I've been accepted to an arts residency with CELLspace in San Francisco for 3 months mid-year to look at love, relationships, gender, and sexuality from the perspective of a female queer migrant minority, through performance art and other mediums. Originally I was booked for August till October, mostly to make BurlyConand Kaleidoscope Cabaret (for burlesque performers from minority backgrounds), but then this REALLY AMAZING TOTALLY PERFECT opportunity to submit to This Is What I Want came from Jiz Lee (who is the Creatrix of Queer Porn Awesome) and now I might move it to mid-June. Besides that, I've also been offered internships & volunteer opportunities with Femina Potens and the Center for Sex and Culture, amongst other places, and there's always an event or two happening that could use some extra help.

Either way though, I need your help. Besides doing all sorts of odd jobs and saving money, I'm also crowdfunding for $5000 to get to my residency: $2000 for airfare and $3000 to cover residency fees ($650 a month for 3 months) and living costs. Any more will help me explore more awesome events (like Burning Man!!!) and improve my creative & performance skills to create even better, more insightful, personal work.

Contribute to my fund, hire me, sponsor me, write up about me on your blogs and newsletters, send me your frequent flyer miles - any and all help is greatly appreciated!

So I haven't really been blogging here much, mostly because I've spent most of my blogging time at The Merch Girl. But I did get a couple of emails asking about me in light of the Queensland floods so I thought I'd update here.

I'm fine, though my garage is likely flooded (I'm on the 2nd floor of an apt) so I've probably lost quite a few books and art supplies and media. Here's hoping the crates held them in! I'm currently in Sydney for a week to find drier weather and to clear my mind; there has also been a family crisis and it's been a rough & tumble couple of weeks.

Many others aren't quite as lucky as me though - losing lives, property, livelihoods, families. Please contribute to the Queensland Flood Appeal as much as you can. Every dollar helps.

This version is slightly adapted from the original; it was sent to Andrew Bartlett (Brisbane rep for The Greens) a month ago and I included a line about how I had sent this letter in elsewhere but the response wasn't encouraging. Bartlett hasn't responded.

Please feel free to pass this letter on and use it as reference for any other projects or protests.

***

I am an emerging artsworker and creative producer originally from Malaysia, of Bangladeshi heritage and citizenship, currently applying for Australian permanent residency. I have completed a Bachelors Degree in Creative Industries (Interdisciplinary) from Queensland University of Technology over two and a half years, with the assistance of a partial Dean's Merit Scholarship. I am active within the arts and youth empowerment communities here in Brisbane and across Australia, and have made very strong and fulfilling relationships and connections with people from a variety of cultures. 

I desire to continue my creative and community life in Brisbane, hence the permanent residency application. However, I find that the overall process of migration and the constant changes of rules - especially with the new rules proposed by Immigration Minister Chris Evans in mid February 2010, and the proposed bill to terminate categories of visa applications at any one time - is restrictive, time-consuming, and not reflective of reality. I am writing in to share my perspective on these changes, highlight the specific issues involved, and provide suitable alternatives to improve the current immigration system. 

People from developing countries, young people, career changers, entrepreneurs, and other people that do not neatly fit into pigeon-holes are highly disadvantaged by the system's unwillingness to recognise their contributions, skills, and potential. People like us hold strong resources for Australia financially, socially, and culturally, but are often confused or put off by the unnecessarily-complicated and invasive bureaucracy that is the visa application process. Our frustrations, however, go unheard - overpowered by under-informed people who use global warming, water restrictions, and the Global Financial Crisis as excuses for xenophobia and misleading statements. [1]

Most immigrants move to Australia in search of a better life - improved career prospects, financial standing, education, and social standing. Some have come from restrictive and oppressive regimes, disadvantaged by the lack of human rights or opportunities. Most immigrants do seek to contribute to the Australian way of life and be assets to the country - however, the manifold layers of the system forces us to begin as "guilty until proven innocent", requiring us to submit highly invasive documentation - bank statements, blood tests, police checks - to make sure we are not "cheating" the system. At the same time, we are considered Australian residents for tax purposes (and tax purposes only), which means we effectively subsidise plenty of Australia's public services, such as Medicare and tertiary education, while getting very limited and often expensive access to only a limited subset of these services [2].

