ROV Job Australia

[Christopher Tyson]

Maybe this should be on another thread as it may be slightly of the original topic, but is relevant to some of the posts here;

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/87illegal.htm

Maybe the MUA reps could enquire to the Immigration Dept or Dept of Industrial Relations & Employment to why foreign workers are allowed to stroll in without first having the required visa?

Seems a pretty straight forward definition of who are illegal workers, and those that aren’t. Maybe I’m missing something buried away on some obscure site or international UN convention?

Problems created by illegal workers; "Deny Australian citizens and permanent residents the opportunity to obtain a job."

I’m all for an international job market. But foreigners should have to at least obtain the correct visas first, suitable qualified locals or at the least expats sought in preference before looking elsewhere, as well as paid the local market rate. As far as I know, most Oz companies have agreed to an agreed MUA Collective Agreement or the like?

Does or should this also cover those non-union members or foreigners working illegally on valid visas?

Check this issue on the following link;

http://www.actu.asn.au/Images/Dynamic/attachments/6638/Workers_Rights_in_Australia.pdf

“Employers are obliged to pay 457 visa holders at least the same wages and conditions as they pay to Australians doing the same work in the same workplace. 457 visa holders are entitled to the same conditions under awards and agreements as Australian workers, including leave provisions and overtime rates.”

“Contracts signed overseas are only enforceable in Australia as far as they are consistent with Australian laws. 457 visa holders have the same rights as Australian workers under an award or agreement, regardless of any contract signed overseas.”

I’m no Solicitor, but the above information is quite straight forward for anyone to clearly understand. In a nutshell, if you are working in Australia legally, you should be paid at least the market rate. Anything less is helping to keep rates ‘low’ or undermine Workers Agreements made in good faith with employers. Please correct me if I’m wrong?

[Anonymous]

I have known personnel work in Australia on MCV (Martitme Crew Visa) not bothering with the 457 visa at all…

[Micbeth]

MicBeth,

So what CAN be done by the MUA to prevent this "cheaper" labor from flooding the market in Aus.?

I don’t know. Let’s hope they don’t go too overboard and try to make the place exclusive. We are an international, highly mobile industry. There are ebbs and flows in work availability at various times in various regions. If every region becomes exclusive and we are tied to our country of residency for work we will have a more easily manipulated feast or famine cycle than which exists now, and we all know how that is exploited to make people desperate and keep rates down. We need to keep the rates in places like Australia at their high levels to maintain the knock-on effect into other parts of the world. S E Asia and Oz used to be the poor relations with dayrates compared to the North Sea who were the main driving upward force, but now the wheel has turned to reverse the situation and North Sea is now the poor relation and is in danger of becoming even poorer. The knock-on effect can make things go backwards as well as forwards. In the past people went to the North Sea for the local dayrates, not to just get work on any dayrate. So why should people going to jobs in Oz, NZ, etc not be able to take advantage of the rates on offer there? We also need to bring North Sea rates up to the levels available elsewhere, to avoid a negative knock on effect from them.

Maybe this is the solution in Oz:

Maybe this should be on another thread as it may be slightly of the original topic, but is relevant to some of the posts here;

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/87illegal.htm

Maybe the MUA reps could enquire to the Immigration Dept or Dept of Industrial Relations & Employment to why foreign workers are allowed to stroll in without first having the required visa?

Great post Redherring, the links were very informative.

Liddlejohn’s post said all he had to do was show LOI and seaman’s book to get in. I assume there was some other online visa in place as I don’t think you can just roll up with no advance notice. He has said that he has worked in Oz twice in the past. Combining this with the relevant bits of 225’s trolling posts indicate it can’t be too hard for companies to get foreign workers in. All the visa references in the other posts describe the 457 work visa which appears to be well policed, according to the Oz government links provided on these posts. But it appears that for a 457 work visa, amongst other things, you have to be sponsored by an Australian company and paid in Australia in Oz dollars at the going rate. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Also please correct me if I am wrong in assuming that this was not the case for Liddlejohn and the SS7 people and they were paid their usual pounds/USdollar dayrate into their usual bank accounts. Hence the point of the thread in exploring a possible loophole which ROV companies will exploit to avoid paying what was originally negotiated with employees in good faith. A really good day rate is only relevant if you get off shore to earn it. If such a situation does exist may I point out that such actions do not benefit any ROV workers in any part of the world because it will nuetralise any possible knock-on effect from these rates.

