[Singel]

There is an interesting article in today's NZ Herald : http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=0008AB19-B0F5-15A9-861683027AF10122

I was intrigued with this statement in the article " A good policy must be one that ensures that even after successfully attracting skilled people here, it is able to help these immigrants find the jobs to plug the worker shortage we're supposed to be facing "

I thought maybe we do a poll on whether NZ govt should help with finding jobs for "approved" migrants or not.

[Trigirl]

no - i don't think they should. the work to residence visa gives you six months to find work - if you can't find work in 6 months the chances are your skills aren't really in a shortage area.

[Anita & Marco]

This is a very good question - so I voted: Not sure.

Although I must say here in Wellington the city council does a great effort to assist new migrants, specifically those with a culture very different from the western culture. However, for the programmes you need to have a PR as far as I know.
The Wellington City Council is very much aware of the fact that this process doesn't stop by give a visa, but that it is very important that immigrants settle well.

Cheers,
Anita

[jo-and-jeff]

I don't think the NZ gov't should (or could) guarantee migrants with PR or WTR a job. But since they are campaigning so hard to get skilled migrants to come here as residents, it's in everyone's best interests for them to help these migrants be successful. This country needs the economic growth that those migrants can help provide, and it needs the income taxes from their higher salaries to help fund its health, benefits, and pension programmes, which are becoming increasingly strained with the growth and aging of the NZ population (and therefore covering less).

It's also in the best interests of NZ companies, whose business practices, skill sets, and productivity could gain from the infusion of different kinds of knowledge, skills, and experience that people from other countries bring.

And of course it is in the best interests of the people who have gone through all of the time, effort, and expense of going through the PR and WTR process, often selling their homes and paying huge amounts to move their households here. If they end up miserable and/or unemployed and go back to their home countries, everyone loses.

The PR and WTR screening programmes are not foolproof, but they are rigourous enough that presumably the vast majority of people who make it through are well worth retaining in this country.

It only makes sense for the NZ gov't to do what it can to benefit from the people it's persuaded to come here, via orientation programmes like Kiwi Ora, via job-search-assistance programmes for migrants, via giving incentives to companies to hire people with PR and WTR who are already in the country before hiring people from other countries who have not gone through the process of gaining PR or WTR, and via education of NZ employers and their hiring personnel, who will often "cut off their nose to spite their own face" by refusing to hire qualified migrants simply because they are migrants.

If you "lead a horse to water", you may not be able to make him drink, but the horse is smart enough to realise when he is thirsty and dehydrated, and he will drink. I am not sure that NZ employers are always as smart as that horse.

:roll

[bob_the_engineer]

I don’t think so,

I’m not sure how the wtr thing works but if I understand it then you are granted an amount of time to find work, if you can find work then an offer of residency is extended to you.

I thought that the idea was that NZIS weren’t 100% sure that you’d be a successful immigrant from an employability point of view, but because you were willing to try, they would grant you access to the country.
I think this is a great idea and I’m sure many people who live here were glad of this opportunity rather than being turned away.
If you couldn’t find work then they’ve at least been given a chance to try.

Something I don’t understand is why people feel that the NZ government should be tasked with finding jobs for immigrants!
I heard the story on the local news, and it was very sympathetically done. The only end I see to this is that the NZ government will NOT grant wtr opportunities if they are expected to go job hunting for the recipients when they arrive, lets face it, the locals will have to pay for the bulk of this service.

Yes it’s sad that some people come here with the hope of staying, but cant find work and have to leave, but pushing on down this road will just lead to a loss of opportunity for others.

Bob

I’m also keeping my fingers crossed that NZ doesn’t go down the route of offering incentives to employers to hire migrants, I’ve found that migrants are accepted with warmth in NZ, lets keep it that way by staying away from the stupidity of “positive discrimination”

[Anita & Marco]

Now I have read some of your reactions I want to add something because my opinion is more becoming a 'yes' than a 'not sure'. The reason is that most of the skills the people getting PR/WTR from NZIS have - are very much looked for here on the NZ market, according to Statistics from the employers etc.

Now, when it is not possible for people with the right skills to find those job - that DO exist, could mean that maybe something else is wrong and maybe the government should act? The NZ job market looks like a very multi-international one - but often employers do have problems with employing foreigners for one reason or the other - unfortunately. That's where maybe government comes in to 'educate'/'show' employers that maybe they are even better off employeeing a foreigner.

Another problem is that applicants do not have the correct approach themselves? Using the wrong CV's etc?

Those are all things that can be solved and make it a success for both employers and immigrants.

Cheers,
Anita

[wilson182]

I don't think the NZ govt should be tasked with helping Migrants find a job, but I think what they can do better is to help Employers understand the benefits and the need to employ skilled migrants. Make the process easier for them to work through and understand.

