Strange Immigration Decision

Forums › Off topic › Strange Immigration Decision

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1509955 9-Mar-2016 15:30

tdgeek:

When people arrive here, or Oz and they are found to be in contravention of the rules of entry they are removed. I guess we could let every one in and give them a piece of paper, i.e. warning. Its up to travellers to ensure they know what the rules are. Its not like travelling to another country is like catching a bus to the park

Come on guys, really, cut them some slack.

The girl was invited here on a holiday with her employers. They no doubt saw her coming here as a visitor not a worker, therefore no visa required. Why would they even think of getting a visa?

Anyone travelling with a family like that, as friend is very likely to help out with looking after the young children at some stage of the holiday, even if it is only to watch over the kids while the parents are momentarily engaged in doing something else. If asked by an immigration official if you were going to help with the children they'd have to answer, Yes. Are you saying this person needs to have a working visa?

Part of the problem likely relates to English being a second language for the French girl, and the way her answer was phrased probably reflected this.

More importantly though was the over zealous immigration official who took an answer at face value, couldn't see the whole picture and apply some common sense.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510179 9-Mar-2016 22:01

tdgeek:

When people arrive here, or Oz and they are found to be in contravention of the rules of entry they are removed. I guess we could let every one in and give them a piece of paper, i.e. warning. Its up to travellers to ensure they know what the rules are. Its not like travelling to another country is like catching a bus to the park

However, on arrival she was not in contravention. She had done no work.

Since she was only expecting to be here a week, I would have thought that a formal notice that she was being admitted as a visitor and that if she did work, she could be deported, would have sufficed.

TinyTim

1042 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1510181 9-Mar-2016 22:03

LennonNZ:

"and Ms Pache admitted during an interview she would undertake childminding, although she also maintained she would not be paid"

Work (Paid or not Paid) makes no difference.. Its still work which could be done by a willing NZ Employee. They are trying to protect NZ Workers.

"a) Anyone bringing a laptop to NZ and working on it for a foreign company whilst on holiday here should be denied a visa unless they have a work permit"

Unless someone has a working visa then no you are not allowed to work even for an overseas company.

"b) Someone who arrives for a 2 week holiday and has, say, a PA with them should expect the PA to be denied a visa - and themselves, if they plan on working at all"

Why would someone take a PA along for a Holiday? If they are a PA then they are working (even if the person who is on holiday isn't )

Is it even possible to get an NZ work visa when your employer is an Australian and your remuneration comes from Australia?

I've travelled all around the world for work (paid by NZ employer) and never once got a work visa.

Kiwifruta

1423 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1510184 9-Mar-2016 22:05

TinyTim:
LennonNZ:

"and Ms Pache admitted during an interview she would undertake childminding, although she also maintained she would not be paid"

Work (Paid or not Paid) makes no difference.. Its still work which could be done by a willing NZ Employee. They are trying to protect NZ Workers.

"a) Anyone bringing a laptop to NZ and working on it for a foreign company whilst on holiday here should be denied a visa unless they have a work permit"

Unless someone has a working visa then no you are not allowed to work even for an overseas company.

"b) Someone who arrives for a 2 week holiday and has, say, a PA with them should expect the PA to be denied a visa - and themselves, if they plan on working at all"

Why would someone take a PA along for a Holiday? If they are a PA then they are working (even if the person who is on holiday isn't )

Is it even possible to get an NZ work visa when your employer is an Australian and your remuneration comes from Australia?

I've travelled all around the world for work (paid by NZ employer) and never once got a work visa.

Excellent question.

Engineers who come here on behalf of their firm to install machinery would be in a similar situation. So what I'm implying is that it's not an entirely new situation.

There is a temporary work visa category. The category most resembling her scenario is special purpose. http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/stream/work/worktemporarily/

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510202 9-Mar-2016 22:27

Geektastic:

tdgeek:

When people arrive here, or Oz and they are found to be in contravention of the rules of entry they are removed. I guess we could let every one in and give them a piece of paper, i.e. warning. Its up to travellers to ensure they know what the rules are. Its not like travelling to another country is like catching a bus to the park

However, on arrival she was not in contravention. She had done no work.