On the 8th of February 2010 the current Australian Immigration Minister Chris Evans announced that 20,000 applications filed before mid 2007 would be rejected solely due to the introduction of new rules [3] . My application was submitted in mid 2009, so it should not be part of the churn, but the prospect of my application suddenly being cut due to the whims and fancies of whoever is in charge is frightening. The process takes many months and years to complete, and it is not fair to punish applicants with wasted time and resources for no justifiable reasons.

Evans claims that they are building a more targeted list of skills needed for the application process, with priority given to people who already have jobs lined up. However, based on my experiences and from talking to other migrants (past and present), even these suggested changes are difficult and unrealistic. Here is what I see is problematic with current Australian immigration policy:

The current "skills" list [4] isn't really a list of skills, but a list of occupations.
It disregards the fact that many people nowadays, especially young people, don't just belong to an occupation - they build up a set of transferable skills, and move between occupations. Some hold multiple jobs that bear little relation to each other - or even to their initial university degree - but are still able to utilise the skills picked up from previous experience. An architect, a hairdresser, and an executive all share skills in design, problem solving, research, knowing their client, application of ideas and concepts - yet they're all treated differently by DIAC. The current system assumes that people stick to one career path from university to retirement, which is no longer a realistic proposition. 

Newer industries, such as the Creative Industries, are not represented in the Skills list at all.
Each occupation is given a number of points according to demand, and residency applicants need to meet a minimum number of points to have their application considered. However, there are a lot of occupations that don't give you points at all. Anything to do with the creative industries, for example, doesn't get you points - you need to already be hired as that role for that "skill" to be relevant to your application. The only Creative Industries occupations with points are related to journalism - but they favour traditional media over new media, not considering that traditional media sources are currently losing financial ground. The current and proposed updates tend to focus on healthcare and sciences, without taking into consideration the considerable contributions the creative industries [5] (or other industries for that matter) provide to the national economy, as well as to Australian culture and society. It perpetuates the notion that only certain occupations and skills are prized, which disadvantages both international migrants and local residents.

You can only claim one "skilled occupation" on the list, regardless of your abilities.
If I could claim more than one skill on that list, I'd have about 300 points easy - stage management, production, journalism, marketing, all sorts. But I could only claim one, and spent ages with my agent figuring out the best occupation that encompasses both my skillset as well as my degree (the only deciding factor). As I said before, the list doesn't account for people who have worked across occupations and industries, and those that have changed careers. Wouldn't Australia be happy to have people that are flexible and can adapt? The current economic climate demands that people multi-skill and be prepared to switch careers - but the immigration system disadvantages (and in some cases punishes) people who are trying to adapt and contribute better, as they do not always fit neatly into systems or pigeonholes.

Determining your "skilled occupation" doesn't actually involve your past experience, but rather your degree (and now where you've worked for a year).
If my CV had anything to do with the occupation I could choose for my PR application, I would be qualified as some version of youth or community worker. However, my CV and years of experience within the Brisbane community did not matter one bit. According to my degree, I was qualified to be a Print Journalist (while I do write, it is primarily for online indie media). A new rule has been added saying the degree wasn't enough - you need to have one year's worth of work experience to claim it. Yet how many students are actually able to get a skilled job while doing a full-time degree (until very recently international students couldn't do part-time study) continuously over a year, especially with the limitations of 20 hours a week? Volunteering does not count, personal projects do not count, ad-hoc or short-but-regular projects (like festivals) do not count. It also significantly disadvantages people who change their minds after their degree, or who took a degree in one thing but realised that their skills and passions lay elsewhere - perhaps somewhere without a degree available. As mentioned before, rules like these do not reflect the reality of the current job market.

It is extremely difficult for international students and migrants (especially people on Bridging visas) to get any sort of employment.
The reasoning behind all these changes is the idea that migrants should be able to get a job in Australia to qualify as a permanent resident. This is often accompanied by cries of migrants "stealing jobs from Australians" and calls for tighter migration rules. However, it ignores the fact that migrants are already significantly disadvantaged in the job market merely for being a migrant. Here's how:

