people thinking of sponsouring overseas technician
Fri, 15 Mar 2002, 04:19 pmRobyn3 posts in thread
people thinking of sponsouring overseas technician
Fri, 15 Mar 2002, 04:19 pmI thought this information may be helpful to overseas technical crew looking for work in Australia or employers looking for overseas technicians and specifically sponsourship for employment in Australia.
I have recently tried to sponsor an employee from overseas, who has a great knowledge and skills, benificial to the Australian industry.
It seems that the department of immigration see our industry as unworthy of sponsourship.
Under their guidelines to gain sponsorship, which lists various areas of production and entertainment crew, the crew are more likely to be accepted if they are on a specific show or tour. If not they may not be accepted.
Be-ware this is a very costly excersise for any employers thinking of sponsouring an overseas technician.
Overseas technicians may have short term casual work, however their employees must submit copies of their passport and visas to the Australian taxation office.
I have recently tried to sponsor an employee from overseas, who has a great knowledge and skills, benificial to the Australian industry.
It seems that the department of immigration see our industry as unworthy of sponsourship.
Under their guidelines to gain sponsorship, which lists various areas of production and entertainment crew, the crew are more likely to be accepted if they are on a specific show or tour. If not they may not be accepted.
Be-ware this is a very costly excersise for any employers thinking of sponsouring an overseas technician.
Overseas technicians may have short term casual work, however their employees must submit copies of their passport and visas to the Australian taxation office.
RE: people thinking of sponsoring overseas technician
Mon, 18 Mar 2002, 04:03 pmrobyn wrote:
-------------------------------
>> It seems that the department of immigration see our industry as unworthy of sponsorship.
Hi Robyn,
I understand the opinion that bringing technicians (or performers) into Australia under a sponsorship programme could have benefits to the Australian industry.
The industry's opinion, however, (as expressed by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance) is that there has to be an EXCEPTIONALLY strong case before it will allow such an import.
This reasoning is based upon industry protection, believing that if a job can be given to a technician that is an Australian resident, they ought to have preference over anyone from overseas.
I know there is a Catch-22 type paradox inherent in this: how do our technicians and performers improve without being exposed to international leaders in the field? But the reason we support the immigration office in its policy is to ensure that every effort is made to make CERTAIN that we don't have artists who HAVE attained those international standards missing out on limited opportunities.
Australia DOES have artists and technicians of international standard, who have perhaps gone to great pains and expense to study and train to that level of proficiency, and it's only fair that if they meet the standards, they should be offered the work, rather than spending the money on overseas competition.
If a case CAN be made that the imported talent is necessary, then that's fine...but that's why the test is made so difficult.
And, considering that it is next to impossible for an Australian to achieve a work visa in places like the USA (for exactly the same reasons of industry protection), it only seems right and fair that we have the same strict criteria.
I got some extremely valuable experience working for a theatre company in Canada several years ago, but the only way they could swing this with their department of immigration was for me to be sponsored by a company HERE that paid my wage, so in effect, nobody in Canada was actually employing me and I technically wasn't taking anyone else's job. And yet the work I was doing was unique and couldn't have been supplied by anyone locally...in fact the whole point of it was the cultural exchange. They were learning from me at the same time I was learning from them. But on paper, that's such a hard area to quantify, and so it couldn't be justified to the authorities without prohibitive conditions and expense.
There MAY be other avenues for you to arrange a "cultural exchange" with your technician from overseas, particularly if you can arrange for a reciprocal agreement in their country (an Australian going over there for an equal time to study?), but failing that, perhaps the funds can be applied to support a blossoming Australian talent?
Cheers,
Craig
<8>-/====/------------
-------------------------------
>> It seems that the department of immigration see our industry as unworthy of sponsorship.
Hi Robyn,
I understand the opinion that bringing technicians (or performers) into Australia under a sponsorship programme could have benefits to the Australian industry.
The industry's opinion, however, (as expressed by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance) is that there has to be an EXCEPTIONALLY strong case before it will allow such an import.
This reasoning is based upon industry protection, believing that if a job can be given to a technician that is an Australian resident, they ought to have preference over anyone from overseas.
I know there is a Catch-22 type paradox inherent in this: how do our technicians and performers improve without being exposed to international leaders in the field? But the reason we support the immigration office in its policy is to ensure that every effort is made to make CERTAIN that we don't have artists who HAVE attained those international standards missing out on limited opportunities.
Australia DOES have artists and technicians of international standard, who have perhaps gone to great pains and expense to study and train to that level of proficiency, and it's only fair that if they meet the standards, they should be offered the work, rather than spending the money on overseas competition.
If a case CAN be made that the imported talent is necessary, then that's fine...but that's why the test is made so difficult.
And, considering that it is next to impossible for an Australian to achieve a work visa in places like the USA (for exactly the same reasons of industry protection), it only seems right and fair that we have the same strict criteria.
I got some extremely valuable experience working for a theatre company in Canada several years ago, but the only way they could swing this with their department of immigration was for me to be sponsored by a company HERE that paid my wage, so in effect, nobody in Canada was actually employing me and I technically wasn't taking anyone else's job. And yet the work I was doing was unique and couldn't have been supplied by anyone locally...in fact the whole point of it was the cultural exchange. They were learning from me at the same time I was learning from them. But on paper, that's such a hard area to quantify, and so it couldn't be justified to the authorities without prohibitive conditions and expense.
There MAY be other avenues for you to arrange a "cultural exchange" with your technician from overseas, particularly if you can arrange for a reciprocal agreement in their country (an Australian going over there for an equal time to study?), but failing that, perhaps the funds can be applied to support a blossoming Australian talent?
Cheers,
Craig
<8>-/====/------------