Sweeping Changes to Australian 457 Temporary Workers Program From 14 September 2009

The Australian Department of Immigration has introduced a number of changes to the sponsorship regime for temporary workers in Australia on subclass 457 visas. These changes come into effect on 14 September 2009 and involve the following:


New criteria for approval as a business sponsor, including a training benchmark

Complete revision of the sponsorship obligations of employers using the 457 program as well as sanctions for breach of obligations

New list of approved occupations for 457 visas, along with new legislation for approval of nomination

Introduction of market rate salary levels for 457 visas

Removal of employers' obligation to pay health costs for new 457 visas, and requiring 457 holders to have private health insurance

Changes to the 8107 work restriction on 457 visas and allowing 457 holders to "transfer" to a new sponsor without applying for a new 457 visa

Sponsorship Approval

The Department of Immigration is seeking to streamline the approval process for employers seeking to sponsor employees under the 457 program. As a result, the requirements for approval as a business sponsor have been completely re-written.

Training Benchmark

Businesses have two options in meeting the training benchmark:


Payment to an industry training fund of at least 2% of payroll; or

Expenditure of at least 1% of payroll on training of employees.
It was previously possible for a business to show that they were introducing or utilizing in Australia new technology as an alternative to demonstrating training, but this no longer appears to be possible.

Benefit to Australia

The "benefit to Australia" requirement which previously applied to sponsorship approvals is no longer required. Employers previously needed to show that employment of a person on a 457 contributed to employment of Australians, trade in goods & services, competitiveness of an Australian business sector or links with international markets.

Employment of Local Labor and Non-Discriminatory Employment Practices

Employers are now required to provide an attestation that they have a strong record or demonstrated commitment to employing local labor and non-discriminatory employment practices. This presumably means that it may be more difficult for employers who have a large number of 457 holders to sponsor further applications. The emphasis on non-discriminatory employment practices might result in issues for employers preferentially hiring overseas nationals or paying lower salaries to overseas workers.

Nomination Requirements

The legislation for approval of 457 nominations has also been completely revised.

The occupation the employee is to work in must in general be on the list of approved occupations for 457 visas. The employer must now certify that the duties of the position match the ASCO definition of the occupation and that the qualifications and experience of the applicant meet the skill level specified in the definition.

A revised 457 occupations list has been produced on 11 September 2009. A number of "not elsewhere classified" occupations have been eliminated. These are occupations where the tasks and duties are not specified by ASCO, and are considered "catch all" occupations. An attempt has been made to narrow the "not elsewhere classified" occupations still on the list by including definitions and a list of allowed specializations. This has also been done for butchers and project/program administrators.

Another category targeted for elimination are occupations in the meat industry - an area where employment of 457 visa holders has been of concern to unions for some time.

Farmers and farm overseers have been added to the approved list of 457 occupations.

Another interesting addition is that the legislation has a provision to require employers to seek the support of certain organizations for a nomination to be approved in certain occupations. Presumably, this would include occupations where labour unions had concerns about presence of overseas workers in Australia.

The only way to nominate employees who are not the approved list is to negotiate a "labor agreement" with the Department of Immigration and the Department of Employment and Workplace relations. This process can take many months and the agreement can be quite restrictive in terms of which occupations can be nominated, salary level and training undertakings. Previously, it was possible for employers operating in regional areas to nominate occupations outside the usual list, but this concession has now been eliminated.

Market Rate Salaries

From 14 September 2009, new 457 visa applicants must be paid at the "market rate". The market rate will depend on the occupation and location of the employee. Evidence must be provided by the employer as to what the market rate is for the occupation, unless the base salary is over $180,000. This replaces the previous system which allowed for grant of a 457 visa providing the salary level was above a clearly specified minimum for the occupation.

For existing 457 visa holders, employers have until 1 January 2010 to ensure that they are being paid the market rate. This will require an extensive audit process for larger users of the 457 program.

The intention of the change is to ensure that 457 visa holders are paid in accordance with Australian standards. The stated intention is to avoid exploitation of overseas workers. In reality, the change seems to be in response to concerns that workers on 457 visas put downward pressure on Australian wages and salaries.

