forces and the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth are usually happy to say that meds & pccs which have been cleared can remain valid for 18 months. Dear Gill, Now the medical is valid for 18 months... Ritu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CarlyMurray Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 HI Can anyone advise me on the best way to start the process, i've started looking at agencies and im starting the think there must be better way, additional info. im 23 and work for HSBC bank, My partner(boyfriend) lived together for 3year, is a Quanity Surveyor with a law degree in construction & engineering, hes 25 and we have 1yr boy. If you have any advise or suggestion i would be more than greatful thanx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sassygal Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 H "Immigration policy has been going through unprecedented change. People’s lives are being affected by the many recent amendments to all classes of visas. This conference will explore the economic and social impacts,” Ms Horder said. Is it me or is there a "tone" in this? The way I am reading it Ms Horder doesnt sound very impressed about all the changes and sounds on the ball regarding the impact the changes are going have on all concerned......well lets hope so, fingers crossed guys & gals:hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sassygal Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Dear Gill,Now the medical is valid for 18 months... Ritu Nooooooooo I dont like this kind of news:cry: could mean that the new processing could get even longer:cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Freaks Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Hi All Let us stick to the issues instead of carping at one another, please. The ONLY legally binding promise which the Australian Government makes to any visa applicant is that if she or he has made a valid application for a particular visa, sooner or later DIAC will process the application to an eventual outcome. DIAC themselves will not seek to charge any more fees in relation to the visa application which has been made but all other payments (eg meds and police checks) are not fees within DIAC's control and none of these other fees will be borne by DIAC. The remedy is to complain to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Senators and Federal MPs about the moral injustice of the way that the Minister for Immigration has recently seen fit to behave. The Minister has Australian Law on his side, so the most you can hope for is recognition that the Minister failed to pay proper heed to the financial hardship caused on 23rd September. Ideally the Aussie Parliament would pledge to rein the Minister in so as to ensure that he can not do this to any of you again at some date in the future. Precedent is against you. Some 4,000 visa applicants were caught out by the closure of the Capital Investment Scheme in December 2007. 5 points for Investment Bond withdrawn Sept 07?? (PART TWO) : British Expat Discussion Forum The link above is to the second (later) of two very long threads on BE concerning the agonies that the CIS applicants endured. They had a parallel experience to the one that is now facing the people who are caught in the fall out from the 23rd September Direction. Eventually South Australia agreed to open a temporary wndow via which to rescue as many of the CIS applicants as possible but the window was only opened a couple of months ago and it will be closing again on 31st October 2009: Frequently Asked Questions - Capital Investment Scheme Lots of the applicants who were caught up in the CIS were told to get their meds done, lost out, were told by DIAC to do their meds again and lost out a second time, about which they were justifiably angry and upset. They have not received a dime by way of compensation nor has the Austraian Government made any sort of apology to them for the way in which they were mucked about. The Govt could argue that it has been very generous towards the Sept 23 "victims." The Minister confirmed several weeks ago that if the affected applicants for GSM visas are able to secure Australian employer sponsorship for ENS or RSMS visas, DIAC will waive its own fees for processing the new employer-sponsored visa applications. Migration agents are unlikely to match the Aussie Government's generosity on this score. The Minister can say - with legal justification - that the Aussie Govt could not have been compelled to offer this fee-waiver by DIAC. Applicants who were caught out by the closure of the CIS were not offered anything comparable, so it can be argued that pressure from the Commonwealth Ombudsman over the Capital Investment Scheme followed by the brouhaha caused by the sudden change to the Critical Skills List on 16th March 2009 is already offering an ameliorating effect on the situation. Astute commentators in Oz have been telling me that if Aussie employers find themselves strapped for a workforce or for key personnel, they will set about discovering how to get the necessary migrants out to Oz promptly via using employer sponsored migration. It is very difficult to secure employer-sponsorship at present but that culture might well change within a year or two. A week is a long time in politics and Aussie politics are driving the Aussie migration program. For a LONG time Aussie employers