• Stigma against minorities - just having an ethnic-sounding name can disqualify you from fair job prospects. [6] Having a foreign passport and an unusual visa makes this more complicated.
• Company policies regarding visas - there have been a number of occasions when I was almost convinced that a company had a policy (written or otherwise) against hiring people on a Student or Bridging visa due to possible lack of permanence. QUT's Human Resources (HR) Department actually tried to tell me that they have a policy against hiring people with Bridging visas since they had no definite end date (they are valid up till a month after the final decision on a Permanent Residency application, but no date for that was available). However, a search through their Manual of Policy and Procedures [7] revealed no such policy. Their HR department did not respond to my enquiries. The Government does not want to give you a visa unless you have a job, yet from my experience many companies do not want to consider applicants with certain visas. It's a Catch-22, with the migrants being the ultimate losers.
• Temporary residents are blocked from accessing job search help - despite being considered as Australian residents for tax purposes, international students and temporary visa holders (including Bridging visas) receive very little, if any, Government assistance - including programs geared towards job-seekers. Among these services are: Centrelink payments, Job Assistance, free training in childcare or hospitality, grants, scholarships, apprenticeships, traineeships, Recognition of Prior Learning, mentoring or residences sponsored by a Government agency (e.g. arts mentoring programs by Arts Queensland), credit cards, loans, permanent public service jobs, even entry into national television programs! Other avenues, such as further university or TAFE study, are priced at full-fee rates - which, at about 10x the cost for domestic students and without the option of grants or scholarships, is prohibitive.
• International students must juggle study and work - international students can only work about 20 hours a week, even though most part-time jobs want at least 25 hours' commitment, often between 9 to 5 - clashing with university study. There is a misconception that international students are wealthy due to the requirement of paying full-fee; however, their entry into Australian universities has usually involved great familial sacrifices. After paying off the fees they may not be left with very much money, especially when it involves currencies that are weak against the Australian dollar. Also, the only jobs international students often get are menial jobs that hardly any local would do, paid at alarmingly low rates and utterly exploitative - to them, it's better than nothing.

Entrepreneurship is barely encouraged, and sometimes seems to be discouraged.
Entrepreneurs should be welcomed by Australia - they create jobs and opportunities, and stimulate the economy. Migrants have traditionally created growth in their areas by setting up businesses to support their communities. Even people who don't make for-profit businesses, such as artsworkers or community developers, still enhance Australia's culture and lifestyle in major ways - often benefiting locals more than they are benefiting themselves or fellow migrants. These people dedicate part of their existence to the betterment of Australia - but they are not given any resources, support, or recognition for it. The focus on jobs actually discourages entrepreneurship and innovation - you're expected to fit into a mold to be approved for a visa. The process of migration gives no room for failure or experimentation - yet it is those two qualities that are greatly needed for entrepreneurial ventures to eventually succeed.

DIAC makes changes quicker than they, or anyone else, can keep up with them, and there are no recourses for people who are suddenly negatively affected.
The average processing times for General Skilled Migration visas [7] range from 6 months to 2 years depending on where the visa was lodged and the priority levels. It is alarming to note that there were still a large number of applications from 2007 that were still not being processed - and now will be discarded not for any fault of their own. Migration agents, department staff, and applicants are not able to keep up with the rapidly-changing rules. It takes a lot of effort, time, and money to put in an application - not all of these can be recovered in case of an impromptu law change. Some applicants, tired by the constant changes and unable to wait any longer, simply leave the country [8] - but for many others, particularly those who have moved from war-torn countries or places where they are in significant risk, this is no longer an option.

The English language requirements completely disregard any university degree.
Residency applicants are required to score well in the IELTS tests (International English Language Testing System) to prove their ability to communicate in Australia. This test was already required for entry into Australia as an international student - however, as the scores are only valid for two years, residency applicants would likely need to retake the test. The fact that they are able to complete an Australian degree satisfactorily should be be enough to prove language skills - but instead the degree is worthless.

This visa process is personally frustrating and heart-breaking, not just for me but for so many others involved - migrants, families, agents, and so on. Many people are left vulnerable and confused after trying to manage the unpredictable changes, leaving them open to exploitation by  people-smugglers and human traffickers who take advantage by promising them "easier" but highly illegal and dangerous methods to enter Australia. After all, why bother putting yourself through the wringer if you're only going to end up worse than before?

Yet, other than the regular moral panics about "boat people", these issues with immigration from the perspective of migrants are hardly ever discussed. The only time mass media channels and shows like Today Tonight or A Current Affair bring up the issue is when it affects someone of European descent, or when it disadvantages an Australian. Yet this is the reality for many migrants out there, not just in Australia but in other places around there world - many of whom are unnecessarily troubled just for holding a green passport. International students and temporary visa holders are often too scared to speak out for fears of losing their visas; some have come from countries where the slightest criticism can lead to major repercussions. The Australian public is not sufficiently educated and are only exposed to the danger of allowing immigrants into the country. So this becomes a lost cause; one deemed unimportant because it is decided that no one is passionate enough to speak up.

