For the purposes of SC482, SC186, SC494, if the Department of Home Affairs have concerns regarding the veracity of the sponsor’s certification that the tasks of the nominated position are equivalent, or substantially equivalent, to the tasks listed in ANZSCO for the nominated occupation, a more detailed assessment of which tasks the nominee will be performing will be undertaken.
In making this assessment, DHA would not just accept the ‘list of duties’ provided, but consider whether the nominee is likely to actually be performing the stated tasks, taking into account any supporting evidence provided by the applicant, as well as the business context of where the position will be based including:
- the location where they will be working;
- their position in the organisational structure of the business;
- the proposed tasks that they will be performing, and
- the tasks performed by current employees.
While it is not the Department’s role to make a commercial decision as to whether it makes good business sense to hire a particular worker or pay a particular salary, the business context is relevant in terms of ensuring that the nominee will not primarily be undertaking duties at a lower skill level than the nominated occupation. For example:
- If a car wash with only two employees nominates a Corporate General Manager (CGM) (ANZSCO 111211), this is likely to raise concerns as to whether the nominee will actually be performing the full range of duties of a CGM. This is because, even if the listed duties equate with ANZSCO and the business can pay a CGM at market salary rates, it is unlikely that the nominee would be ‘planning, directing controlling and reviewing the day-to-day operations and major functions of a commercial, industrial government or defence organisation’. The nominee would appear to be unable to perform a significant majority of a CGM’s tasks, as outlined in ANZSCO, in the business context.
- On the other hand, if a business operates a large number of car wash outlets around Australia and nominate a CGM to work in their head office, this would be unlikely to raise concerns as it would be possible for the nominee to undertake the occupation’s tasks.
If after further investigation DHA have concerns, DHA will also consider the ‘genuineness’ of the position.
Position is not consistent with the nature of the business
If DHA has concerns that there seems to be a significant inconsistency between the nominated position and the nature of the sponsoring business and one or more of the factors below apply, further assessment will be undertaken:
- the scope of the activities of the business do not encompass the duties of the nominated occupation and hence, it appears unlikely that the nominee will actually be undertaking the tasks specified in the application:
- For example, nominations of a Landscape Gardener (ANZSCO 362213) or a Multimedia Specialist (ANZSCO 261211) by a physiotherapy practice would not, on face value, be consistent with the nature of the business.
- the size or turn-over of the business would not appear to support such a position.
- For example, a small restaurant with an annual turnover of AUD$300,000 is unlikely to be able to afford to nominate a cook on an annual salary of AUD$55,000, if they already have four staff paid the same salary.
- Tasks of the position and nominated occupation
- Recruiting for Healthcare Positions Overseas
- Work Visas
- TSS 482 visa – Adverse Information
- TSS 482 visa – Direct employer or associated entity
- ‘Legacy 457 Worker’ Age Limit Exemption for 186 Permanent Visa
- TSS visa self sponsorship
- Assessing genuineness – 482 TSS visa
- Are part-time positions acceptable for the 482 TSS visa?