[johankmagnusson]

Why not reverse the immigration process? Instead of doing tremendous amounts of paper work after which the system takes a guess if you will be able to contribute to the country, run that process backwards instead and lower the threshold for IT professionals to enter NZ significantly and then they get to prove their worth.

Start with a very rudimentary initial screening and after say a 2 year trial period have a selection process based on what the person in question has accomplished. That way people get to prove themselves and what the can contribute with instead.

If you don't contribute, i.e. receive social welfare or similar, you're out. If you contribute by performing in the labour market, start an at least moderately successful business or similar you're in. I don't understand why all immigration systems don't work like this...

[modernerd]

This is essentially how freedom of movement in Europe works.

As an EU citizen I was able to move to another EU country, rent a flat, and then within 3 months had to prove that I had income to pay tax/social contributions. On passing that interview you get residency rights and continued access to public services and healthcare; I am still a “guest”, but can effectively stay indefinitely as long as I keep contributing and don't break the law.

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/what-eu-fr...

[peterburkimsher]

That sounds similar to the Working Holiday programme, which offers 1 year work visas with few strings attached.

Most people blow their chance on irrelevant work experience (farm work, café). I got relevant jobs (summer job coding control systems at Fisher & Paykel Healthcare in NZ, network administration at Lululemon in Canada).

My mistake was only staying for a few months - I should've spent a whole year there, and then I could add immigration points for working in the country for 1 year.

Now I'm trying to move back, and it's hard. Any suggestions would be helpful.

[RowanH]

Maybe visa sponsorship ? Sometimes with niche enough roles NZ employers can sponsor Visas if no one is upto standard locally.

[peterburkimsher]

I think the word "sponsor" scares off the HR department. I'm able to pay all the fees, I just need the company's name (and a commitment to stay in the role for at least a year if I remember right).

[Negitivefrags]

You have to understand that it’s not as simple as that for the company.

In order to sponsor your visa they have to demonstrate that they attempted to hire New Zealanders for the role and there was nobody suitable for the role.

That means being able to supply proof that you made a reasonable effort to advertise for the role, and giving lists of NZ candidates who applied but where not suitable because they lacked the technical requirements for the role.

[viraptor]

I think this could get a bit cruel in a few ways.

- Who measures the performance and how? How is it scaled to compare a contractor for corps and a dev at a tiny startup?

- Who decides what's the fault of the employer vs employee? If you're either fired or quit due to terrible mismanagement, why wouldn't you use whatever welfare you can while looking for a new job?

- And if you want to get someone out of the country, how do you do that? Where exactly do you send them if they ran out of money and have no support network?

[RowanH]

Moving countries has a huge impact on people especially families. Not something you really want to leave people in limbo for - the first year or two can be quite rocky for some (it's usually tougher than people imagine). Realistically it's not a huge amount of paperwork to come to NZ if you qualify and you know with good certainty what your pathway is to residency.

Not perfect but is fair and reasonable.

[avip]

That would likely violate equality before the law. It won't pass legal (and rightfully so IMO).