To be frustrated that DD is struggling to find a job in her desired field while her friends on skilled worker visas aren’t

Ive just posted on this -I think this was an EU condition - if I’m wrong then I’ve asked to be corrected

Ironically it was the case I think when we were in the EU for any non EU nationals - certainly is the case for any Brit going to an EU country as ‘employed ‘ now unless I think as part of an inter company transfer - there was a reason Asian communities were being leafleted by the pro Brexit bunch and being told it would be easier for skilled highly qualified family members.. Nowadays I believe it comes down to salary level and skill level - so if a well qualified consultant from say Sri Lanka wants to come here , they are welcome to apply and not be subject to the ‘is an equally well qualified Brit /EU citizen with the same experience interested and applying . Please correct me if I’m wrong , but I’m pretty sure the rules under EU were as such.

@AnnaFrithBut no one is stopping anyone from living and working in their own country. You and your children are free to apply to any job, but you can’t just expect to be given it just because you happened to be born here and other (potentially better) candidates weren’t. That’s just childish thinking.

Really? When did it change?

Well I am British and I simply want the best doctor for the job. Their nationality is irrelevant to me and you certainly do not speak for me. And this constant bait and switch is used by racists to try and justify their racism.

The point I am trying to make is that a lot of people on threads like this seem to simply have an issue with “foreigners” getting on and making something of their lives because they think they are entitled to special favours simply by virtue of being born in the UK. It is racist. Give me the best person for the job, and the fact that that is increasingly leading to British nationals missing out on jobs says a lot more about the general brain drain, insularity and dare I say - laziness - that exists in the UK than it does about the hiring tactics of companies/institutions.

I don't believe this is the case anymore.

You have misunderstood how work visas apply. You have to advertise and interview and be unable to appoint a British candidate. Only at that point can you consider a foreign worker.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make here. One of the reasons I think the current system of selection for medical specialty training is flawed is that I think British people prefer British doctors, because shared language and culture leads to better communication.

Your use of the term 'racist' shows why it's rapidly gone the way of 'transphobe' and 'islamaphobe' and lost it's power as an insult.

Spot on! The British Museum currently has a Hawaii exhibition - I doubt anyone working there is Hawaiian but yet they managed to curate an exhibition!

Oh so it’s not because patients can’t understand “foreign” doctors but because the system used by the UK government to train its own workforce is fundamentally flawed? Nice bait and switch there - racism 101.

For many jobs there's low demand (few number of jobs available), and high supply of workers. I expect philosophy jobs are part of this.

It sounds like the roles just wanted the best person and sadly that wasn't your daughter. Did she apply for these specific roles too? If yes, i expect her friends had something that made them stand out. For example, knowledge demonstrated in interview or work experience.

If your daughter hasn't been able to land a philosophy job, she needs to think about why and not blame others. I expect there are gaps in her resume. For example, truely entry level jobs are notoriously difficult to get nowadays, with companies preferring people who have some kind of work experience (e.g., internship, previous role in related field, previous junior role).

The UK should be trying to create more jobs and attract employers. Unfortunately, Brexit has actually hampered that in creative, arts and science fields that operate in global markets. Employers want the best talent, they don't care about whether someone is British or not - it is irrelevant to their business model.

Oh for sure both roles are covered by highly skilled, WiggyPig said that in her original comment. We then delved off into the exact code as that decides the minimum salary threshold.
For the second friend the exact code will depend on the remit of her role and the type of institution but likely researcher if she isn't producing her own work. It was more just pointing out one of the roles at least is on the immigrant salary list which allows for the role to pay less than the going rate, as arts covers a wide range of disciplines.

Many of the international doctor only have more skill and experience because they are not the 'exact counterparts' of the British doctors they are competing against - they have been working as doctors a lot longer.
British doctors complete a two year foundation programme, then have to compete for specialty training. If they don't get a job, they won't be able to develop their skills and experience. A waste of the money already spent on their education.

Nobody has suggested that workforces should be less skilled. Why would you think that prioritising training posts in medicine, or entry level posts in any profession, for British applicants, would result in a 'race to the bottom', unless you are extremely racist?

Social and Humanities scientist? Other researchers unspecified discipline? They’re both Highly skilled.

We don’t even know if her daughter actually applied for the jobs her friends got.

The whole whinge from the OP is ridiculous.

Interesting, thank you!

Well, I can reassure you that we are in fact not at all 'nice' to applicants in the equivalent interviews here. While employers have to satisfy the HO that there is a genuine vacancy, the applicant has to satisfy them at interview that they genuinely intend to take the job, that they have the relevant skills and experience, understand the role, understand the rules around skilled worker visas and intend to live and work in the UK. This often means people with niche and specialist skills being interviewed by under-qualified immigration officers who don't understand the job the applicant has been offered, don't understand what questions to ask, don't understand the answers that are given and then reject them for garbled reasons. There is no right of appeal if you are rejected, only to an "administrative review," which is a lengthy process for which you really need expensive legal advice.

But AnnaFrith’s original post was more focused on how patients can’t understand “foreign” doctors. If the issue is actually that UK trained doctors are leaving study and training without the level of skill and experience of their international counterparts then again, that’s not the fault of those who take advantage of the global marketplace is it?

Bringing in policies that will lead to workforces being less specialised or skilled is not the way forward. It’s not a race to the bottom.

On this case I agree with AnnaFrith. After graduating from medical school, UK trained doctors spend 2 years in hospitals. At the end of this 2 years they apply for specialty training posts within the NHS. These training posts are open to all, for example foreign trained doctors who may have far more experience and have built up an impressive portfolio to make them attractive to hospitals. This isn't about affirmative action or the best qualified person for the job. It's not a level playing field and a big reason for the recent resident doctor strikes over the past year.

At the very least I believe a programme coordinator at the French Institute would fall into 3416, I work in a similar cultural institution and that is the code our programme leads fall under, even in the Philosophy/Literature field. Arts doesn't just cover the visual arts, music etc. and they are generally classed as arts officers.

So basically you think your DD should be given preference over other candidates just for being British? This isn’t how the job market works.
Maybe the other girls have better knowledge, skills and are better at interviews, so your DD needs to up her game. Sounds like she thinks she’s above normal jobs too. What job directly related to philosophy is she expecting to get? Unless she wants to work in academia/teaching I can’t think of any other jobs in that field.

3416 is on the salary list yes - but friend is a researcher with a philosophy degree and wouldn't appear to fit this. OP said she was working for an organisation "like" the RSA but not that she's in the arts, so I think 3416 would be a stretch.

I genuinely don’t know what you mean. What is classist?

Is your daughter still applying for jobs.? There are more jobs out there

Possibly a bit classist, but not entirely untrue by the sound of things! 🤦🏻‍♀️