have had no need to worry about getting the migrant workers they need because the GSM visa program has been doing all the work for them. The Minister's "message" to the employers is clear, though. He is now telling them, "If you genuinely need Mr Bloggs the migrant Farrier, no law prevents you from sponsoring him for a suitable visa. Farrier is on the SOL." Once DIAC are allowed to start processing non-CSL State sponsored applications again they will obviously start with the people who were unceremoniously dumped on 23rd September 2009. Meds and police checks are *normally* valid for a year. In practice the Aussie security forces and the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth are usually happy to say that meds & pccs which have been cleared can remain valid for 18 months. Please think about this. DIAC are under immense pressure to cut their operating costs. It costs them hard cash to have a CO asking Mr Bloggs to get his meds done again because they have to pay COs to sit at desks making repeat requests, apologising for having to ask again, sympathising about the costs etc. Wherever possible it will be in the Minister's own interests to do without asking for repeat meds and police checks. MOC doctors have to be paid for re-checking new meds etc. It could be that the ASPC are reasonably sure that they should be able to get most applicants through this without having to ask people for new meds and police checks provided that people have waited for COs to ask for them to be done in the first place. DIAC cannot be responsible for steps which people take without waiting for DIAC to ask them to take those steps. Whether or not Minister Evans wishes to admit it to himself and to others, the fact is that his crass handling of the 23rd September Direction has done Australia's image significant harm in the eyes of the international community of potential skilled migrants. He has given spectators to understand that he is an unpredictable, unreliable, untrustworthy Minister for Immi - which reflects badly on Mr Rudd, Parliament and ultimately on the Australian people. Whatever the Aussie voter might think about curbing immigration, most of them would NOT condone causing other people to lose money. That notion is not fair dinkum in his eyes. I think the average Aussie will be particularly sympathetic to those who have spent a fortune on studying in Oz, relying on assurances from successive Ministers for Immi. It is clear that Aussie employers are helping ex-Students out to a greater degree than DIAC anticipated in this Table: Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics It is quite possible that the Commonwealth Ombudsman will ask the Chair to convey the Ombudsman's concerns to the Senate Standing Committee on Migration at its forthcoming meeting on 20th October. The Minister will not respond to individual visa applicants who have complained - all that they will receive is bland letters, by airmail, from the Minister's flunkeys in 3-4 months' time. However the Senate will not ignore the Ombudsman and the Minister will not ignore his fellow Senators. I think the Minister can expect to be told, "Right. Last December, you fiddled with the GSM program. You told us your strategy would work. In March 2009 you realised that your strategy was not working so you changed it abruptly - mucking thousands of visa applicants around in the process. You assured us that Plan B would work. In September 2009 you discovered that Plan B was a failure as well, so you have now mucked even more thousands of applicants around with this new Plan C of yours. Get this, Minister. There is no Plan D and there will not be a Plan D. Enough is enough. Live with Plan C. If that fails as well, live with being booted out of office in November 2010 at the next General Election." I suspect that the Senate will be pretty tough with the Minister in 19 days' time. Cheers Gill Thanks Gill, Lots for really good information here. Ironically we were going to file when all the CIS mess happened but decieded the time was not right, just to get caught in round of ineptitude! I have already sent a message to the Ombudsman, so lets hope Mr Evans is pushed to finally make some sensible decisions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest babboo Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I agree - Based on this superb advice I hope we ALL take the time to complain to the Commonwealth Ombudsman! And we stand taller in numbers!... So,., lets hammer the b*****ds with complaints! I just did ... It take not more then 10 min... Thanks for the advice. I hope this helps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freebo Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 HICan anyone advise me on the best way to start the process, i've started looking at agencies and im starting the think there must be better way, additional info. im 23 and work for HSBC bank, My partner(boyfriend) lived together for 3year, is a Quanity Surveyor with a law degree in construction & engineering, hes 25 and we have 1yr boy. If you have any advise or suggestion i would be more than greatful thanx Start here Australian Visa wizard - Visas & Immigration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mylady Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Is it me or is there a "tone" in this? The way I am reading it Ms Horder doesnt sound very impressed about all the changes and