Does anybody out there who has worked in Oz, but paid at your usual contract rate into your usual account know what type of visa was used to get you in?

[Christopher Tyson]

The government website http://www.immi.gov.au/sea/mcv/about.htm also states that:

"Crew are not permitted to sign-on to an imported vessel with a MCV. They must hold an appropriate visa such as a 457 business visa.

If crew, at time of sign-on, hold only a visa other than an MCV, such as a Tourist visa or ETA, that visa may be ceased as it does not permit work in Australia. Crew may consequently face restriction on board and this may have serious consequences for any future visa applications."

Have not looked for the definition of ‘imported vessel’, but only assumed one not registered in Oz waters? If this is the case, making any use of a MCV illegal in theses instances? Maybe I’ve got it wrong and missed something?

[Micbeth]

I have known personnel work in Australia on MCV (Martitme Crew Visa) not bothering with the 457 visa at all…

If true this explains the mystery of how to avoid the 457 work visa requirements. But I suspect 225 is still trolling because Redherring raised a good point on the validity of working in coastal waters on an MCV.

The following is copied from this link: http://www.immi.gov.au/sea/mcv/about.htm

When does a Maritime Crew visa cease or become invalid?

if the ship on which the crew travel to Australia is ceasing its international voyage status and is declared ‘imported’ by Australian Customs, and within five (5) days crew do not depart Australia, or sign-on to another non-military ship, or do not obtain another suitable visa from the department to authorise their continued lawful stay in Australia

And on another page:

Coastal Trading Licences

Vessels that hold a Coastal Trading Licence issued by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (Infrastructure) and which undertake coastal (domestic) trade in Australia are subject to Customs entry / import.

Foreign sea crew lose their Maritime Crew Visa status 5 days after Customs entry / import.

Foreign crew are required to depart Australia unless they hold an appropriate work visa which will usually be required to be applied for offshore.

[Micbeth]

According to the definition here:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/na1912123/s187a.html

Any vessel working in Australian waters appears not to be an International Voyage, so foreign crew could possibly be working illegally if using an MCV.

Be sure to check what visa you are entering Australia under if you are sent there to work, just in case.

[Christopher Tyson]

Micbeth,

I agree that we’re an international and highly mobile industry and with your stated reasons for keeping it that way.

But maybe there’s possibility of no actual ‘loop-hole’ at all. I wouldn’t even suggest any individual or employer would flaunt or ignore immigration laws / trade union agreements etc and risking prosecution, job & reputation,…………………. just to save a few bucks? 🙂

[James McLauchlan]

Keep at it people. There is some pretty interesting stuff coming out here which may prove to highlight the loophole that ‘may not exist’ 😉

A few informed calls to immigration might help stem the flow of this breach. If you are wrong then no problem.. if you are right then the illegal act should be corrected and appropriate fines issued. As long as the companies and individuals are working within the law then that’s fine in my mind. If not they should be nailed.

Whilst the OP doesn’t suggest that, just because a supervisor has been advertised for – ‘visa required’, there is an imminent flood of foreigners heading to Oz, and whilst others may feel the earlier debate was all pure ‘speculation’ I can see how companies (such as SS7 – don’t ya just love them!) would try to flout the the law favour of greater shareholder profit but at the same time try to downplay knowledge of the practice.

Somebody did post and openly admit that they had knowledge of a MCV being used to get foreign workers offshore.