Health Costs and Insurance for 457 Holders

Employers who have employees on 457 visas which were granted prior to 14 September 2009 are expected to cover costs of public hospital treatment of the 457 visa holders.

The health obligation is no longer part of the sponsorship obligations for 457 visas granted after 14 September 2009. Instead, employees must show that they have adequate medical insurance to be granted their 457 visa, and must maintain this insurance during their stay in Australia on their 457 visa.

Employers previously had significant exposure to potentially very high health costs under the previous sponsorship obligation regime. Requiring the employee to hold suitable insurance is a more sensible way to offset the risk.

However, requirement that the insurance be already in place prior to visa grant could be rather troublesome. Many applicants would need to pay for health insurance without being sure that their 457 visa will be granted.

Sponsorship Obligations

A new regime of sponsorship obligations has been introduced. The most significant changes include:


Elimination of health obligation for 457 visas granted after 14 September 2009

Changes to the events which must be notified to the Department of Immigration, as well as the time-frame (10 business days) and method of notification

Clarification of the obligation to return 457 holders and family members to their home country

Requiring the employer to maintain certain records for a period of 2 years

Forbidding employers from recovering the cost of obtaining sponsorship approval and recruitment fees from the sponsored employee
Work Restriction 8107 and Changing Employers for 457 holders

457 holders are now able to change employers without needing to apply for a new 457 visa. The process of doing this is for the new employer to lodge a nomination and once this is approved, the 457 holder can work for the new employer. The work restriction on 457 visas, condition 8107, has been rewritten to reflect this change. 457 holders can only work for the employer who most recently nominated them. If a 457 holder ceases employment, they must start working again within 28 days otherwise they will be in breach of their visa conditions.

Conclusion

Probably the most significant of the changes is the requirement to pay 457 employees at the market rate. In most cases, the market rate will be much higher than the Minimum Salary Level which applied prior to 14 September.

Whilst some guidance has been provided on determining market rate, this requirement is very subjective and is likely to result in signifcant delays for employers using the 457 program going forward.

Changes to the sponsorship obligations are mostly quite sensible and make the requirements more easy to determine.

The training benchmark will be very difficult for employers to meet if they rely mainly on "on the job" training.

Employers must now in general show payments to external training providers or that they have hired a training officer to meet the training requirement. High-tech companies which would have previously relied on the introduction or utilization in Australia of new technology will be disadvantaged.

Changes to the work conditions on 457 visas are very much in favor of 457 holders, as they make it easier to transfer to a new employer without applying for a new 457 visa.

Mark Webster is the director and founder of Acacia Immigration and a member of the Migration Institute of Australia's NSW Executive. In this capacity Mark has liaised with the Department of Immigration on key policy issues. He was a major contributor to the MIA's submissions on Skills Assessment and Review of the General Skilled Program.

A recognized expert in the field, Mr. Webster has been quoted in print numerous times, including in Phillipe Legrain's 2007 book, Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them (Princeton University Press). Mark is a contributing author of the current edition of the Immigration Kit (Federation Press), the definitive text on migration law. He wrote the chapters on General Skilled Migration and Temporary Workers.

Acacia Immigration Australia's website contains information on the main Australian visa types. View the original article here: http://www.acacia-au.com/457_changes_September_14_2009.php

How Generational Changes Can Help Save Our Economy

This article is something for America to ponder. If you don't agree, make changes or state your own solutions that we can all ponder, but please don't wait for Congress which created these problems by putting their Aristocracy and hunger for power before America's well-being. A Congress that seems to be more loyal to political parties than to the United States of America has caused all of the problems America is now facing. The question is who will offer solutions we can ponder.