Since she was only expecting to be here a week, I would have thought that a formal notice that she was being admitted as a visitor and that if she did work, she could be deported, would have sufficed.

She was actually as she said she will work. She's an au pair, and will be doing what an au pair does. Funded here. Its the rule. Border Patrol has this happening a great deal.

Border Control Canada series is the same. yes, it seems unfair, but NZ, OZ, Canada at least take jobs very seriously. So I assume the requirements for deportation are also clear. If they will work, or strong evidence shows they will, their on the next return flight. In her case she said she will. The fairness points made need to go to Govt, not border security, the latter just did their job. And I very much doubt they were aggressive etc as the family states.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510206 9-Mar-2016 22:38

tdgeek:

Geektastic:

tdgeek:

When people arrive here, or Oz and they are found to be in contravention of the rules of entry they are removed. I guess we could let every one in and give them a piece of paper, i.e. warning. Its up to travellers to ensure they know what the rules are. Its not like travelling to another country is like catching a bus to the park

However, on arrival she was not in contravention. She had done no work.

Since she was only expecting to be here a week, I would have thought that a formal notice that she was being admitted as a visitor and that if she did work, she could be deported, would have sufficed.

She was actually as she said she will work. She's an au pair, and will be doing what an au pair does. Funded here. Its the rule. Border Patrol has this happening a great deal.

Border Control Canada series is the same. yes, it seems unfair, but NZ, OZ, Canada at least take jobs very seriously. So I assume the requirements for deportation are also clear. If they will work, or strong evidence shows they will, their on the next return flight. In her case she said she will. The fairness points made need to go to Govt, not border security, the latter just did their job. And I very much doubt they were aggressive etc as the family states.

Exactly. say the wrong things -> deport. Say the right things -> enter.

Swanny

107 posts

Master Geek

#1510209 9-Mar-2016 22:48

frankv:

..

But, in my view, the whole thing could have been avoided if the au pair applied for the right type of visa. The question that should be asked is why she didn't.

..

Seems to me that they were well aware of the problems with her working while in NZ, which is why the made extra effort to say that it was a holiday blah blah blah. What they didn't think was that it is probably quite straight forward to get a visa, rather than end up in this mess...

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510361 10-Mar-2016 10:01

Swanny:

frankv:

..

But, in my view, the whole thing could have been avoided if the au pair applied for the right type of visa. The question that should be asked is why she didn't.

..

Seems to me that they were well aware of the problems with her working while in NZ, which is why the made extra effort to say that it was a holiday blah blah blah. What they didn't think was that it is probably quite straight forward to get a visa, rather than end up in this mess...

The problem is that it isn't really that obvious. For example, a man and his wife have a small child. They visit New Zealand with the man's sister who comes along for a holiday.

Whilst here, the man and his wife decide to go out to dinner and the local baby sitting service wants $50/hr. The man says to his sister "Any chance you'd look after Younique whilst we go out?" and she says "Sure - $20/hr!" and he says "fine!".

Can we now expect INZ SWAT teams to swoop in and deport the sister?

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1510403 10-Mar-2016 10:32

Geektastic:

The problem is that it isn't really that obvious. For example, a man and his wife have a small child. They visit New Zealand with the man's sister who comes along for a holiday.

Whilst here, the man and his wife decide to go out to dinner and the local baby sitting service wants $50/hr. The man says to his sister "Any chance you'd look after Younique whilst we go out?" and she says "Sure - $20/hr!" and he says "fine!".

Can we now expect INZ SWAT teams to swoop in and deport the sister?

Similarly- if the visiting family consists of the parents and 3 kids 15/10/5 yrs old.

The parents confess under interrogation by immigration officers that they plan on going out to dinner and allow the 15yr old to babysit the siblings for $10.

According to immigration and some of the people here, the 15yr old should be locked up and deported!!!

MattR

224 posts

Master Geek

#1510676 10-Mar-2016 16:37

Kiwifruta:
Engineers who come here on behalf of their firm to install machinery would be in a similar situation. So what I'm implying is that it's not an entirely new situation.

