April unemployment rates head south!
Unemployment down to 4.9%!
- Thread starter buzzlightyear
- Start date
As a migration lawyer I get to see the first green shoots of the hiring process. Employers contacting me wanting to hire employees on subclass 457 visas. They have mostly come out of a tough trading period however are now keen to hire. It means the job market is tight in certain areas and employers are gearing up for expected stronger sales activity (I am currently working on sub-class 457 applications for town planners, building inspectors, construction estimators, cooks, training development officers, advertising specialists and marketing specialists-sales promotion officers).
3 months ago I hardly had any sub-class 457 applications. Now I'm the busiest I've been in about 7 years.
3 months ago I hardly had any sub-class 457 applications. Now I'm the busiest I've been in about 7 years.
That's nice insight Ajax. Thanks.
I work for an organisation, who in part, does medical tests for those people coming into the country on behalf of DIAC, and our prospective numbers for next FY have had a marked increased over this FY.
I work for an organisation, who in part, does medical tests for those people coming into the country on behalf of DIAC, and our prospective numbers for next FY have had a marked increased over this FY.
Roughly what % in each state (in your opionion) will these 'emploee' stay?
Not too surprising though. Tony Abbott is certainly signalling much higher 457 immigration targets -
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...eas-workers-20120426-1xo00.html#ixzz1uQnqo5ys
what's Abbott got to do with it? i.e. are you suggesting business are preparing hirings based upon a presumed coaltion win?
I'm implying that it signals that there's now a strong bipartisan consensus for accelerating 457 immigration. Business has told both sides of politics to pull their heads in (if they want to continue receiving electoral donations, most likely). Expansion will quietly go beyond 457s too. Notice how no-one's debating 'big vs small' Australia these days? Abbott's simply making it clear that as incoming PM he's heard the message loud and clear.
My applicants are all in New South Wales (mostly Sydney).
About 80% are staying. It hasn't always been as high. Maybe because of the state of the economies they have to go back to.
Sometimes they subsequently have their employer sponsor them for Permenant residence on an ENS (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa after 2 years on 457 visa (if their occupation is also on the ENS skilled occupations list).
An inceasing number are sponsored for the ENS visa before holding a 457 visa for 2 years (this requires a positive skills assessment and proof of 3 years post qualification employment expereince and also occupation on the ENSOL).
Sometiems they go secondary applicant on a spouse's Employer Nomination Scheme Permant residence application.
The ones that are single sometimes marry an Australian Citizen/Permanent resident then lodge a spouse application.
I recognise that some think 457 visas undercut salaries and conditions for Australian job seekers. There are fairly strong protections now in place now with the 457 process-need for nominating employer to prove the market salary paid to Australian citizens in the occupation (and that visa applicant's employment terms are no less favourable).
It's the confidence of employers to gear up that I find interesting. The immigration process is time consuming and fairly costly yet they wil readily go though the process as they are anticpating improved trading conditions in coming months/years.
About 80% are staying. It hasn't always been as high. Maybe because of the state of the economies they have to go back to.
Sometimes they subsequently have their employer sponsor them for Permenant residence on an ENS (Employer Nomination Scheme) visa after 2 years on 457 visa (if their occupation is also on the ENS skilled occupations list).
An inceasing number are sponsored for the ENS visa before holding a 457 visa for 2 years (this requires a positive skills assessment and proof of 3 years post qualification employment expereince and also occupation on the ENSOL).
Sometiems they go secondary applicant on a spouse's Employer Nomination Scheme Permant residence application.
The ones that are single sometimes marry an Australian Citizen/Permanent resident then lodge a spouse application.
I recognise that some think 457 visas undercut salaries and conditions for Australian job seekers. There are fairly strong protections now in place now with the 457 process-need for nominating employer to prove the market salary paid to Australian citizens in the occupation (and that visa applicant's employment terms are no less favourable).
It's the confidence of employers to gear up that I find interesting. The immigration process is time consuming and fairly costly yet they wil readily go though the process as they are anticpating improved trading conditions in coming months/years.
"...oh noh, mr garrison! wage pressures!...."
i smell more of those f_ck off we're full stickers...
What else did you think Bob Katter was playing at? The tolerance vote?
PS. Care to explain the post above that, FFS?
No, not offended. Just trying to make any sense of anything you post. That's all. If you don't want to be taken seriously that's fine.
This is truly amusing! Given me quite a chuckle.
P.S. I've got no clue what's going here but, damn, it's funny.
P.S. I've got no clue what's going here but, damn, it's funny.
It's an in-joke. The bizarre thing is that only the joker is in on it. Yep.
Just getting back on topic, you need to look a bit further into the figures to get a better picture. The bulk of employment growth is in part time jobs - there were 10k full time job losses last month. Additionally, the participation rate, which is the percentage of employed in total population, is about the same. So the headline figure is not the be all and end all indicator.
Please answer this question as this is how I seem to interpret it.
for example out of 100 people.
Example 1. 80 people employed full time, 16 people employed part time = 4% unemployment
Example 2. 60 people employed full time, 36 people employed part time = 4% unemployment
Example 3. 40 people employed full time, 56 people employed part time = 4% unemployment
are my figures correct?
for example out of 100 people.
Example 1. 80 people employed full time, 16 people employed part time = 4% unemployment
Example 2. 60 people employed full time, 36 people employed part time = 4% unemployment
Example 3. 40 people employed full time, 56 people employed part time = 4% unemployment
are my figures correct?
