As reported on 1 August 2022 in The Canberra Times by Andrew Brown The resolution was passed by the Australian Workers’ Union national conference in Sydney on Monday.
What is not clear is whether this recommendation only applies to employer sponsored and employer nominated demand driven migration, for example the 482, 186, 187 and 494 visa programs, or is the Australian Workers Union saying this should apply to all new Australian migrant workers including permanent skilled migrants, international students, family and spouse visa holders, humanitarian visa holders, backpackers and Pacific Island visa holders?
After being involved in the Australian migration profession for over 25 years, the inconsistency between visa programs still amazes me.
The Australian Workers Union have also said that While the union said migration was necessary in the immediate term, it believes employers have an obligation to help Australians fill skill shortages.
Under the plan, those employing migrant workers should provide a traineeship or apprenticeship to an Australian in the same role, or contribute to a funding pool to help with training.
For anyone unfamiliar with Australia’s temporary and permanent employer sponsored and employer nominated demand driven migration programs (the subclass 482, 186, 187 and 494) employers are already required to pay a training levy.
According to information on the Department of Home Affairs Website:
Employers must pay the applicable nomination training contribution charge referred to as the Skilling Australians Fund (SAF) levy. The purpose of the SAF levy is for employers to contribute to the broader skills development of Australians.
The levy funds are managed by the Department of Education, Skills and Employment (DESE) Information provided in the online nomination application form is used to calculate the required SAF levy amount which is payable in full at the time of lodging a nomination application.
Employers must not pass the SAF levy on to the visa applicant.
Information recently released through a Department of Home Affairs – Freedom of Information request (FA 22/04/00442) shows the total revenue paid by businesses, industry and government by way of the Skilling Australians Fund (SAF) levy payments collected from 2018-19 to 2020-21.
In 2018-19, revenue paid was $197,981,800, while in 2019-20 it was $224,780,600 and $172,095,400 in 2020-21. If temporary and permanent demand driven program numbers double or triple over the coming years to help business, industry and government address current and future workforce needs, this could see Federal Government revenue from SAF levy payments increase to almost $500,000,000 a year. What we need to understand now and then improve upon, is what this fund is being spent on and is it spent on training Australians in the jobs and locations that businesses require the skills (and have therefore brought in a migrant to undertake the job role). I imagine that this is the intention of the Union recommendations and they should be asking this question now.
But there is another problem. If I’m a business in a remote area or region and pay into the Skilling Australia Fund, there are not always local training providers, so my funds are going towards paying for training outside of my region. The SAF is not going to solve my problem, no matter how much money I pay into it.
With my experience and knowledge of the migration program, my perception is that the current settings of the migration program do not assist businesses in regional and low population growth jurisdictions to address workforce, demographic, economic or population concerns. The SAF levy should be removed or significantly reduced for any business who needs to access this program to address genuine workforce needs in regional Australia. Currently applying a SAF levy to demand driven migration and not to other migration programs is unfair, inconsistent and doesn’t actually help to grow the local skills businesses need.