1. Legalize drugs. I know, before you go crazy just listen for a moment and ask yourself some questions. First of all, more people die from legal pharmaceuticals than any other drugs in the world. All you have to do is see the commercials on television and listen to the side effects that include death, stroke, heart attack, cancer and much more. Google LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) and read what the professionals have to say; judges, prosecutors and police officers. The benefits of legalization are many; reduced cost of incarceration; reduced cost of law enforcement; the gain in taxes; and crime on our borders and in our neighborhoods cut by at least 70%. Opponents of legalization say it will only bring in 15 to 35 billion. Law-enforcement and incarceration savings are not included in the conversation. What also isn't included is how much money and taxes can be made by the hundreds of products the hemp plant alone can produce, like clothing, paper, medicine, rope, silk and much more. At one time General Motors thought of mixing hemp fibers with plastic to make a stronger automobile body. I don't know if they went through with it, but it was one good idea amongst many. Legalizing drugs also takes the 'forbidden fruit' aspect from our youth and brings the effects out in the open so parents can point to those effects and say, "Don't be like that". We can make sure anyone giving an adolescent under sixteen drugs without their parent's approval will get an automatic five-year term without parole. A second offense will be a ten-year term without parole, and a third offense will be a twenty-five year term without parole. Keeping drugs illegal creates crime-lords and killing just like in the Al Capone days, and those innocent folks were smart enough and had enough that they amended the Constitution. Illegal drugs foster crime and creates billionaires who can then buy politicians, judges, prosecutors and police officers. Take the money out of drugs and you reduce crime and corruption.

Another benefit of legalizing drugs is stopping private prisons. Right now there are companies that run for-profit private prisons that trade on Wall Street and they are constantly lobbying Congress to make more things against the law so that they can make more money for themselves and their shareholders. Now that's a crime or should be a crime. Read what our Forefathers said in the 1700's when some folks wanted alcohol made illegal. They said not to prohibit anything because only ten-percent of the population will imbibe, rather they said to tax and control the 'sins' of man. Abraham Lincoln said the same thing. Drug addiction is a character and medical problem. It can be fixed if we use some of the money made legalizing it to do two things: One, create rehabilitation facilities; and two create advertisements like we did for cigarette use and I'll bet you in one generation drugs will not be a problem in our society. Don't you think it's ironic that pharmaceutical companies sell drugs that can kill you, yet a person who wants to smoke marijuana goes to jail and their life is ruined? Afterward it's hard to find a job and they can lose their voting rights. Yet we subsidize pharmaceutical companies with our tax money so they can put more drugs with killing side effects on the market. Just how stupid are we? And why do we let our American Royalty, the Congress, get away with telling us how to live. I thought they worked to serve and represent us, but oh my God, the hired help has taken over the house, weakened the foundation, and is getting ready to demolish it and tells us it's our fault and we must pay while they live high on the hog. Have we had enough already? Let's have an adult conversation without any of the fear tactics. Take the illegal money incentive out of drugs and reduce crime while taxing and controlling production and usage. We can save one billion a year on prison and law enforcement cost and make another billion on tax and hemp products. That's two billion a year and twenty billion in ten years. Hemp also has many medical purposes and the side effects won't kill you like some of the drugs pharmaceutical companies sell. Opponents say hemp is a gateway drug, that's like saying mothers breast milk leads to beer drinking or having sex leads to rape. Just another fear tactic to keep us from having a useful and adult conversation because illegal drugs is our hidden economy that brings in billions of dollars a year for drug king-pins and law enforcement. It's time to legalize drugs, reduce crime and make the billions of dollars to pay down our National debt. What do you think? Start screaming and shooting, I'll duck.

2. This one is a generational change that will cost money but payback great dividends in years to come. Bring back the draft. But make it a voluntary draft. First we roll Americorp from the Clinton Administration and all like programs from other Presidents into the Peace Corp; then we make the Peace Corp a cabinet position to show the world we take peace seriously. The Peace Corp will have an international and a domestic arm and any person between the ages of 18 and 26 who will serve four-years in the Military, Peace Corp or the State Department will get a free four-year college education or a couple of two-year degrees at a two-year college or four one-year certificates at one-year technical schools. If someone over 26 wants to serve we choose by health and education. Just imagine our Military having cooks, electricians, plumbers, heavy equipment operators instead of contracting it out to companies that don't have any skin in the game and just want to make a profit from war and our heroes dying. Even in the Peace Corp young folks will learn a trade that will last them a lifetime. We will produce many skilled workers with this one voluntary draft. Please don't think it won't work, because many young folks will gladly volunteer in the Military, Peace Corp or State Department to serve their country, learn a trade and get a free college education. We will be building an educated work force for generations to come. The benefits gained are well worth the cost. Plus we will be giving our children something we had when we were younger and that is a rite-of-passage and a pride in serving, something that is missing for many of our youth today. Remember, this draft will be absolutely voluntary and the benefits enormous to our future workforce. With the added benefit that it will cost less than any Government contract with any company that tried to compete, because we will have an educated workforce with the pride of serving, and you can't put company profit ahead of that. But you can put a generational and National profit on our youth serving while learning a useful trade. Bring back a voluntary draft, watch our country and our youth blossom, and be ready to compete in a global economy and win.