I have known personnel work in Australia on MCV (Martitme Crew Visa) not bothering with the 457 visa at all…

I don’t think for a moment that companies will not have looked into the legalities of this, but they have probably concluded that the risk/reward (fines/profit) falls in their favour so they are trying it on.

Question based on the OP.
Is there a shortage of ROV supervisors in Oz at present?

If companies are having trouble filling slots then that might explain the Ad. If there is no such shortage then this debate will be on track.

[Scott Beveridge]

Micbeth,

I agree that we’re an international and highly mobile industry and with your stated reasons for keeping it that way.

But maybe there’s possibility of no actual ‘loop-hole’ at all. I wouldn’t even suggest any individual or employer would flaunt or ignore immigration laws / trade union agreements etc and risking prosecution, job & reputation,…………………. just to save a few bucks? 🙂

Red,

It certainly appears that ROV employers are in fact, flaunting Aus immigration laws… Perhaps they (the employers) are doing a Bondy (not the beach…)

[Anonymous]

Redherring:

Have not looked for the definition of ‘imported vessel’, but only assumed one not registered in Oz waters? If this is the case, making any use of a MCV illegal in theses instances? Maybe I’ve got it wrong and missed something?

Global construction vessels and such that work in Australia on relatively short term projects are never permanently imported into Australia for obvious reasons and so MCV remain valid.

[Micbeth]

But maybe there’s possibility of no actual ‘loop-hole’ at all. I wouldn’t even suggest any individual or employer would flaunt or ignore immigration laws / trade union agreements etc and risking prosecution, job & reputation,…………………. just to save a few bucks?

During discussions on this thread at least one person here has admitted to working in Australia on a foreign based day rate and it has been claimed that SS7 do it on a regular basis. How is it being done? And to go back to the OP, the add being questioned said the applicant must already have a visa or be able to arrange one themselves. You can’t arrange a work visa by yourself, you need a sponsor, so who can explain what other visas would fit someone into the category described?

And for the second part, I have personal knowledge of immigration laws being flouted to work in Singapore. So it does happen, and the troll with his MCV and wrong definition of imported vessel posts seems to indicate it is being done in Oz, but I’ll try to stick to forum etiquette and not feed or humour the troll.

Whilst the OP doesn’t suggest that, just because a supervisor has been advertised for – ‘visa required’, there is an imminent flood of foreigners heading to Oz,

Given the rumours of the amount of work coming up in Oz in the future it may be the start of such a flood though.

[Scott Beveridge]

Micbeth,

Ergo, the gates must be closed….

[Christopher Tyson]

225,

Please explain why they remain valid and provide evidence rather than opinion that may enlighten us not in the know? Under what circumstances / criteria would a vessel have to be imported into Oz? Can you provide any facts rather than opinions?

I’ll provide some facts I’ve dug up.

Quote also from http://www.immi.gov.au/sea/mcv/about.htm

Who is the Maritime Crew visa for?
The Maritime Crew visa (MCV) is for foreign crew (including supernumerary crew) of non-military ships. Crew includes articled ships’ crew, or crew under an employment contract and listed on the supernumerary crew list.
Non-military ships includes:
• vessels used for commercial trading purposes
• vessels owned and operated by a foreign government to do scientific research
• vessels approved for ‘public vessel status’ by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
• In general terms, non-military ships are commercial vessels (cargo vessels, cruise ships, fishing vessels and so on). Crew of yachts would not normally qualify for this visa.
• The MCV permits crew to enter Australia by sea only, for the purpose of allowing them to work on their ship.
• Any foreign crew on board a vessel that is ‘imported’ (that is, subject to an entry declaration) by Australian Customs, must hold another visa (not the MCV) to remain lawfully in Australia.
• For information about suitable visas and maritime activities in Australia.

