Dealing with Immigration Policy Changes: Tackling Compliance, Skill Shortages, and Worker Rights

We are expecting a fee increase in October 2024, and possibly the second phase of AEWV scheme changes, along with ANZSCO consultation findings by 2025. Immigration changes are complex, with governments basing decisions on factors like the economy and growth. Below, we discuss some changes and thoughts on possible future options as we see it as an immigration advisers.

Migrant exploitation: When the AEWV scheme began with a high-trust model, employers could advertise and apply for a job check with no qualification and no experience required. This allowed overseas workers who did not have verifiable work experience (e.g., no payslips or tax certificates) to be able to apply for an accredited employer work visa irrespective of the ANZSCO skill level and support their dependent and children too. This was beneficial for employers and migrants (those who had the experience but did not have evidence) until some employers began exploiting the system, offering job tokens in exchange for money. Reports of migrant exploitation led to tightened settings, aimed at protecting workers.

With the result, now the job checks have to adhere to ANZSCO occupation levels, qualifications, and experience requirements, alongside additional English language criteria for skill level 4-5 roles, and a reduction in the maximum continuous stay for these roles. Skill 4-5 role applicants in general cannot support their partners or dependent children.

There is now a bigger demand by migrant workers (offshore and onshore) for genuine roles in Skill level 1-3 occupations which may lead a few employers to offer a higher premium on these roles with the added advantage of possible residence pathways. Of course, this is not true for all employers.

A question everyone has on their mind is if the recent revised changes, have any benefit at all for genuine employers and overseas migrant workers they want to hire. In addition, what would motivate someone meeting the skilled residence pathways to move to New Zealand as compared to the countries we compete with. If the ultimate goal is to gain residence, become a citizen and move to Australia, how can we stop the cycle?

Another question is if Skill level 1-3 roles are greater in terms of job openings than Skill level 4-5 jobs in New Zealand. How many accredited employers genuinely have Green list or Skill level 1-3 positions versus those with wanting migrants in Skill level 4-5 positions. Only data can answer this question. Is our method of placing value on the skills as per ANZSCO occupation levels, title and tasks not matching with what employers need for growth?

Compliance burden on accredited employers: Accredited employers need to provide financial evidence along with evidence of settlement assistance, and learning modules offered by Employment NZ completed when renewing their accreditation. For small businesses, this can be time-consuming, especially for those standard accreditation employers working hard to generate revenue and pay taxes on time.

Could there be a better way to convey support for business growth, rather than increasing hoops? For instance, offering tax breaks for businesses employing a greater number of New Zealanders or permanent residents. The goal should be to incentivize growth rather than restrict. Can there be more incentives to starting a business in New Zealand so we have more job created in the country?

Potential reform for the AEWV scheme’s second phase could focus on a better way forward to identify a genuine employer, genuine business and genuine need for a migrant worker. Incentive for start ups to encourage growth in specific sectors such as Tech and Health can help boost growth.

ANZSCO, Job Advertisement and Work & Income: Immigration New Zealand (INZ) has been directed to follow ANZSCO occupation and relevant tasks as a part of the job check approval process. Even after navigating through the process, genuine employers face longer wait times.

Can genuine employers afford to wait this long if they can’t find a New Zealand citizen or resident to fill the role? How do we ensure job ads are placed for genuine needs and not just to tick a box? Should there be more flexibility, or should businesses be interviewed by INZ to verify their needs first? Could NZTE or any other agency assist businesses in growing more efficiently?

Timing, Work Ex and Skills Assessment: Addressing the availability of skilled workers in New Zealand, along with how much to pay them, remains a challenge. Could there be a temporary pathway to residence? Migrants on a working holiday, post study or partnership work visa may not meet the work experience or skills required if the employer is looking for a specific skill with work experience.

Worker Rights: Countries such as the Philippines and Bangladesh now have their own process to follow after a visa has been approved by INZ for the migrant worker to board the flight to New Zealand. Some of these changes have been done to protect their citizens however is something that adds to the time duration the migrant worker can enter New Zealand and start working for the employer. What if other countries demand similar processes before a migrant is allowed to travel to New Zealand from the home country?

There needs to be a more effective policy for skilled overseas workers who are needed in New Zealand but can’t enter without a job offer or claim points for overseas experience. Could policymakers extend the Green List or introduce a mid-to-short-term skill shortage list with temporary-to-permanent residency pathways? Can education providers also offer skills assessment services as evidence of overseas skilled experience just like overseas qualification assessment by NZQA. Can this be an additional revenue stream for education providers?

Future Pathways for Workers not eligible for residence: Could another pathway be created for skilled workers like chefs, who have extensive overseas experience but don’t meet the criteria for residence in Green list or Simplified 6 point SMC system. Can work to residence/sector agreement like care work force or transport sector be an option?

In an open and free market, employers would determine wages competitively, ensuring migrants can live comfortably. Job ads would be more genuine, with less exploitation so productive for migrants and Industry associations would have data for capped or uncapped sectors, helping regulate the market.

For workers, a temporary residence option could grant time to earn permanent residence based on their performance, employer support, or perhaps even return to their home country after a specified period.

Focus on a long-term and wider tax base is required for which we need more job creators and as a community we need to do more to encourage start ups and overseas companies to set up businesses in New Zealand.

These are just a few reflections on the changes we’ve seen and the possible future of immigration in New Zealand. It is crucial to strike a balance between protecting migrant workers, supporting genuine employers, and driving the country’s economic growth. We are sure these are some of the aspects policy makers are already working on and we would just have to wait and see.