There is a temporary work visa category. The category most resembling her scenario is special purpose. http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/stream/work/worktemporarily/

I've been in exactly this situation. I'm on an Australian passport and have been to Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Finland, and India for work. I ticked business on the arrival forms and got a 30/60/90 day visa-waiver except for India where I had to apply for a business visa before leaving Sydney. I'm not coming to a country for employment, so that isn't the correct visa type. Employment visas are for if you intend to live in the country and aren't just visiting.

roobarb

653 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1510709 10-Mar-2016 16:56

TinyTim:

I've travelled all around the world for work (paid by NZ employer) and never once got a work visa.

I had to get a work visa to work in New Zealand (funny that)! Likewise when going through immigration in the US and UK you get "why are you here, how long are you staying?" questions.

As in the old question "business or pleasure?"

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510946 10-Mar-2016 21:50

roobarb:

TinyTim:

I've travelled all around the world for work (paid by NZ employer) and never once got a work visa.

I had to get a work visa to work in New Zealand (funny that)! Likewise when going through immigration in the US and UK you get "why are you here, how long are you staying?" questions.

As in the old question "business or pleasure?"

They are protecting their local workforce. If you are a 7 Eleven guy, tough, if you are a nursese and they are short of nurses you are in, I feel thats fair.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510948 10-Mar-2016 21:52

surfisup1000:

Geektastic:

The problem is that it isn't really that obvious. For example, a man and his wife have a small child. They visit New Zealand with the man's sister who comes along for a holiday.

Whilst here, the man and his wife decide to go out to dinner and the local baby sitting service wants $50/hr. The man says to his sister "Any chance you'd look after Younique whilst we go out?" and she says "Sure - $20/hr!" and he says "fine!".

Can we now expect INZ SWAT teams to swoop in and deport the sister?

Similarly- if the visiting family consists of the parents and 3 kids 15/10/5 yrs old.

The parents confess under interrogation by immigration officers that they plan on going out to dinner and allow the 15yr old to babysit the siblings for $10.

According to immigration and some of the people here, the 15yr old should be locked up and deported!!!

Awarded best post , I mean funniest post. The punt is very much stretched there SIU! You'll be allowed in then deported for underage employment issues!

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1510987 10-Mar-2016 23:37

Interestingly, I looked to see how we compare with the US in this.

NZ passports get Visa waivers and carrying out work (note - not the same as employment! Ie you cannot get a job with an American company but you can do your job) is permitted on a visa waiver admission as a tourist.

Dratsab

3946 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1511436 11-Mar-2016 15:56

tdgeek:

Geektastic:

tdgeek:

When people arrive here, or Oz and they are found to be in contravention of the rules of entry they are removed. I guess we could let every one in and give them a piece of paper, i.e. warning. Its up to travellers to ensure they know what the rules are. Its not like travelling to another country is like catching a bus to the park

However, on arrival she was not in contravention. She had done no work.

Since she was only expecting to be here a week, I would have thought that a formal notice that she was being admitted as a visitor and that if she did work, she could be deported, would have sufficed.

She was actually as she said she will work. She's an au pair, and will be doing what an au pair does. Funded here. Its the rule. Border Patrol has this happening a great deal.

Border Control Canada series is the same. yes, it seems unfair, but NZ, OZ, Canada at least take jobs very seriously. So I assume the requirements for deportation are also clear. If they will work, or strong evidence shows they will, their on the next return flight. In her case she said she will. The fairness points made need to go to Govt, not border security, the latter just did their job. And I very much doubt they were aggressive etc as the family states.

At the end of the day, the INZ official produced a 'technically correct' decision. He was not wrong in doing so, equally he was not right in doing so. The decision just is what it is.

In this particular situation he could have (and did) take the line "you're going to be working without a visa. Goodbye." Or he could have taken the line "you should have applied for a visa, but I understand how this could have been overlooked, here's a temporary visa - don't think you'll get away with this again." INZ officials do have discretion in this area.

BTW - I did a bit of digging and found the answer to a previous musing I posted. Queenstown currently has one INZ official (who was on duty for this matter) and consideration is being given to adding a second.

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9