A further deduction from the above; I’m not sure how a construction vessel would be classified as ‘trading’, and therefore a MCV would not apply.

http://www.immi.gov.au/sea/_pdf/guide-to-visas-for-foreign-sea-crew.pdf

“The MCV is not appropriate for foreign crew remaining in Australia and onboard a vessel that has been, or will be, ‘imported’ by the Australian Customs Service. ‘Imported’ is the common term for a vessel that has been subject to a Customs entry declaration. Such vessels usually seek to remain or operate in Australia. As a consequence of being ‘imported’, a vessel is deemed to have ceased its international voyage. A MCV held by foreign crew will usually cease five days after a vessel is ‘imported’ to allow crew time to depart Australia lawfully. Foreign crew cannot sign-on to a vessel that has been imported.”

Also, I would assume that any vessel working in Australian waters be subject to Customs, therefore would need to be imported? May need to contact Australian Customs on this to find out actual regulations……….

After a little scanning of the text, found this down the bottom of the document:

1. Crew on a commercial vessel operating strictly outside Australia’s migration zone
For example, seismic vessel, pipe-laying vessels, and so on.
2. Foreign workers on Australian resources installations (e.g. oil rigs), fixed or mobile.
3. Foreign workers transiting Australia to the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA) (Timor Sea)

ALL REQUIRE VISAS OTHER THAN MCV!!

A little old but useful map; http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/2003-04/04rn42.pdf

“Australian territory currently defined in the Act as an ‘excised offshore place’ includes Christmas, Ashmore and Cartier Islands and offshore installations such as oil rigs etc. The definition also includes other external territories and islands (but not territory on mainland Australia) prescribed in the regulations as ‘excised offshore places’.”

MCV not valid here either!!

If still just confused / misinformed and you’re indeed correct in there being an actual ‘loop-hole’, maybe lobbying from concerned parties including MUA to the various government departments (immigration, customs etc) & Trade Union to clear it up?

[Anonymous]

Redherring: Nice research..

MCV remain valid for project based work because the vessel is not permanetly imported into Australia. This is not the same as clearing customs as you seem to think. Also the term ‘trading’ does not just mean offloading bananas

A typical voyage to Australia may require the vessel to leave Norway, refuel in Las Palmas, South Africa, Singapore and arrive in Australia. The offshore workscope is then completed and a similar yoyage home begins. I can assure you that the vessel has not been "imported" into five different countries, because of customs clearance. Thats not how it works.

Moreover, the proof is the fact the companies send personel to Aussie with MCV. Its not a theoretical exercise. However a certain set of curcumstances must be present for this to happen, so I dont believe the flood gates will open as some folk think.

[Christopher Tyson]

225,

Yes, if what you say is correct, circumstances would have to be right for the issue of legally valid MCV’s.

I refer to the likely requirements for ‘import’, as the vessel has completed its voyage and working in Australian waters. 1 day or 1 year is not the concern, but most likely that of Customs & Immigration which may be able answer the question on vessel requirements…..

“The MCV is not appropriate for foreign crew remaining in Australia and onboard a vessel that has been, or will be, ‘imported’ by the Australian Customs Service. ‘Imported’ is the common term for a vessel that has been subject to a Customs entry declaration. Such vessels usually seek to remain or operate in Australia. As a consequence of being ‘imported’, a vessel is deemed to have ceased its international voyage. A MCV held by foreign crew will usually cease five days after a vessel is ‘imported’ to allow crew time to depart Australia lawfully. Foreign crew cannot sign-on to a vessel that has been imported.”

But the fact remains;

1. Crew on a commercial vessel operating strictly outside Australia’s migration zone
For example, seismic vessel, pipe-laying vessels, and so on.
2. Foreign workers on Australian resources installations (e.g. oil rigs), fixed or mobile.
3. Foreign workers transiting Australia to the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA) (Timor Sea)

ALL REQUIRE VISAS OTHER THAN MCV!!

I am not personally against the movement of workers across borders. The industry is global, and the following of procedures and regulations is a must to ensure foreign workers do not harm prospects and undermine & erode agreements for fair pay & conditions made in good faith between Aussie workers and their employers. Just a trickle is a drop too much if wages, conditions or jobs are adversly affected.

[Author]

Posts