3. This fix is both generational and political. First, we offer 250 billion dollars to the first company that comes up with a three stage clean energy fix for both transportation, which includes trucks, cars and airplanes, and a clean energy fix for buildings and houses. The first stage must be an economical way that can be adapted to our cars and trucks today. The second stage must be an economical way that we can adapt it to our buildings and houses. The third stage will be a complete change for future products. The Government will match the 250 billion dollar reward with 250 billion dollars in research and development. We will use the money left over to help adapt stages one and two. Imagine the money and lives saved. Over one generation we will have saved the amount it cost us to do this and the United States Government will own at least 10% of all profits from this energy fix. That will sure cut into our taxes and our National Debt. Now the political part of this is our American Royalty, the Congress, they will never go for this because they make much of their money from energy dealers and energy lobbyist who write the laws that wrong the people and kill our troops, just to keep their power and Aristocracy. Have you ever counted how many Congressional persons and Senators are now millionaires or billionaires, but when they entered Congress they weren't worth much more than three hundred thousand dollars? How did they do it on $170,000.00 paycheck? Now is the time for an Energy Manhattan Project. Because if we can go to the Moon in ten-years I imagine we can be energy independent in less than ten-years with today's technology. Please, let's do it now because it will save lives, invest in our youth and create jobs; and just imagine how strong our country will be in just one generation.

4. This last fix I wanted to talk about was health care, but I didn't want to make the same mistake Obama made when he should have been concentrating on jobs. This fix is about education and putting our school age kids to work. But it will behoove you to research the top ten Veteran Health Care Facilities in the United States. Each patient has a team doctor, a team nurse and a team administrator. When a veteran goes to the lab for blood test or x-rays, within two-hours the results are on the doctor's computer. The VA gives some of the best health care in the world at a very reasonable cost. I will go into the cost savings using the VA system at another time because we should model our healthcare system after the top-ten VA hospitals, but that is for another article. Now I'd like to speak about our school age children going to work and how it can help families and corporations. My proposal is simple and will give children the impetus to help their family and the incentive to do better in school. Why? Pay every student for every grade ranging from A+ to C-. Every gas company, electric company, water company, insurance company and mortgage company will pay every child in every family one dollar for every C, two dollars for every B and three dollars for every A, whether those C's, B's or A's are plus or minuses. Of course each company will be able to deduct a tax write-off dollar for dollar. Imagine if Sears, J C Penny, Walmart or any other outfits got into the act by offering coupons. Imagine the pride of the children going to work and being able to help their family financially. Because now a family with four children whom each get six A's can write-off seventy-two dollars from each of the five companies mentioned above and save $360.00 for the month. And the great thing is the companies can write-off that $360.00 from their taxes. Children will learn the value of a dollar and the pride of helping their family. And most of the savings will go right back into the economy. Imagine if companies were patriotic enough to get on board and make it happen. Ah, the American dream isn't lost, just delayed by fear. How scared are you by your Congressperson or Senator? Will you write, email, call and generally raise hell until Congress institutes some or all of these fixes?

Please ponder these solutions. Make changes if you can improve on them or use them to create your own solutions. But get involved and contact your Congressperson and / or your Senator. Don't let politicians divide us and have Americans hating and fighting other Americans because of our political views. In the end we are all Americans and in the same boat. Let us not have name-calling without proposing solutions. Loyalty to America before loyalty to party is the solution to almost all of our problems.