sounds on the ball regarding the impact the changes are going have on all concerned......well lets hope so, fingers crossed guys & gals:hug: Hi It sure sounds that way .I hope she has a guilty concience as Chris Evans certainly does not have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Nooooooooo I dont like this kind of news:cry: could mean that the new processing could get even longer:cry: Dear Gill, Now the medical is valid for 18 months... Ritu Dear Ritu & Sassygal Please relax. There is nothing to fear. If DIAC are able to re-start the processing for Category 5 applicants any time soom, they will try to extend the validity of the meds and pccs wherever possible in order to avoid having to ask applicants to pay for new checks. This is one of the ways in which DIAC staff can help to mitigate the ill-effects of the Minister's recent actions and the Ombudsman stressed in his comments about the Capital Investment Scheme that he (the Ombudsman) hoped that DIAC would extend the meds and pccs wherever possible so as to minimise the damage to the visa applicants' wallets. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Is it me or is there a "tone" in this? The way I am reading it Ms Horder doesnt sound very impressed about all the changes and sounds on the ball regarding the impact the changes are going have on all concerned......well lets hope so, fingers crossed guys & gals:hug: Hi Sassygal The MIA are certainly dismayed by the 23rd September Direction. It is good that the MIA has added its own voice to the chorus of disapproval but the MIA is merely one of two pressure groups which represent the interests of MARA registered migration agents. There is a new, similar pressure group headed by Christopher Levingston, a Sydney solicitor and an Accredited Specialist in Australian Immigration Law. CL's group is called Migration Allliance and its website is here: Migration Alliance: Home Migration Alliance do not seem to have made any public statement about the 23rd September announcement. Then again they do not have an annual conference taking place next weekend..... The Commonwealth Ombudsman remains the observer with the most powerful voice on behalf of aggrieved visa applicants and the international public in general. The Ombudsman has statutory powers to ask DIAC to explain themselves. Nobody else has comparable powers to do this. The Ombudsman publishes homilies spelling out to Aussie Govt Depts what the Ombudsman's views about "best practice" are. He has the power to insist that his homilies are heeded and followed: http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/commonwealth/publish.nsf/Content/publications_better_practice Hopefully he will be able to insist that DIAC publish up to date statistics without delay so that people can work out for themselves how long they are likely to continue to have to wait for. I hope that DIAC will make this information publicly available during November. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Freaks Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hi All, Having read lots of information..... I feel we should all complain to the Ombudsman as they are the people who have the power to help us!! It is very easy just takes a few miniutes click on the online complaint form link @ Ombudsman, Australia - Complaints I have included a template for those who wish to save a little more time below. You will have to edit the RED text with your information. Then copy and paste into online form. I hope this helps, remain postive and dont give up hope. Please give details of your complaint The matter is concerning the announcement on 23rd September 2009 by Senator Chris Evans to restructure priority processing for all General skilled Migration Applications. My situation is, I am a skilled migrant (not on the CSL) I have secured State Sponsorship for my trade. Adelaide skilled processing centre have requested both mine and my families medicals and police clearance to be done on the 25/6/09. I had this done at considerable expense ($1900AUD) The new directives now dictate my application will not be finalized until 2012, by that time the medicals and police checks will have expired, result in costing all migrants in my position additional monies. I ask is fair, reasonable and right for the Australian government to be allowed to deliberately, force this additional expense on skilled migrant, when all we are doing is following instructions from the Adelaide skilled processing centre, as laid down by ministerial directives. This excludes all the expense involved in lodging the application and gaining Vet Assess Approval (again all required prior to finalization of our application) I ask is sensible to force additional work/expenditure onto the DIAC? If these files are left for a log period of time they will all require much more processing, than if they were to finalize them in the near distant future? The Minister has continually messed around with the immigration program, this should not be allowed, as he is directly causing immense stress and loss of money to all skilled migrants wishing to live, and offering the ability to contribute both the Australian economy and society. To allow you to investigate my situation further here are the full details of my General skilled Migration Application. Name: --------- Visa type: --------- Client ID: --------- TRN: --------- DOB: --------- Passport Number: ---------- Nationality: ----------- I await your response. What action or result do you want? I feel it right and only fair to finalize all applications in the final stages of processing (requested medical, and character clearance) as priority 2. As per the directives announced 23rd September 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hi Freaks As per the directives announced 23rd November 2009. When?! :wink: In December 2008 the Minister announced dramatically that he intended to alter GSM processing priorities with effect from 1st January 2009: Multicultural experts to further Australia's strength in diversity - Immigration Media Release ce08122/2008 The first CSL came into effect on 1st January 2009 along with the new pecking order for processing priority. On 16th March 2009 the Minister suddenly slashed the list of occupations on the first CSL in favour of the current CSL. The Ombudsman knows all about that because it caused hundreds of complaints which are identical to your own. Also on 16th March 2009 the Minister cut the size of the skilled migration program. Government cuts migration program On 12th May 2009 the Minister reinforced the changes he had already made via his Budget Statement and he cut the quota still further: Budget 2009-10 - Migration Program: the size of the skilled and family programs In August 2009 the Minister published DIAC's Report on the Migration Program for 2008/2009: http://www.immi.gov.au/media/statistics/pdf/report-on-migration-program-2008-09.pdf On the same day in August 2009, the Minister released a Table showing (inter alia) the planning levels for the skilled stream for the period from 1st July 2009 to 30th June 2010: Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics Less than 6 weeks later, the Minister left it to DIAC to drop the bombshell that the skilled program is not performing in accordance with the Minister's original promises for it in December 2008 and it is not performing in accordance with any of the measures which the Minister has taken at any time since then. What's New? Recent Changes in General Skilled Migration Between them DIAC and the Minister have given me the clearest possible impression that Fred Karno's Army is in charge of Australia's Immigration program. He and DIAC have done nothing but lurch from one panic measure to the next as each of their successive attempts are creating a Bold New World has collapsed like a pack of cards because the program is not performing in accordance with Fred Karno's predictions for it. He might as well ask Madame Zara to consult her crystal ball and ask Granny Weatherwax to have a look at the tea leaves at this rate. Both may well prove to be more reliable indicators than anything produced by DIAC and their Minister so far. Because they plainly have no real control of (and maybe not much understanding of) the skiled migration program, DIAC and their Minister have now spent the thick end of a year mucking thousands of Australian employers around, mucking thousands of prospective migrants around as well and now mucking the 8 States & Territories around on top too with their latest measures on 23rd September 2009. Everybody else has lost money, valuable time and business opportunities as a direct result of the Minister's antics during 2009. Everybody has now had enough of the man's nonsense. Hopefully the Ombudsman can make himself heard above the hubbub of devising one new panic measure after another - none of them aimed at doing anything except keeping Australia's Trades Unions happy, I would contend. None of them successful in any other aim, either. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest southerngent Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hi Freaks On the same day in August 2009, the Minister released a Table showing (inter alia) the planning levels for the skilled stream for the period from 1st July 2009 to 30th June 2010: Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics Gill If you took this chart at face value we would all have been better of staying on a 175, there never gonna get 41,600 175 ers on there CSL list. what a crock of ***t thanks all the same thou Gill - your the best:notworthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hi, wondering if you can give us any advice or point us in the right direction with our visa issue: Applied for skilled (bricklayer) sponsored (sister) visa 176, then bricklayer taken off CSL so applied for state sponsor (approved). I have a job offer in Australia with brother in law who has own building company but as he only employs staff on a sub-contract basis cannot sponsor me as 'employee sponsor' (i think). We are now back to priority 5 & our visa will not be processed until 2012. I am 41 now with 2 kids aged 12 & 9 so the clock is seriously ticking. Life already been on hold for over 12 months so cannot keep going till 2012. Any advice you can give would be so much appreciated. Cheers, David n co Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Freaks Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hi David & Co, My only advise I can think of is for you is to put some pressure on the brother in law for sponsorship, if not does he know anyone who might? That said I am not sure if you will be allowed to change the class of visa to a 457 for free. I know this option is temp (4years I believe) If you are on shore, visa processing is a little quicker. We have good friends out there, he is also a brickie (aged 41 ish) They flew out and managed to find a company to sponsor him in one week (Perth) they arrived in Perth March 09. I do think in the short time it will be sensible to wait and see what they say in the next announcement due by the end of October 09. All the best Freaks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottntina Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hi guys just letting you all know i have also sent my complaint to the ombudsman..... im so angry, we gotta stick together and hopefully some rational decision will be made soon !