KWOK (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking review of a decision not to grant a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa. The applicant claimed to have completed the requisite specified work in regional Australia, which is a requirement for this visa subclass.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had carried out the specified work for the required duration, and crucially, whether the remuneration received for this work was in accordance with relevant Australian legislation and awards. The applicant provided evidence including completed forms, bank statements, payslips, and piecework agreements, asserting he worked full-time hours, seven days a week, for two different employers in regional Victoria.

The Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's provision of piecework agreements, which indicated that payment on this basis was permissible under the relevant Horticulture Award. However, the Tribunal expressed significant concern regarding the consistently low weekly pay received by the applicant. The payslips showed weekly earnings as low as $15.00 and generally under $200.00, which the Tribunal found to be substantially below the minimum weekly wage and indicative of pay rates far below the minimum hourly rate. Consequently, the Tribunal was unable to be satisfied that the applicant had worked the equivalent of at least three months of full-time work or that he had been lawfully remunerated.

Therefore, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, as the applicant failed to meet the criteria stipulated in clause 417.211 of the Migration Regulations.