[H & Rick]

I think they should be asked to assist in some way by maybe offering incentives to companies that take the risk.

We have spoken to a variety of companies who have agreed that there are skilled shortages but are not willing to take the risk of employing a immigrant unless they are in the country..... surely this compounds the skill shortage.

Maybe they mean that they don't have many applications and therefore have limited choice....or perhaps they have been let down in the past by people that say they are coming but never arrived. :mad:

From our experience companies in Auckland will take the risk, but of you are looking to relocate elsewhere......especially to South Island companies are just not interested unless you are there and can start now. :wah

We also spoke to a NZ recruitment agency that said “as a rule, New Zealand Companies will not offer you employment unless you are in the country”.

[sarahw]

I agree with Wilson - the Government has enough to sort out without finding jobs for people who want to move here, but I think there is a gap for employers understanding the whole thing & a bunch of seminars aimed at those employers wouldn't go amiss.

[Ana&Steve]

I voted "not sure", as a simple "yes" or "no" isn't enough to cover all the effects of either decision. I think going to either extreme would cause a lot of serious problems, and trying to juggle both extremes like here in the US can be devastating. I agree with Anita that NZ gov should concentrate on educating employers on the value of immigrants, and I also agree with bob_the_engineer that employers shouldn't be given monetary incentives for hiring immigrants. I feel that immigrants are highly motivated, as they made it to NZ in the first place, and education packets from the govt. and practical job-hunting advice are in order, but that immigrants shouldn't be coddled. I think employers should make themselves more accessible, a lot of us have had the problem of recruiters stating they won't deal with people who don't have the legal right to work in NZ; it feels like the door is slammed in your face before you even get started. I feel like I'm a walking (typing) contradiction, no wonder I voted "Not Sure"!
Ana

[Mexican in NZ]

I don't think the NZ govt should be tasked with helping Migrants find a job, but I think what they can do better is to help Employers understand the benefits and the need to employ skilled migrants. Make the process easier for them to work through and understand.
I totally agree with you!
I have faced some bad experiences just by being a migrant :no ... i have great qualifications and i was not even given a chance in many work places :( ... So, the way i got my job was saying i will work for free for a week and if they liked the way i did it than they could hired me...many were skeptical...but finally i got a chance and i got the job and even got promoted to supervisor after just 2 weeks :clap
Well that is just my experience that is why now i am very happy to move to Wellington i have found the people there are more keen to give you a try no matter where you come from.
Adriana

[veronica]

Maybe the govt. needs to have some way of educating employers of the different visas and the procedures that they have to follow when employing a migrant. It seems that many are nervous of employing people who don't have a standard work visa because some of the other visas might require them to fill in forms etc themselves.

[H & Rick]

I think Bob the Engineer made a good point regarding the risk of encouraging "positive discrimination". This would be detrimental all round. However I think NZ companies are not very well informed regarding the committment migrants make when planning and moving to NZ. If they were more in charge of the facts then maybe they would feel more comfortable when considering employing migrants. Maybe the NZ government could offer more advice to companies on the subject.

[Moorf]

I don't think the NZ govt should be tasked with helping Migrants find a job, but I think what they can do better is to help Employers understand the benefits and the need to employ skilled migrants. Make the process easier for them to work through and understand.

Couldn't have put it better :nice1

[Singel]

So glad to know that NZIS is reviewing the six-month permit http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10419485

[Trigirl]

however hard i read that article i can't read it as them reviewing the six month permit?

while clearly the interviewer wanted to make a big deal of the 6 month permit there was only one "official goverment" quote in there which was:

Labour Department policy manager Lesley Haines said yesterday that the whole skilled migrant category was being re-evaluated.

"It is too early in the process to say whether the work-to-residence policy will be an aspect that is evaluated. However, if the policy is reviewed, any feedback from migrants or communities will be considered."

hardly NZIS is reviewing the six month permit?

[jo-and-jeff]

however hard i read that article i can't read it as them reviewing the six month permit?
Six-month permit too tough, say job-seekers
Wednesday January 17, 2007
By Simon Collins

A controversial six-month limit on work permits for skilled immigrants is under review after only 3 per cent of intending migrants managed to gain residence in New Zealand in the first six months of the new policy.

http://subs.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10419485
The way it's worded, it sounds to me as though the six-month limit is under review because statistics show that it's not a long enough period of time for the overwhelming majority of migrants to meet its time-limit conditions.

Jo

[Trigirl]

thats definitely not my interpretation of the article. i suppose it may be what the author is trying to say - but i can't see how that can possibly be interpreted as the government is reviewing the policy?

i agree the (in my opinion badly quoted*) stats are written in a way to show the policy isn't working. but there's nothing in the article to say that its under review because of that?



*why badly quoted?