Tom C. Watson is the founder of The Bunny Brigade. Tom uses this site as a means of dedication to support the reinstating of the original concepts as depicted in The Constitution of the United States along with its Bill of Rights. Tom also suggests that the federal government should stop over regulating business as well as eliminating of federal deficit spending. The site features Benny The Bunny and the site tells about the founding of the bunny brigade organization. The Web site also addresses solutions to fixing the nation's ills. Lastly, the site's author also has produced free bunny videos that you may view. Please visit the bunny site as often as you desire. It is located at http://thebunnybrigade.com/

Medical Loss Ratio Changes Affect the Pace of Health Care Reform Implementation

Even as state legislatures tackle how they will create new health care exchanges, the details of federal health care reform affecting their current health insurance markets have states, insurers, and others asking for time. One of the changes required by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) addresses Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) requirements on health insurers. Intended to reduce administrative costs and excess profits, states are now asking for waivers from federal law so that they can phase in MLR requirements over the next few years. The states hope that this will allow for changes in policies to prevent insurers leaving their jurisdictions, and to address other issues like insurance agent commissions, prior to exchanges coming on line in 2014.

Prior to the PPACA establishing a federal MLR, states determined how much insurers could spend on expenses not related to health care expenditures. While many states have established MLR requirements, the federal MLR requirements are more stringent than those now in place. Federal MLR requirements limit the amount of administrative costs and profit that insurers can make to 20% of premiums for individual and small group coverage and 15% for large groups, when state limits allowed 25% or more. Based on claims information that carriers will report in 2011, insurance carriers will be required to issue rebates to customers if they do not spend 80 to 85% of their revenue on health care or quality improvement costs. As costs vary between states due to a variety of factors, insurers may cease to do business in some states rather than pay significant rebates.

Nine states including Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, and North Dakota have formally applied for waivers from the pending requirements so that they can maintain carriers in their health insurance markets. Maine has already been granted a waiver to adjust their MLR standard to 65% and the eight other waivers are still under review. State exchanges will change the way individuals and groups purchase health insurance, but they depend on a healthy market to provide options through the exchange framework.

Tighter MLR requirements and the move to an exchange market have states concerned also about the role of insurance agents and brokers. Under current rules, agent and broker commissions paid by health insurers will be calculated as administrative costs. Carriers are anticipated to move their offerings to online resources and direct sales in response to MLR and in anticipation of exchange implementation. This result is a feature supported by advocacy groups like Health Care for America Now and Consumer Union who believe that strict MLR requirements will reduce costs to consumers.

Industry groups like the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA) and The Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers (CIAB) oppose the categorization of commissions in this way, noting that insurance agents are significant employers in many states, act as consumer advocates for their customers, and can reduce consumer protection and oversight burdens in states where administrative agencies are already stretched.

This position has also received support from state insurance commissioners. This issue was a concern last year when the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) made rule recommendations to the Health and Human Services Department following contentious discussions of what constituted "administrative" or "quality improvement" costs and how the MLR would be determined. Since that time HHS has issued interim final rules for their implementation based on the input they received from the state insurance commissioners, while the insurance commissioners have directed the NAIC Health Insurance and Managed Care Committee to address the role of the insurance agent in their markets. One possible avenue exists under the PPACA, as the law provides for health care "navigators" that would fill some of the roles currently filled by agents.

Congress too is discussing this issue. House Bill 1206, introduced in March and sponsored by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), would carve agent commissions out of the MLR calculation. While the bill has bi-partisan cosponsorship in the House, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) has been a strong proponent for a strict exclusion of administrative costs from the MLR computation and this position is also strongly supported by provider groups like the American Medical Association.

Ultimately, states will be seeing considerable changes in their existing health insurance markets leading up to 2014, not only in the way that health insurance is purchased, but in the underlying market that the exchanges will access. While it remains to be seen if states can address all of the details effectively prior to that date, it is clear that Governors and state legislatures will continue to seek flexibility as they address health insurance in their jurisdictions.

By Robert A. Holden, Vice President

Robert A. Holden is a Vice President for Stateside Associates. http://bit.ly/elv6Po