Immigrant rule on paying 20% less than going rate

[Crikeyalmighty]

I'm not quite sure how this passed me by in the list of ludicrous post Brexit stuff but reading today about the fact that in certain shortage occupations it is possible if using immigrants needing visas to pay up to 20% less than the going rate to obtain visas , provided it's more than minimum wage . Labour I believe want to outlaw it.

The figures today do not suprise me one bit- I have a desk in a centre that also does visa processing- for the last 6 months it has been wall to wall with families from developing countries . Not single youngish people but large families and clearly not all nuclear scientists or brain surgeons or however the gvt tried to make it sound as if it would all be super highly skilled immigration - and all will need medical and housing .

If anyone tries to tell me this makes sense rather than mainly single people here short term from the EU- sorry I'm not having it. At least in the EU we had reciprocal rights in places you possibly would choose to live and work or retire . This way it seems the traffic is all one way .

These are not the governments beloved subject of 'the boats' - this is people flying in with permission to work- I don't think many had this quite in mind when they voted to leave- although I always thought it would end up being the case.

Nearly 90% of the doctors in my department are immigrants. We'd be screwed without them.

We have millions of people on benefits many of whom could work but just don't want to. Unless we tackle this then we will keep needing immigrants.

@nocoolnamesleft I absolutely agree - and I doubt they are paying them 20% less!

I just don't like the idea that companies can apply for visas for shortage industry's and offer 20% less than the usual going rate.

The legal migration net figures of 700,000 are a disgrace. The visa requirements are so minimal as to be almost meaningless- isn't the minimum salary level set below the national average?

All the focus has been on small boats but those figures are dwarfed by the legal migration figures.

Exactly this. Employers who like paying crap wages have whined to the government post Brexit about not having enough workers hence the stupid visa rules.

Let's revamp our economic model, get employers paying decent wages and get people off the crutch of in-work benefits. And deal with the issue of why millions are claiming out of work benefits when there are record levels of job vacancies.

Go on, give us a figure then...how many is 'many'?

5.3 million was reported in the news last week

No idea whether they want to work or not, but that's how many people are on out of work benefits. At a time when we have high job vacancies.

@TeenagersAngst I think that's what I was trying to say - the obsession with the boats I think is a distraction from how much legal immigration is happening- given that many (not all I know) voted for Brexit on the grounds of too much immigration then to me it is exceptionally pointless. Then again I don't have much sympathy if people don't like this and they voted that way based on immigration- personally I would rather immigration happened from places where there were reciprocal easy arrangements- like the EU for example.

I was listening to a podcast the other day and one of the guests was arguing that Brexit wasn't explicitly about reducing numbers of immigrants but about 'taking back control' which could translate to more immigration as long as we were able to decide where from and who.

It seems that this is the approach Boris went for (who let's face it, is more of a Remainer than a Leaver and only got on the Brexit bandwagon so he could become PM) and is continuing under Rishi. I don't actually think that's what the people who voted for Brexit were voting for.

Well yes, there were reciprocal arrangements but the net figures were always high. So it never balanced itself out.

We do not have millions of people on benefits to lazy to work. We have millions of people working who also need benefits because we don’t pay properly. People on disability benefits are included in those figures too.
Oh, and the other people on the equivalent of job seekers, if they can’t prove they’re job hunting for a minimum period each week, they’re sanctioned. So very few are conning the system.

If you’re going to use an argument at least learn a bit about it first.

Finally, the largest part of the benefits bill is pensions.

And deal with the issue of why millions are claiming out of work benefits when there are record levels of job vacancies

Also because many of these jobs are temporary, seasonal, casual, zero hours contract jobs. No good if you want to buy or even rent a house. Also having to go on and off benefits in between jobs is a right pain.

@TeenagersAngst I tried to apply for a disability benefit which I am definitely entitled to. The form I had to fill in was so long and complicated that due to my disability I had to give up with the application . I've had to reapply, so will lose out on money. This time however I will get help with the form (GP has given me contact info). They really do make it hard to apply for benefits.

The going rate is a figure that the government allocate to roles - it doesn't mean that companies can pay immigrants 20% less than current staff members. The list of those roles is relatively small as well.

I'd be interested to know how many, if any, of those people are working and being topped up by UC, or who have reduced working hours requirement for health or caring responsibilities.

I completely agree with this post.

I have seen through what's happened to certain family members that it has been made so much harder to apply for UC even when people are already working just to get absolute pittance.

I really don't believe people are just choosing to not work as a life style choice.

I really don't believe people are just choosing to not work as a life style choice.

Except the early retired ones, in their 50s. I mean, there's a plenty of bristly 50-somethings in good health, on MN, sticking 2 fingers up at Jeremy Hunt for suggesting they should get a job.

I don't have any expertise or data, nor do I trust OP's 20% less pay statistic. Last night on radio the journalist was saying that the largest category of skilled worker imports are health care workers, and I doubt NHS deliberately pays them 20% less. But if the natives won't work then...

I only know for myself things I read on MN.

5.3 million on benefits who don't work, can you show me the evidence?

I don’t think that’s what the 20% less refers to. The cost of the visa is 20% less in a shortage occupation, the wages paid to the employee are the same as the wages paid to a non immigrant British person.

If immigrants can live and thrive on the wages paid to them, why can’t born Brits? Immigrants come here and subsequent generations achieve a great deal. It’s all about mindset and grafting. Many here are work shy and fragile. For the simplest thing, they cave in and choose to no longer work. One has to ask why is the British population getting sicker and sicker both physically and mentally so much so that the numbers out of work for health reason is increasing dramatically.

I mean, there's a plenty of bristly 50-somethings in good health, on MN, sticking 2 fingers up at Jeremy Hunt for suggesting they should get a job.

You make it sound like they're stroppy and workshy but in the thread you linked to there are plenty of measured responses from people saying they'd simply managed their finances well. Taking redundancy, downsizing, occupational pensions kicking in. And yes there's going to be inheritance too for some. Good luck to them.
Maybe we should look to the other end of the age spectrum and drop school leaving age back to 16.

There are a heap of people not working, not because they are lazy but because they genuinely can’t afford to. Expensive childcare and low wages keeps people out of the workforce.
Let’s look at the systems reasons. And pay people the right money for working (whether they need a visa or not!)

The vast majority of long term unemployed are unemployable i.e no work ethic or skills/have caring responsibilities and live in the wrong places.

We don't need to be taking in potentially millions of HK er's.

Last time i looked, Western businesses were investing heavily in HK, ex pats working in lucrative jobs and the Chinese crackdown has pretty much finished... of course help the individual students involved in protests but millions not effected? based on a rule change and with no idea if they support China or not? No, definition of madness.

ONS figures say there are about 350k people who are long termed unemployed, the remaining 900k are churn, people moving through the job market.

Those 350k are not a substitute for young ambitious highly qualified EU workers but lets replace them with unskilled with large families and dependents from the RoW.