"Labour Department figures show that 617 people were granted six-month work-to-residence permits in the first six months of the new policy. But only 19 (3 per cent) had gained permanent residence by the end of June last year."

so 617 people were given this permit over 6 months. 19 had PR by the end of the 6 months after the policy began (not as would make more sense 6 months after the end of each of them got their visas). they have to have worked for at least three months to apply for PR. so even if the 617 people got the visas evenly over the 6 months then at this point 308 of them still wouldn't be eligible for visas even if they'd got a job *on day 1* of them arriving. it also takes no account of how long it may take them to get PR after applying.

might be worth a look at the stats of this same group a further 6 months on i'd say?

[jo-and-jeff]

Hmmm, AMI says they were asked for feedback about the "policy" -- presumably the Skilled Migrant policy as a whole -- and it sounds as though AMI are assuming, since they recommended a lengthening of that 6-month period on the WTR visa, that the Labour Dep't is re-evaluating it.

Considering the frequent non-responsiveness of government to recommendations made by knowledgeable parties, I'd have to agree that that assumption is a stretch. ;)

I'd also have to agree that it sounds as though the statistics which best supported the claim were used (and likely provided to the reporter by AMI), but they're not necessarily accurate -- you're right, Mandy, you'd need at least a one-year time frame to reliably be able to judge how many actually got residence.

Jo

[macs gold]

Please note it is open for debate whether the policy is working or not. Just because affected immigrants think the period should be longer than 6 months does not necessarily make the policy wrong.

Obviously I don't know each applicants case, but the 6 mth visa would seem to be issued to those applicants for residency for which NZIS is unsure they will successfully settle. They are given a lifeline by being given 6 months to get a job, and that on the face of it seems a reasonable period. To be honest, for myself and a lot of people, if I did not have paid employment for 6 months, my residency status would not be my biggest worry. I would be more concerned about my ability to pay my bills, and whether my skills are suitable long term for the job market.

Perhaps I'm being a bit blunt, or devil's advocate, but the fact that so few are getting jobs in 6 months might actually indicate the policy is working; ie. not granting PR was correct, and putting the onus on the applicant was the right place to put the risk.

That said, as an employer, and as somebody who has spent more than a little time on these forums and on NZIS website, immigration rules are by definition a complex minefield. If anybody could work out a practical way to educate employers about what it all means that would be a good improvement.

The employer education issue affects all immigrants, not just the 6 month visa ones.

However, I note that those most likely to benefit from recruiting more immigrants are recruitment agencies, and they themselves struggle to keep abreast of the rules, and still generically advertise for "only candidates with residency need apply". What hope the rest of us.

[wilson182]

Please note it is open for debate whether the policy is working or not. Just because affected immigrants think the period should be longer than 6 months does not necessarily make the policy wrong.

Obviously I don't know each applicants case, but the 6 mth visa would seem to be issued to those applicants for residency for which NZIS is unsure they will successfully settle. They are given a lifeline by being given 6 months to get a job, and that on the face of it seems a reasonable period. To be honest, for myself and a lot of people, if I did not have paid employment for 6 months, my residency status would not be my biggest worry. I would be more concerned about my ability to pay my bills, and whether my skills are suitable long term for the job market.

Perhaps I'm being a bit blunt, or devil's advocate, but the fact that so few are getting jobs in 6 months might actually indicate the policy is working; ie. not granting PR was correct, and putting the onus on the applicant was the right place to put the risk.

That said, as an employer, and as somebody who has spent more than a little time on these forums and on NZIS website, immigration rules are by definition a complex minefield. If anybody could work out a practical way to educate employers about what it all means that would be a good improvement.

The employer education issue affects all immigrants, not just the 6 month visa ones.

However, I note that those most likely to benefit from recruiting more immigrants are recruitment agencies, and they themselves struggle to keep abreast of the rules, and still generically advertise for "only candidates with residency need apply". What hope the rest of us.

Good Post :yes

[zxof]

just want to add...

If you managed to secure an employment within the 6 months WTR periods (and stay employed for at least 3 months), NZIS will need to evaluate your "WTR-to-PR" application. The process will take another 2-4 months !?!?

So, what happen if your visa is going to expire soon?
according to the person at the call center, you can apply to extend your work visa, you need to pay $120 for that! and the process will take another 2 months!

sorry for the rant...

[macs gold]

Actually the education issue might be one for the applicants too. Getting a job offer in a new country can be a very difficult affair, and there are a number of things going against you:

- role definitions are likely to be different
- may have a different work-culture
- employers have perception of language difficulties
- qualifications will be difficult to translate/map with new country equivalents
- job applicants don't know the employers, business scene, other factors that help them prepare more fully for application process
- lack of personal references
- employers may have doubts about candidates commitment to new country and role.

Again, a lot of these issues are generic to nearly all immigrants, but perhaps the risks need to be emphasised particularly to those immigrants getting the 6 month visa, so at least they are going in with their eyes open.