Results (
English) 1:
[Copy]Copied!
Trends in visa students in 2010-11, with the rate falling from the year 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, which is part of the impact caused by the changing rules of student visa Australia.TRENDS IN STUDENT VISA APPLICATIONSTo be eligible for an Australian student visa, applicants must be accepted for full-time study with a registered institution, as well as meet various financial, health and character conditions. (Endnote 4)The visa covers the duration of the course applied for. Over the four years to 2010–11, applications for Australian student visas increased sharply to 2008–09, followed in turn by an almost equally sharp decline in the subsequent two years. In 2010–11, there were 282,000 student visa applications lodged in Australia, including both onshore and offshore applications. This is a decline of 5.1% from 2009–10 and 23% less than the peak of 2008–09. Despite this decline, the number of student visa applications in 2010–11 is still higher than the number recorded in 2006–07.The Australian Government's Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) made a number of changes to student visas and skilled migration between 2012 and 2014. These changes were made in response to the Knight review, an investigation commissioned by the government with the aim of finding ways to make study in Australia easier for international students. The changes will affect all students applying for visas from 2012 onwards.Human resource management is performed in two types of environments- internal and external.Factors that affect human resources management action in the Organization are divided into internal and external factors, from which the case studies reflect external factors that affect human resources management in the organization. The external factors that affect human resources management in the University are as follows:What are the downsizing driving forces? Why do firms resort to downsizing in the first place? While downsizing is viewed as a complicated,multifaceted phenomenon (Gandolfi, 2006), it hasgenerally been adopted either reactively or proactively (Macky, 2004). To put a single downsizing cause forward is problematic and underrates its inherent complexity. Eachdownsizing decision is likely to constitute a combination of company-specific, industryspecific,and macroeconomic factors (Drew, 1994).Firms frequently justify downsizing through theemergence of deregulation, globalization, merger and acquisition (M&A) activities, globalcompetition, technological innovation, and a shift in business strategies in order to achieve and retain competitive advantages (Sahdev, 2003;Zyglidopoulos, 2003).How do organizations implement downsizing?Three forms of implementation strategies havebeen identified; workforce reduction, organizationVolume 8, Number 1 ï April 2008 5redesign, and systemic strategies (Farell &Mavondo, 2004). First, the workforce reductionstrategy concentrates on the reduction of theoverall number of employees, including layoffs,retrenchments, natural attritions, early retirements,hiring freezes, golden parachutes, and buyoutpackages. This strategy is commonly implementedin a reactive manner as a cost-cutting measure(Ryan & Macky, 1998), yet has shown to be rarelysuccessful. Second, the organization redesignstrategy focuses on eliminating work and includesactivities, such as abolishing functions, eliminatinghierarchical levels, redesigning tasks, andconsolidating units (Farell & Mavondo, 2004).Third, the systemic strategy assumes a moreholistic and macro view focusing on changing theorganizationís intrinsic culture and the attitudes andvalues of its employees (Luthans & Sommer,1999). Studies have shown that most firms haveresorted to workforce reduction strategies
Being translated, please wait..
