|
‘Working while
Studying – An Opportunity Fraught with Danger for International
Students’
(by
A.J. Aristei, independent Barrister)
Minister for
Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v Alam
[2005] FCAFC 132
Breach
of Condition -
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 8
Condition 8105 – exceeding 20 hours work in a week
Definition: “week”
Studying
in Australia can be a tough bargain for international students;
there are a myriad of conditions and restriction that they must
comply with to avoid breaching their visa and ‘shattering their
dreams’.
One of the
most treacherous is the requirement not to work for more than 20
hours a week whilst the selected study course is in session.
However, many students do not know what this means and can
either unknowingly breach this condition or, even worse, be
accused of breaching it when they are entirely innocent. The
following case defines what condition 8105 of the Migration
Regulations 1994, Schedule 8, actually means and is essential
reading.
In this
case, Mahabub Alam was a young man from Bangladesh who held a
student visa from the Department of Immigration and
Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA). He arrived in
Australia on 17 April 2001. Mr Alam was a very enterprising
student, who not only undertook an intensive English language
course, but also (in just seven months) completed a high
distinction average in a Diploma of Information Technology
(Network Engineering). (This course usually takes two full
years!!!).
Mr Alam
then embarked upon a degree at Central Queensland University in
Information Technology. This highly successful student had no
problems with either attendance or marks, and it was not until
September 2002 that things began to go wrong!
Mr Alam
had renewed his visa from time to time as it was required by
law. At the time, he had been issued with a Higher Education
Sector visa (subclass 573) - valid until 15 March 2004. Mr
Alam’s study in Australia was financed by his father (back in
Bangladesh), but he also supplemented his income by undertaking
casual work.
Condition
8105 of Mr Alam’s visa stipulated that he was prohibited from
working more than 20 hours “during any week when
the holder’s course of study or training is in session”. Mr Alam
had dutifully complied with this condition throughout his stay
in Australia.
On a Friday night in
October 2002, Mr Alam was working in a Sydney hotel when the
duty manager, having realized that another staff member could
not attend work, asked him to work overtime until the hotel
closed that night. Dutifully and diligently, Mr Alam complied.
The hotel, also in good faith, noted Mr Alam’s extra work on his
pay slips and timesheet – he had worked 22.5 hours from Tuesday
to Monday. Thinking nothing more of the incident, Mr Alam
continued to study hard and achieve well.
Ten weeks later,
DIMIA officers came to speak with one of his flatmates. The
officers were seemingly abrasive and, without warrant or reason,
undertook a search of Mr Alam’s room and belongings. The
officers saw the payslips from October and interpreted them to
mean that Mr Alam had worked more than 20 hours in a single
week.
Mr Alam appealed
against this interpretation. DIMIA claimed that a ‘week’ for the
purposes of condition 8105 was any consecutive seven day period
and therefore the payslips were indicative of Mr Alam’s breach.
Mr Alam believed that a “week” for the purposes of the Migration
Regulations 1994 meant a university calendar week, beginning
from either Sunday or Monday. Upon this interpretation, Mr. Alam
had not exceeded his visa conditions and was entitled to remain
the holder of a valid student visa. The Migration Review
Tribunal agreed with Mr. Alam and, upon appeal, the Federal
Court of Australia (Full Court) confirmed this view.
Conclusion
A ‘week’ for the
purposes of condition 8105 of the Migration Regulations 1994,
Schedule 8, runs from either Sunday or, more likely, Monday
depending on the context. This means that a student holding a
visa subject to this condition can work up to 20 hours at any
time in this period, regardless of the pay period given by the
employer, and without concern that these hours will adversely
affect their availability early in the following week.
Any student who
feels that they have suffered under similar circumstances would
do well to consider obtaining legal advice as soon as
practicable. |