Extragreen Holidays (Aust) Pty Ltd (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Extragreen Holidays (Aust) Pty Ltd against a decision to refuse the approval of a nomination for a Subclass 457 visa. The dispute centred on whether the terms and conditions of employment offered to the prospective visa holder were no less favourable than those provided to an Australian citizen or permanent resident performing equivalent work at the same location, as required by regulation 2.72(10)(c) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Extragreen Holidays had satisfied the criteria for approving the nomination, specifically focusing on regulation 2.72(10)(c). This regulation mandates that the terms and conditions of employment for the nominee must be no less favourable than those offered to an Australian citizen or permanent resident undertaking equivalent work at the same location. The Tribunal also considered the definition of "earnings" and the specific requirements for determining terms and conditions when no equivalent Australian workers are employed at the location, as outlined in regulation 2.72(10AA).

The Tribunal's reasoning was that it lacked sufficient contemporary information to be satisfied that the employment conditions offered to the nominee met the "no less favourable" threshold. While older information regarding pay rates from June 2016 was provided, the Tribunal determined this was not current enough to assess present-day market conditions. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Extragreen Holidays had failed to demonstrate compliance with regulation 2.72(10)(c).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review to refuse the nomination.