# Claiming part time work experience for 189 visa



## Sleepydraftsman (Apr 11, 2018)

Hi everyone,

I am in a bit of a dilemma now, so I would appreciate any input I could get on this matter.

So I have been operating under the assumption that my working in a permanent, part time position for 4 days a week, 8 hours a day in my nominated profession as an architect was enough to allow me to claim skilled work experience points for my 189 EOI. As I had just accumulated a year of work experience in July, I was hoping to add the 5 extra points to my EOI, bringing my score up from 70 to 75. 

However, when I talked to a migration agent today, I was told that only *full time* work experience could be claimed, and because I had not worked full time, I would need to have worked longer than 1 year to claim that experience. I was horrified to hear that, but was told that not all is lost: since I had also worked for 5 days a week for a few months in this 1 year, I could try to show mostly the payslips where I worked 5 days a week and have my employer experience letter say that I averaged at 30+ hours a week, so it's not exactly lying, but downplaying the fact that I've been working part time.

Personally, I found this to be really sketchy, so I chose instead to change my EOI back to 70 points and go further back in the queue, and claim only the points I was sure I had. But now I'm second guessing myself, as I'm sure the DHA website doesn't mention anything about requiring full time experience, only that it has to be a minimum of 20 hours a week. Unless that migration agent knows something I don't, I wonder if I did the right thing? Can anyone please confirm this?


----------



## PrettyIsotonic (Nov 30, 2016)

DHA isn't ambiguous, as long as you have 20 hours of paid employment a week you can claim it for your nominated occupation - most people get points tested advise for the employment they are claiming points from their relevant skills assessing authority too.


----------



## Sleepydraftsman (Apr 11, 2018)

So...does that mean what the migration agent told me was inaccurate? I'm starting to wonder if something got lost in translation, as it was a telephone conversation rather than a face to face one.


----------



## PrettyIsotonic (Nov 30, 2016)

Sleepydraftsman said:


> So...does that mean what the migration agent told me was inaccurate? I'm starting to wonder if something got lost in translation, as it was a telephone conversation rather than a face to face one.


If your agent was advising you regarding DHA requirements - I personally believe they are wrong.

If they misunderstood and thought you are looking for state / territory nomination - they might have a point e.g. each state has autonomy to define their own nomination criteria, and some states may differ from DHA's requirements when asking for work / skilled work experience in their state / territory. 

For what it is worth for the ACT they follow DHA's definition when it comes to work experience claims at the state level.

Edit:

Do get a second professional opinion - and ensure you consult a MARA agent, having said that there are good and bad MARA agents - just like there are good and bad folks at every other profession.


----------

