• MigrationDesk is a community, not an agent (nor is affiliated with any). You can post here without an account, but all unregistered posts will be queued for moderator approvals. You can register a free account to bypass moderation and enjoy additional features such as post notification, Live Chat etc.

EA Engineers Australia Occupation Outcome, Review and Appeal

EBB90

Newbie
Messages
2
Points
1
Timeline missing
Hi All,

I’ll try to keep my story as short as possible. In December last year I have submitted my MSA application opting for Transport Engineer outcome (ANZSCO 233215) knowing that that I’m a transport engineer by profession with bachelors in Civil Engineering and Masters in Engineering Management. All my submitted documents including the three episodes, experience and reference letters, CPD, etc. support my preferred outcome. During my application, my assessor commented on my education details only claiming that I don’t have the required underpinning knowledge in Transport Engineering though I have taken two major/core courses in Transportation and given the fact that Civil Engineering has vast array of disciplines including Structural, Transportation, Geotechnical, Drainage, etc. Hence, I was offered either Civil Engineer outcome (ANZSCO 233211) or Technologist, which I obviously went with the first option. Noting that, my full work experience and postgraduate degree were accepted.

On parallel my brother had submitted his application for Transport Engineer but with Roading specialty and was granted the preferred outcome with no issues, knowing that we have the same educational background and career path except he is specialized in Roading.

Therefore, I had decided to apply for an Application Review believing that my assessor missed something or made a wrong judgement on my application. And I have mentioned that Civil Engineer outcome doesn’t fit my previous or current job descriptions and responsibilities. Yet, unfortunately waiting for almost a month I got the same reply from EA stating that the two courses in my bachelors program are insufficient (weirdly enough it was sufficient with my brother :) ) and more intensive courses are required.

Currently, I’m confused and I’m not sure if I should go for another round and apply for a formal appeal and mention my brother’s case or should I settle with the Civil Engineer outcome though I’m not convinced with it and it almost makes me feel like I’m incompetent enough. Below is the review conclusion I received:

As an assessor, I have conducted an independent informal review and can advise the below:

Your core technical engineering knowledge, as reflected in the transcript of undergraduate studies, supports an outcome of Civil Engineer. This is because, I only noted 2 subjects which are relevant to transport engineering, Transportation Engineering and Highway Design. Your CPD of modelling software is insufficient to support the nomination of Transport Engineer. We are looking at more intensive transport planning, logistics, road, railway, air and sea transportation engineering courses to support an outcome of Transport Engineer.


Conclusion:

Based on the above review, I uphold the preliminary decision made by this office on 9 March 2021.

If you remain dissatisfied with the above explanation, you will need to follow the procedure for a Formal Appeal as per the MSA Booklet


I’d really appreciate your guy’s opinion and advice.
 

mohsinciddiki

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,022
Points
83
MSA
2018-08-02
Skill
261111
SC
189/190
Point
75/80
EOI
2018-08-17
Nom.
2018-11-11
Inv.
2018-11-11
App.
2018-12-22
CO
2019-03-27
PCC
2019-02-23
HC
2019-02-18
Grant
2019-06-03
IED
2020-02-20
Hi All,

I’ll try to keep my story as short as possible. In December last year I have submitted my MSA application opting for Transport Engineer outcome (ANZSCO 233215) knowing that that I’m a transport engineer by profession with bachelors in Civil Engineering and Masters in Engineering Management. All my submitted documents including the three episodes, experience and reference letters, CPD, etc. support my preferred outcome. During my application, my assessor commented on my education details only claiming that I don’t have the required underpinning knowledge in Transport Engineering though I have taken two major/core courses in Transportation and given the fact that Civil Engineering has vast array of disciplines including Structural, Transportation, Geotechnical, Drainage, etc. Hence, I was offered either Civil Engineer outcome (ANZSCO 233211) or Technologist, which I obviously went with the first option. Noting that, my full work experience and postgraduate degree were accepted.

