I confirm that I have read and understood the Privacy Collection Statement
I consent to the collection of any sensitive information included in my submission in accordance with this Privacy Collection Statement
I confirm that I have the consent of any third parties to the inclusion of personal information about them in my submission and have made them aware of this Privacy Collection Statement
Please indicate how and if you want your submission published.
This submission represents:
Are you answering from the perspective of any of the below categories – select all that apply:
Where do you live/work/represent - select all that apply
Choose how you want to provide your feedback:
Upload a document submission
31 October 2023
Questions for stakeholder feedback
Questions about the draft principles and standards
1) Which standards will improve outcomes? Why/why not?
Principle 1 will improve outcomes if implemented correctly and with guidance and communication with countries and languages who are undergoing the process. If it is only revising the information in the English language, the improvements may be minimal.
Principle 2 will assist with transparency before applicants start the process
Principle 3 will improve standards and ensure the requirements are uniform across all assessing bodies and not prohibitive by asking the applicant for qualifications beyond the scope of the profession.
Principle 4 is important in such a process.
Principle 5 will reduce redundancy and confusion, as well as time inefficiencies of the process and hopefully create a more streamlined application process.
Principle 6 has the potential to improve outcomes but linking in with the professional organisations of the area would further assist the applicant.
Principle 7 will improve outcomes in relation to audit and feedback on process to further improve.
2) Which standards are achievable and why/why not?
All standards are achievable if working with collaboration of other assessing authorities and professional organisations.
3) What have we missed?
The standards cover all themes of the process. Suggestions are included below to further develop some areas.
Questions about the delivery of skills assessments
4) What changes are needed to improve skills assessment processes to make them simpler and
more migrant centric?
Linking with the Australian professional bodies, linking/providing access with interpreters to assist applicants understand the paperwork and language used.
Documentation and paperwork is a challenging field for many. Those who are not familiar with the
English language or Australian system, may find this process daunting and challenging, and possibly too challenging and stop the process. Having access to an interpreter service to assist with navigating and interpreting the needs of the documentation may assist with a more appropriate timeline and streamlined approach to the application.
Principle 1 does address this to an extent, but further development could be done in this area.
5) Are skills assessments appropriately aligned with domestic employment, visa, and
licensing/registration requirements? Why/why not?
OFFICIAL: Sensitive
OFFICIAL: Sensitive
Currently yes. In 2021 the updated their processes to better align with process. To note, applicants wanting to work in Australia as , will be registered with before the
provides the skills assessment.
Principle 2 could be looked at further by investigating the larger scope of the fees the migrant will be required to pay to ensure the overall cost is not prohibitive. We may have applicants unable to complete all aspects to gain employment if the overall fee structure is prohibitive.
6) How could skills assessment processes be streamlined with occupational licensing and
registration schemes?
Continual partnership with licensing and registration schemes will ensure there is no duplication in process for the applicant. Each stage of becoming a worker in Australia should assess different areas so the applicant does not feel there is duplication or confusion.
A suggestion would be that there is one data base that would be linked to the pathway needed for an applicant to be able to work in Australia. For example: a skills assessment, once complete, would flag to the registering body so all documents and outcomes are placed there, negating the need of the applicant to go through another long process of assessment. This would streamline an application and help the applicant understand where their application is up to, log online to understand the next steps.
7) What other functions could assessing authorities deliver to support employment and
migration outcomes?
Create a mentor program to link applicants with those in the profession or professional organisations so assistance and support can be developed to assist in the process. This then also be used to create networks for employment and other opportunities.
Try and match the applicant’s domestic experience to that of a workplace in Australia that also is in need of additional workforce.
8) Should there be more than one assessing authority appointed to assess an occupation?
Why/why not?
No. Ensuring standardisation, repeatable outcomes, consistency in process and a streamlined information pathway will assist migrants to understand who to go to, and what to do to be assessed. Multiple authorities will create confusing and differences in process creating barriers for applicants.
One authority is sufficient but within it there can be a representation from the various disciplines of the profession.
9) Should English language testing be a skills assessment requirement? Noting English levels
are tested as part of the visa application stage.
This should be assessed by the professions registrations standards or regulatory bodies. Each profession requires differences and keeping this aspect with the registration bodies will ensure the applicant meets the needs of the profession. As English levels are assessed through the visa stage and registration stage, it is not necessary in the skills assessment.
10) Is there anything else you want to tell us about skills assessments?
Nothing further
Thank you,
OFFICIAL: Sensitive