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrussell Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Complain to the paper tiger? You might as well complain to the man in the moon. Our reference: xxx Ombudsman 1 Friday, 6 March 2009 Complaints about the Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship The Commonwealth Ombudsman GPO Box 442 Canberra ACT 2601 The Ombudsman · On 17 August 2007 I lodged an application for a skills assessment with TRA on behalf of xxx (attachments 1,2,3 refer) · The application was delivered to TRA on 23 August 2007 (attachment 4) · The application was returned unassessed. · My Federal Member of Parliament the Hon Roger Price MP wrote to the immigration department and conveyed my complaint about the way this case had been mishandled. As far as I know he received no reply. · I wrote to the minister for immigration and received no reply (attachment 5 – part of the letter to the minister}. · I wrote again and received a response from the department of Education, Employment and Workplace relations (attachment 6) · The conditions under which TRA agreed to accept skills applications are summarised in attachment 7. · I note that the date upon which TRA claimed to have received the application was the date when the minister signed the instrument designating VETASSESS as the assessing authority for applicants with designated skilled occupations from designated countries. It was incorrect an entirely unreasonable for TRA to include my clients’ application as one that was based primarily on work experience. He held a relevant a 4-year degree 1080 hours of relevant industrial training and more than 12 years relevant professional work experience. The thrust of my complaint is that my clients’ application was not decided on its merits. You might want to consider whether it is reasonable, or even legal, for applicants from some relatively poor countries (for the most part) to pay $2000+ for a skills assessment that can be completed for $300 for applicants residing elsewhere. The fees charged by VETASSESS discriminate against poorer applicant. A UK applicant might find the fees annoying, but the would not act as a bar to making an application. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sassygal Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Complain to the paper tiger? You might as well complain to the man in the moon. Our reference: xxx Ombudsman 1 Friday, 6 March 2009 Complaints about the Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship The Commonwealth Ombudsman GPO Box 442 Canberra ACT 2601 The Ombudsman · On 17 August 2007 I lodged an application for a skills assessment with TRA on behalf of xxx (attachments 1,2,3 refer) · The application was delivered to TRA on 23 August 2007 (attachment 4) · The application was returned unassessed. · My Federal Member of Parliament the Hon Roger Price MP wrote to the immigration department and conveyed my complaint about the way this case had been mishandled. As far as I know he received no reply. · I wrote to the minister for immigration and received no reply (attachment 5 – part of the letter to the minister}. · I wrote again and received a response from the department of Education, Employment and Workplace relations (attachment 6) · The conditions under which TRA agreed to accept skills applications are summarised in attachment 7. · I note that the date upon which TRA claimed to have received the application was the date when the minister signed the instrument designating VETASSESS as the assessing authority for applicants with designated skilled occupations from designated countries. It was incorrect an entirely unreasonable for TRA to include my clients’ application as one that was based primarily on work experience. He held a relevant a 4-year degree 1080 hours of relevant industrial training and more than 12 years relevant professional work experience. The thrust of my complaint is that my clients’ application was not decided on its merits. You might want to consider whether it is reasonable, or even legal, for applicants from some relatively poor countries (for the most part) to pay $2000+ for a skills assessment that can be completed for $300 for applicants residing elsewhere. The fees charged by VETASSESS discriminate against poorer applicant. A UK applicant might find the fees annoying, but the would not act as a bar to making an application. encouraging words - not really! I think people are fed up enough about the new priority bombshell thats recently been dropped with out being told they may as well write to the man in the moon, and thats from an immigration agent:rolleyes: the ombudsmen are for just that amongs other things and I applaud everyone for making a stand and sticking together:hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.