Some of the advice is being ignored
Yet, it seems unlikely that reforming the 457 visa program so that it works more effectively to meet skill shortages is going to be adopted by the government.
In his address to the National Press Club, Minister Scott Morrison did not identify the report’s recommendation for an independent labour market testing model as a priority, instead admitting that because of a lack of cross-bench support, the government was prepared to retain the employer conducted labour market testing model but that the Department was applying this in a diluted fashion. What this means in practice, is that there is still no rigorous way to determine whether an occupation is genuinely in shortage.
A proposal contained in the report which the government has said it will adopt, is the weakening of the English language requirement. This is currently a minimum of five across the four competencies (reading, writing, speaking and listening) which the report proposes should be reduced to an average of five.
This is concerning because the main function of the English language proficiency requirement is to ensure a 457 visa holder will not be exploited.
If temporary migrant workers have lesser language skills, this could leave them vulnerable to potential health and safety risks in the workplace. Research shows migrant workers usually have far higher injury rates because they have less training and experience, and less command of the local language. This was the case prior to the Rudd government’s reforms to improve the English language requirements.
Protecting the integrity of the program
Another concerning recommendation of the report is the proposal to freeze the Temporary Skill Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT) at its current level and to review the role of the TSMIT in two years’ time.
Like a strong English language requirement, the TSMIT has a key role in protecting the integrity of the program overall. It was introduced following the Deegan Review into the 457 visa to act as a salary floor ensuring a visa holder’s wage was sufficient to maintain a reasonable standard of living given the lack of access to welfare and tax benefits available to local workers.
This protection was seen as particularly necessary for visa holders in trades or semi-skilled work because the Deegan Review found many of these were not receiving salaries or wages equivalent to that of Australian workers performing the same work, in some cases, even where employed in the same workplaces.
A preference for deregulation
The report is a step in the right direction in that it offers ideas on how to reform the 457 visa program so that it is more balanced. It seems unlikely some of the more re-regulatory, worker-protective proposals will be adopted by the government, with the Minister indicating his preference for deregulating the program and making it easier for employers to access temporary migrant labour.
This brings with it real concerns that the scheme will begin to operate in the way it did under the Howard government, where the program was expanded and deregulated. During this time, stories abounded of serious instances of exploitation: an Indian chef unable to speak English worked 14 hours a day for 40 consecutive days without being paid. In another case, four Chinese workers who spoke little English were found to have been underpaid $93,667. In another case two workers were forced to continue working after breaking bones in their arms doing work they were unqualified to do. In many other cases 457 visa holders had “rent money” docked from their wages to pay for overcrowded and underserviced company housing.
It is vitally important the Minister does not forget the chequered history of the 457 visa program and does not merely adopt the deregulatory proposals of the report without seriously considering ideas for how to improve the integrity of the whole program.
The problem for the government is how to design a deregulatory 457 visa without Australia descending into a guest-worker ghetto. Our experience makes it apparent that rigorous, in-built safeguards are needed and it is simply not good enough for the Minister to dismiss claims of rorting out of hand.
Joanna Howe is a lecturer in law at Adelaide University. This article first appeared on The Conversation.