There are a number of ways to improve the migration process, be more in line with the current job markets, and ultimately support Australian society in all its forms. Among them are:

Include documentation beyond just degrees in applications, such as resumes and references.
If Australian businesses require a resume and look for skills and experience beyond a degree when considering a job application, surely a Government agency could do the same. It would not be too hard to ask for a resume, some portfolio samples, references, and maybe even selection criteria - thereby providing greater flexibility and enabling migrants to be properly certified for their best skills (and making it easier for them to be hired). The job experience considered should be taken as a whole - not just in picking one job that lasted a year.

Allow multiple occupation nominations, or nominate based on skills.
Instead of concentrating a big proportion of points into one occupation, allow applicants to nominate various skills, backed up by proof such as resumes and skills tests, to create a package of their viability in the Australian job market. Once again, flexibility is encouraged, and migrants are more likely to find employment as they can prove their ability to adapt, change, and learn.

Changes should never be retrospective, and should always be include consultation with stakeholders: migrants (past, current, future), education bodies, migration agents, DIAC staff, and so on.
There have been plenty of community consultations for issues such as youth & body image [9] and ratings on computer games [10]; however, none have been conducted about migration, despite the frequent changes. A thorough investigation on the realities of migration, including the experiences of migrants past and present through the different systems, as well as a look into hiring practices and obstacles, would go a long way into creating a more stable migration system - eventually benefiting Australia.

Substantially increase education around visas.
There are plenty of misunderstandings and misinformation about the differing types of visas, especially with regards to work and study rights. Sometimes an applicant will ring DIAC for clarification only to be given different answers by different staffers. Having clearer information about each visa, and making sure it is consistently delivered, will help ease misunderstandings and create confidence within employers, migrants, and public service.

Substantially increase job search and financial resources.
There are people and organisations who are willing to bend the rules to take in a worthy candidate who may not quite qualify due to residency concerns. However, this comes at great risk to their funding and the sustainability of the program. (This is a common concern shared by all types of non-profits and social benefit programs, trying to cater to demand that is greater than what their funding permits.) By relaxing the rules on residency for grants, scholarships, job assistance, apprenticeships, and other such assistance, more migrants will be able to skill up and equip themselves for employment - and employers will win by getting diverse well-skilled staff.

Australian immigration policies demand reforms that are realistic, humanistic, and takes into account the real-world experiences of migrants and current job-seekers. Migrants do not deserve to be taken for a ride as they try to keep up with the ever-changing rules. Many people come to Australia for the promise of a better life, and have often done all they can to contribute - however, the current restrictions only hinder them from doing the best they can, and ultimately hurt Australia as a country. A better, more organised, consultative system, based on real-world experiences and requirements, will not just benefit migrants but also bring prosperity and success to Australian economy and culture.

I call onto Senator Chris Evans, other relevant ministers, and the Australian media to open up more education and discussion on the migration system, informed by relevant and recent research into the effects and experiences of current migrants. I also call onto the Australian public to show empathy for the migrants who have worked very hard to integrate into Australian society, and to broaden their minds and be educated on the migration process.

I would greatly appreciate a response to this letter, to learn more about efforts to improve the immigration process, as well as any resources for those of us trying to thrive and contribute to Australian society despite issues with visas and regulations. Earlier this year I did a major mailout of this letter to significant politicians and media, and while I did get a few responses they weren't all that encouraging. I thank you for reading this and look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,
Tiara Shafiq

References

[1] Comments on Barns. ABC The Drum: Unleased: Immigrants: Australia needs them. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2813938.htm

[2] GlobalHigherEd: Making sense of the economic contribution of international students in Australia (up to 2008). http://globalhighered.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/the-economic-contribution-of-international-students-australia/

[3] Financial Times: Australia rejects 20,000 would-be immigrants. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bc6e39a4-1489-11df-9ea1-00144feab49a.html

[4] DIAC GSM Skills List. http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/pdf/1121i.pdf

[5] ABC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation: Creative Industries National Mapping Project - Findings. https://wiki.cci.edu.au/display/NMP/1.+The+Findings