On parallel my brother had submitted his application for Transport Engineer but with Roading specialty and was granted the preferred outcome with no issues, knowing that we have the same educational background and career path except he is specialized in Roading.

Therefore, I had decided to apply for an Application Review believing that my assessor missed something or made a wrong judgement on my application. And I have mentioned that Civil Engineer outcome doesn’t fit my previous or current job descriptions and responsibilities. Yet, unfortunately waiting for almost a month I got the same reply from EA stating that the two courses in my bachelors program are insufficient (weirdly enough it was sufficient with my brother :) ) and more intensive courses are required.

Currently, I’m confused and I’m not sure if I should go for another round and apply for a formal appeal and mention my brother’s case or should I settle with the Civil Engineer outcome though I’m not convinced with it and it almost makes me feel like I’m incompetent enough. Below is the review conclusion I received:

As an assessor, I have conducted an independent informal review and can advise the below:

Your core technical engineering knowledge, as reflected in the transcript of undergraduate studies, supports an outcome of Civil Engineer. This is because, I only noted 2 subjects which are relevant to transport engineering, Transportation Engineering and Highway Design. Your CPD of modelling software is insufficient to support the nomination of Transport Engineer. We are looking at more intensive transport planning, logistics, road, railway, air and sea transportation engineering courses to support an outcome of Transport Engineer.


Conclusion:

Based on the above review, I uphold the preliminary decision made by this office on 9 March 2021.

If you remain dissatisfied with the above explanation, you will need to follow the procedure for a Formal Appeal as per the MSA Booklet


I’d really appreciate your guy’s opinion and advice.
If you need to apply formal review, you definitely can but only mention that some of your fellows also got the same results. Dont be specific with the names or any other reference, you obviously dont want any trouble to happen with your brother
 
MSA
2018-08-02
Skill
261111
SC
189/190
Point
75/80
EOI
2018-08-17
Nom.
2018-11-11
Inv.
2018-11-11
App.
2018-12-22
CO
2019-03-27
PCC
2019-02-23
HC
2019-02-18
Grant
2019-06-03
IED
2020-02-20

MysticRiver

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
15,720
Points
113
You can't really tell whether your assessment was wrong because someone else got the desired outcome. Because if can be, your assessment was indeed wrong, OR your assessment was actually correct and your brother got lucky due to leniency from his assessor.

So, I would suggest go for review if you think your case matches your desired skill, not just on the basis of another person got desired outcome. I am not discouraging you against a review, just stating the obvious.
 

EBB90

Newbie
Messages
2
Points
1
Timeline missing
You can't really tell whether your assessment was wrong because someone else got the desired outcome. Because if can be, your assessment was indeed wrong, OR your assessment was actually correct and your brother got lucky due to leniency from his assessor.

So, I would suggest go for review if you think your case matches your desired skill, not just on the basis of another person got desired outcome. I am not discouraging you against a review, just stating the obvious.
Thank you @mohsinciddiki and @MysticRiver for your advices.

@MysticRiver In my review I had clearly stated in my cover letter that my skills, competencies, entire work experience, ect. are supporting my preferred occupation outcome (I even didn't get any comments from the EA assessor on any of my submitted documents for not being relevant to the preferred occupation).

I felt that the external assessor was biased with the EA assessor as he/she referred back to the same reason and ignored the fact that B.Sc in Civil Engineering (in many countries, though I'm not sure about AUS.) teaches merely fundamentals in couple of courses for each subdicspline including Transportation, Structural, Water, Geotechinal, etc. thus, mentioning more intensive courses required was unrealistic in my case.

I also believe that it was unfair to base the occupation outcome on how many courses I have taken in a subdicspline and simply ignoring the competency I had demonstrated in that domain. I will give it a thought before squeezing addtional 400$ for a formal appeal.
 
Consider before posting:
  • Do not post the same thing in multiple places.
  • No personal contact and/or non-English phrase is allowed.
  • Always post in a relevant thread or open a new one.
  • Better to use the reactions in a post to congratulate/thank.
Top