Paid less than your nominated salary on a 482 or 494: what was promised, what it does to your PR, and what to do

MARN 1576536

What the sponsor promised

A nomination for a 482 or 494 states the annual earnings the sponsor will pay, and the Department approves it only if that figure is at least the annual market salary rate for the position, meaning what an Australian in the same job at the same location would earn, and at least the income threshold for the stream. Once the visa is granted, the sponsorship obligations require the sponsor to ensure the worker’s terms and conditions of employment are no less favourable than those provided to an Australian in an equivalent position, which in practice means paying the nominated salary and keeping pace with the market rate as it moves. The sponsor also undertook, in the nomination, that the position and the salary were genuine. Paying less than nominated breaches the obligation, and it exposes the sponsor to a finding that the nomination was not genuine. The obligations guide sets out the sanctions, and the threshold guide the current figures.

What counts toward the salary

The nominated figure is guaranteed annual earnings: the base salary and any amounts in money the worker is guaranteed to receive each year regardless of hours worked or performance. Superannuation is paid on top and is not part of it. Overtime, penalty rates, shift loadings, bonuses, commissions and allowances that depend on hours, performance or circumstances do not count, because they are not guaranteed. Benefits in kind, accommodation, a vehicle, meals, count only where the nomination declared them and the Department accepted their value as part of the earnings, which is uncommon. A worker whose base is below the nominated figure, and who reaches it only with overtime, is paid less than nominated; a worker whose base matches the figure and who also works overtime is paid more. The comparison is made on the base, from the payslips, against the nomination.

Hours, part-time and leave

The nominated position is full-time, and the salary is for full-time hours. A sponsor who reduces the worker to fewer hours at the same hourly rate is paying less than nominated in total, and a reduction to part-time without a new nomination is a change to the position the Department did not approve; a temporary reduction agreed in writing, for a defined period, at the same rate, with a return to full-time, is treated more leniently than an open-ended one, and the Department expects to be told. Unpaid leave agreed with the worker, parental leave, extended personal leave, does not reduce the nominated salary, because the worker is not being paid less for the hours worked; it is a period in which they are not working. Paid leave is paid at the ordinary rate. A pattern of the worker being sent home without pay when the business is quiet is an underpayment.

The lawful reasons pay can differ

• A salary packaging arrangement the worker chose, where the pre-packaging figure equals the nomination.
• Lawful deductions authorised in writing for the worker’s benefit, where the gross pay equals the nomination and the deduction is reasonable; the deductions that are not lawful are in the deductions guide.
• A declared in-kind component accepted in the nomination.
• A period of unpaid leave at the worker’s request.
• A new nomination, lodged and approved, at a different salary for a changed position, which the new nomination guide covers.

What is not a lawful reason: the business doing badly, a probation rate, a trainee rate, the worker agreeing to less, the worker being told the visa depends on it, or a cash-back arrangement in which the nominated salary is paid and part of it returned.

Why it is the worker’s problem too

The permanent visa at the end of the sponsorship is where the shortfall surfaces. The 186 Temporary Residence Transition stream requires the nominating employer to show that the worker was paid at or above the market rate and the threshold for the qualifying period, and the Department reads the payslips, the tax records and the superannuation; a period below the nominated salary can be excluded from the qualifying period, and a long one can lead the Department to question whether the position was ever genuine, which fails the 186 nomination outright. The 191 requires taxable income at or above the threshold for three of the years on the regional visa, from the tax assessments. A worker who tolerated underpayment to keep the sponsor happy discovers, at the permanent stage, that the sponsor’s breach has become their own criterion. The time to correct it is while the sponsorship is running and the back pay can be made. The 186 pathway guide sets out the test.

The evidence

The nomination approval letter or the salary stated in the employment contract attached to the nomination; the employment contract and any variations; every payslip; bank statements showing what was received; superannuation statements; the tax income statement for each year; rosters or timesheets where hours are the issue; and every message in which pay was discussed, particularly any in which the visa was mentioned. The comparison is made on paper, period by period, and the result is a figure: the difference between what was nominated and what was paid, which is what the employer is asked to make good and what the Ombudsman recovers.

Raising it with the employer

Many underpayments are error, a payroll set-up that ignored the nomination, a pay rise that was never applied, and a written request to the employer that sets out the nominated figure, the amounts paid and the difference, and asks for the back pay and the correction, resolves them. The request is written, polite and specific, and it does not mention the Department; the employer knows. A sponsor who corrects it and pays the arrears has cured the problem for both sides. A sponsor who refuses, who says the worker agreed, or who responds with a threat about the visa, has moved the matter to the next stage, and the response is kept as evidence.

The Ombudsman and the Department

The Fair Work Ombudsman recovers underpayments under the Fair Work Act, including the gap between the contracted salary and the salary paid, and investigates employers of visa holders as a priority; a claim is lodged with the evidence above and can proceed whether or not the worker still works there. The Department is told through its sponsor-monitoring or Border Watch channels that the sponsor is not meeting the obligation, and may audit, warn, fine or bar the sponsor. Reporting is not a breach of any visa condition. Under the Assurance Protocol a worker who has breached a work condition only because of the exploitation is protected from cancellation for it, and the Workplace Justice visa allows a worker who has left the employer to stay with work rights while the claim runs. What reporting does not do is keep the sponsorship alive: a sponsor who is barred stops sponsoring, and the 180 days to find another begins. A worker who reports with the next sponsor already identified is in a different position from one who reports and then looks.

Leaving without losing the visa

A 482 or 494 holder who leaves an underpaying sponsor holds the visa and has 180 days to be nominated by another, during which they may not work for anyone else; the new nomination is at a new salary at or above the market rate, and the new sponsor’s payslips are the ones that count toward the permanent visa from then. Time with the first sponsor at below-nominated pay may not count toward the 186 qualifying period, and the worker plans the permanent application on that assumption. The resignation, the report and the new nomination are sequenced so that the worker is never without a lawful position for longer than the clock allows, and the 180-day guide sets out the clock.

Book a consultation — $330 inc. GST, credited

General information only, current at October 2026; not advice on your own case. Division 2.19 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (sponsorship obligations, including the obligation to ensure equivalent terms and conditions), the nomination criteria in regulation 2.72 and the salary criteria of subclasses 186 and 191, and the Fair Work Act 2009, as in force at the date above. Employment-law recovery is a matter for the Fair Work Ombudsman or an employment lawyer; WIDEN advises on the migration side. Outcomes depend on the Department’s assessment of each matter; no registered migration agent can guarantee a result (Code of Conduct, Migration Agents Regulations). Keshab Chapagain, MARN 1576536.