[6] Booth, Leigh, and Varganova (Australian National University). Does Racial and Ethnic Discrimination Vary Across Minority Groups? Evidence From a Field Experiment. http://people.anu.edu.au/andrew.leigh/pdf/AuditDiscrimination.pdf

[7] DIAC Average Processing Times - General Skilled Visas. http://www.immi.gov.au/about/charters/client-services-charter/visas/8.0.htm

[8] Gerkens. ABC The Drum: Unleashed: A long goodbye to Australia. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2836983.htm

[9] Youth.Gov.Au: Body Image. http://www.youth.gov.au/bodyimage.html

[10] Attorney-General's Department: An R18+ Classification for Computer Games - Public Consultation. http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Consultationsreformsandreviews_AnR18+ClassificationforComputerGames-PublicConsultation

The only Aussie politician who has been honest about this whole thing is Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman, who has openly acknowledged that cutting international student numbers will bring a major hit to the Australian economy:

Cr Newman told brisbanetimes.com.au the city was spending money to attract even more international students to study here because they provided a big boost to the local economy.

"I think it's a really important thing, and it's important for not just the money that's made from fees and from supplying accommodation, food and clothing and all those sorts of things," he said.

"It's important because ... these people who study here - they're going to go back home, if they've had a good experience here ... they're going to be literally ambassadors all their lives for us; they'll think fondly of Brisbane and they'll bring their families here and all that sort of stuff."

At least I can respect him for not bringing in other argy-bargy about climate change or the "Australian way of life" or other things. It's all about the money. We migrants pay full fee for everything and get nothing in benefits, even up to 2 years after permanent residency. The only reason Australia's able to afford HECS, Centrelink, scholarships, and all the other fun stuff citizens take for granted is because it comes from the pockets of migrants and students who don't even earn enough (yay visas getting in the way of work!) to get their tax return back.

I have been quite disheartened with how very little has come in the way of public support for migrants from local Australians, particularly from the left-wing side who seem to be quite fond of making themselves sound like they're better than the Conservatives (who are oddly enough mostly of the Liberal party). As evidenced above, the Australian Greens have their misconceptions, and nowhere in this debate has anyone actually ever bothered to ask a migrant. Y'know, the people affected by all these law changes and election rhetoric? But because we can't vote, we have no influence on local politics - and because historical and recent imperialism has messed up our home countries anyway we're all coerced to move to countries like Australia anyway because it's a much better life even with all the bureaucratic trouble! Silence isn't support, people.

Thankfully there are people who are calling the politicans - including Bob Brown - out on their crap. I don't know how much influence they have, or whether they will get the support of a wider voice - the xenophobic "OMGZ THE DARKIES ARE COMING WITH THEIR SHARIA BURKAS" crowd seems to be really loud and common - but they're there. We just seem to be quiet voices in the noise of rabble.

Here's some:

ABC Unleashed: Greens' population policy no better than the others:

Let's be clear. If you are a refugee fleeing persecution, then a Green government will embrace you. But if you are fleeing something as banal and commonplace as poverty, economic hardship, low wages, a lack of opportunity or jobs, or if you're just looking for a better life for you and your family - then the door to Australia is closed.

The Greens are torn. On the one side, they have supporters who value Australia's role accepting more refugees and providing opportunity for migrants. 

But on the other side, they have supporters who see people as the ultimate environmental problem. Each Australian has a relatively high carbon footprint. So, for some environmentalists, the goal should be to make sure there are as few Australians as possible. 

That means keeping foreigners out. Poor people are better for the environment. They can't afford gas guzzling cars, or always-on-standby plasma televisions, or gaudy McMansions with heating and cooling systems.

Anyway, that's the theory. Many people holding this view say we should increase foreign aid, but they are convinced the effective path out of poverty - immigration - should be blocked.

Green Left: Why cutting immigration won't help:

"Overpopulation" has long been a euphemism for "the pressing surplus of non-white poor". By classifying them as "surplus", overpopulation theory denies them the very right to exist. Not only have they no right to exist, but this is presented as "scientific" fact, the operation of the "law of nature". The historical, political, economic and social reasons for poverty and environmental degradation become irrelevant.

