Work Visa: Extensions

Immigration New Zealand Revises AEWV Work Visa Extension Policy

Immigration New Zealand has revised its policy on Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV) extensions, limiting the extensions to specific applicants rather than offering them universally. These changes, which are complex and detailed, have introduced new criteria based on skill levels and salary rates.

Skill Level and ANZSCO

The skill level assessment of occupations has returned as a key determinant, with ANZSCO being reinstated as the occupational classification system. The duration of the AEWV Work Visa extension now depends on the skill level of the job under ANZSCO:

  • Skill Level 1-2: Professional jobs
  • Skill Level 3: Trades jobs
  • Skill Level 4-5: Caregiving, transport sector work, labouring, hospitality, and tourism
  • Skill Level 2-4: Office jobs (varies by role)
  • Skill Level 1-3: IT jobs

Duration of Visa

The duration of the visa extension is determined by the skill level and salary/wage rate:

  • Skill Level 1-3 roles: If paid $29.66/hr or more, eligible for a maximum stay of 5 years.
  • Skill Level 4-5 roles: If paid $29.66/hr, eligible for a maximum stay of 5 years, provided the application was made between 23 June 2023 and 6 April 2024.
  • Skill Level 4-5 roles (earning below $29.66/hr): If now earning $29.66/hr or more but applied before 23 June 2023, eligible for an extension of 1 year, with a maximum stay of 3 years.

Specific Cases

  • Caregivers: Earning $28.25/hr or more can get a work visa for up to 5 years; below this rate, only 3 years.
  • Bus Drivers: Specific details are too complex for a general post and require direct consultation.

Key Points

  • New applications are required for all visa extensions, effectively making them new applications rather than extensions.
  • Application fees are $750 per work visa application.
  • Health and character requirements from previous applications do not need to be repeated.
  • Evidence of 3 years of relevant work experience or a qualification equivalent to NZQF Level 4 is required, unless previously assessed.
  • For applicants earning $29.66/hr or more in skill level 1-3 roles:
    • No new Job Check required; existing one can be reused.
    • No English test result needed.
    • Eligible for the balance of 5 years.
    • Accompanying family visas will also be new applications with associated fees.
  • For applicants earning below $29.66/hr in skill level 1-3 roles:
    • Must be offered $29.66/hr or more to get an extension.
    • Eligible for an extension of 1 year.
    • New Job Check required.
    • No English test result needed.
    • Must show at least 3 years of relevant experience or a Level 4 qualification.

These changes reflect a significant shift in Immigration New Zealand’s approach to AEWV Work Visa extensions, emphasising skill levels and salary rates as key factors.

 

Why the changes

“So, you know, we’ve thought about it quite carefully”

RNZ Erica Stanford, Minister of Immigration

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/513686/immigration-tightening-might-only-be-temporary-erica-stanford

While she is turning the tap down for now, Immigration Minister Erica Stanford says the reverse might be the case next year, depending on how the economy goes

These changes are a perfect example of how Immigration New Zealand gets itself tied in knots. They are a knee jerk reaction to the rising unemployment and worsening economy.

While tossing out international workers at the first sign of trouble might be an approach that finds many supporters in the voting public, it is very short-term thinking for the economy. People are not liquid, Immigration is not really a tap that can be turned on and off. The recent pandemic has shown us how reliant New Zealand really is international people to work and maintain our economy.

Recent trends in migration have been predominantly lower skilled workers coming in as those are the roles that employers have been struggling to fill. This reflects our demographic shift, and the large number of local people who are unfit or unwilling to work in lower skilled roles.

There fraud that came in due to the gaps policy failures of the Employer Accreditation scheme should not be conflated into a need to push out all lower skilled workers. This would be a very heavy handed approach.

There are structural changes needed to get New Zealanders who have been out of the workforce long-term into the workforce again. That’s another issue.

To force employers to lose the international staff they have brought in punishes employers who have invested in the Accredited Employer Work Visa scheme and settled their international talent into NZ. It also punishes international people who have sacrificed a lot to come here, and worked hard to make a difference once they’ve arrived.

We should treat people who are willing to come here and join our society awith dignity and respect for hard work and contributions. 

After all, as COVID show, it is international people who are keeping our country running.

Work Visas: Good Faith Obligations

Work Visas and Good Faith Obligations

This article comments generally on employment law and immigration policy. This article should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in your specific situation.

What happens when immigration policy meets employment law?
Specifically, when immigration policy favors the employment of New Zealand applicants over migrant workers meets employment law obligations to all workers?

An Employment Court reminder to always uphold good faith duties or face hefty penalties, such as the $45,000 that was ordered in the case of Dilshaad Gill v Restaurant Brands Limited.
Gill was an overseas worker with a work visa expiring in a few months. He approached his employer to support him with a further work visa, but two New Zealand applicants were suitable, and the employer did not support the documentation for the work visa.

The Labour Market Test requires that when a suitable New Zealand Resident or Citizen applies for a role, they must be selected over a suitable overseas applicant. Gill was dismissed because he did not have a valid work visa. Before the dismissal, the employer fell short of good faith obligations to their employee. The Gill case explains that when employees request assistance in applying for a further work visa, employers acting in good faith looks like:

  • A positive duty to be clear in communication
  • Letting employees know as soon as possible if visa applications cannot be supported and why
  • Communicating what the labour market test process looks like
  • Not creating any expectations of certain results
  • Consulting with employees about options like applying for other roles

Employers and employees must understand the types of visas, their requirements, and processes to fully know what visa options exist.

It should be clear that employment is subject to employees holding valid work visas and in the case that labour market tests fail, employers cannot support work visas.

Whilst it is not reasonable for employers to support visa applications when the labour market test fails, employers still have good faith obligations to their migrant employees throughout the visa process. Communication about the process, the result of the test and consultation on other options should have taken place.

UVISA is closely watching the overlap of immigration policy with employment law.

Employers should seek advice to avoid similar mistakes and penalties and to fully understand visa application options.

Keira McGregor

Employment Representative