Faced with a choice between acknowledging the need to confront the most powerful sections of society to demand that the driving force for development becomes meeting the basic human needs of all people in an ecologically sustainable way, or pointing the finger of blame at the poor and powerless, the overpopulationists take the easy and (for First World, relatively affluent, white people) more comfortable way out. In focusing on the number of people as the problem, they don't just let the existing social relations off the hook, they obscure them.

[...]

To blame immigrants to the First World (or the mass of people around the world) for the environmental crisis we all confront is not only "scientifically" insupportable, but also erects barriers to uniting the victims of the crisis in action to reverse it. If we are to truly "think globally and act locally", we will welcome more refugees and migrants to this land and, in the process, encourage and convince them to join with us in the struggle for a society which puts human rights and the environment before profits.

World People's Conference on Climate Change - PEOPLES' AGREEMENT:

Developed countries, as the main cause of climate change, in assuming their historical responsibility, must recognize and honor their climate debt in all of its dimensions as the basis for a just, effective, and scientific solution to climate change. In this context, we demand that developed countries:

[...]

•          Assume responsibility for the hundreds of millions of people that will be forced to migrate due to the climate change caused by these countries, and eliminate their restrictive immigration policies, offering migrants a decent life with full human rights guarantees in their countries

Now where's the rest of you?

Hi everyone who found me through my two-pager in Grazia (Australia)! I answered a callout on SourceBottle last week and got called in for a photoshoot and an interview. I was surprised at the space - I honestly thought it would be just a headshot and a paragraph! Now I can say I'm in the pages of a mainstream women's fashion magazine ;)

Just some things about me that the article probably didn't make very clear:

• I'm not that desperate for a job, haha! I was pretty desperate by mid last year, before my parents' allowance stepped in, and there are months where I often wonder when or if I'll get any income. I find that things tend to sort itself out, though yes, if it weren't for my boyfriend (who works as a web developer) or my parents I would definitely be in much worse conditions!
  
  
• Despite what the article implies, I do actually have stacks of experience. I've been active with events, festivals, non-profits, media, social enterprise, culture, youth, and performing arts in one way or another since about 2001 - possibly earlier. Here are my latest resumes (professional and performance). I get a LOT of praise and rave reviews about my resumes - both the look of them and the diverse range of experience - but I never seem to have the "exactly right" experience they're after. Which can be befuddling, especially when they don't seem to know what they're after either.
  
  
• The freelance stage and events management work I do that was mentioned in the article is as The Merch Girl. As Tiara the Merch Girl I create performance art, assist creative productions & creators with their administrative or menial tasks, and am growing into event & project production. I love being The Merch Girl, and if I could I would just like to keep doing all sorts of creative projects and not worry about being properly "employed". But, as the article says, the money isn't reliable or much, so at this stage it would be good to have a part-time job that allows me enough flexibility for me to work on my own projects. (Or have people sponsor/hire me enough to just be The Merch Girl full-time. Ooo!) Besides that, I also do some temp childcare work from tiem to time.
  
  
• The main drama surrounding my jobhunting is actually my Bridging visa. I came to Brisbane from Malaysia in 2006 for university and hung around to pursue performance and production opportunities. I applied for Australian permanent residency in May 2009, and while theoretically it means I can work just about anywhere anytime, realistically a lot of companies and agencies have no idea what to with you. The visa doesn't have an end date, despite being temporary (it expires 28 days after a decision is made on your PR application), so sometimes even forms don't work for me. I've had HR in companies knock back my application in seconds because they didn't understand the bridging visa (one time HR was telling me my visa was ineligible, at the same time the direct supervisor of the role I was applying for asked me to come in for an interview). The vagaries and inconsistencies of the migration system in Australia is something I am deeply passionate about. I suspect my ethnic last name may be a factor too.
  
  
• I don't tend to write job applications at 2 in the morning - I like my sleep! - though I have done job applications in the middle of the might mainly due to jetlag. I did reach a point where I was applying for every job possible, not getting anywhere, and feeling physically ill - just looking at job advertisements made me sick. Now I've pared down my approach; I only apply for roles and/or companies that feel like a great match with my skills, ethos, and personality.

Here are some other articles I've written about the jothunting process:

Should I change my name for a job?
On software and the job-hunting process
Tiara, Brisbane, and the Creative Industries - let's work together!

And once again, my resumes, and my work as The Merch Girl.

Feel free to get in touch if you have any questions, want to commiserate, or perhaps have a job offer!