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

[Andiessock]

My DD is in her mid 20s, she graduated with a masters in philosophy over 2 years ago now from a top university in London, she has a BA from a top university as well. Her two closest friends during her masters weren’t British.
DD struggled to find a job directly related to philosophy or even culture in general, she did manage to get a job in the civil service but she doesn’t enjoy it at all.
Her two friends both managed to get jobs in the field they desired originally on graduate visas, now both are sponsored on skilled worker visas.
One works at cultural institute associated with her home country in programme coordination so planning and running events that promote her countries culture etc. specifically in literature and philosophy.
The other works at a non-profit cultural institution in a similar role to her other friend but a little more research heavy less events centred.

First of all I’m not entirely sure how either of these roles fall under “skilled workers”, they must be making around 40k to even qualify and whilst I understand the first friend being preferred over a British national since it’s a cultural institution, I don’t understand why non-Brits are being given roles in an industry Brits are struggling to get a foot in the door at.

Im all for migrants for what it’s worth, this is not intended to be slanderous to migrants, especially in industries which need the talent from abroad; but I don’t see how that applies here and in this case it does feel like “foreigners are stealing British jobs” (not a sentiment I typically agree with or would use any other time). That’s not to mention that I’m not even sure how these roles qualify as skilled workers in the first place.

AIBU to find this incredibly frustrating?

I think a lot of the people posting are immigrants. It's a case of the 'anywheres' - people who are happy to move around for work and don't feel any strong geographical ties, feeling superior to the 'somewheres' - people who want to live and work in their own country, and hope their children will too.

Is it a problem though? Why shouldn’t I employ the brilliant highly experienced candidate who will bring lots of new ideas to my organisation? I’d much rather have them than the candidate who scraped the baseline ‘minimum skill for role’ score in all sections but no more.

Indeed!

There's a hint in this thread that the OP's DD is a bit passive ... the tyhing about humanities training is that you then need to use those skills of analytical thinking & research to find a good fit in employment - a modicum of initiative is needed.

Jesus.
this is your daughter problem. A philosophy degree isn't opening many doors for her. That's the issue, not what a skilled worker is or isn't

This and many other posts are totally missing the point.

Immigration for skilled labour should be limited to areas where there is not in fact enough domestic skilled labour available.

Not enough doctors, then you should absolutely be allowing employers to accept good people from abroad.

But if there are plenty of accountants, and indeed maybe too many, you don't allow employers to open up those positions to foreign applicants.

It's not what specific jobs the OPs daughter did or did not apply to, it's a systematic policy issue. Why are there jobs being opened in sectors where there are plenty of good domestic candidates?

Err this

This thread is a cringey mash up of “them foreigners coming over here and taking our jobs”, with “my daughters relatively niche / impractical qualifications aren’t leading to job offers falling at her feet”.

It's up to other countries to decide which sectors they need to open up to foreign applications. And most do, they do not allow people to come in and apply for jobs unless there aren't enough local workers.

When I was working outside of my own country, it was very difficult to get a work permit. There were certain sectors that were open because it was a general problem to fill jobs with locals - nurses being a prime example. And if a company could not fill a position, they could apply to open it up - they had to show they had taken certain steps and the qualifications they were looking for were necessary, and they weren't turning away local candidates.

If I go work in France or china or Zimbabwe, I assume they are looking out for their own local economy and workers. That doesn't mean my country will have to accept the same number of people from other places if it isn't justified in terms of our economy.

Okay, so the relevant parts of the immigration law would have been

• student visa
• graduate visa - that allows you to stay in the UK for 18 months - 2 years and work, with no recourse to public funds. After that you must either switch to a skilled worker route (or find another route) or leave the UK

Both of those are expensive applications, even without the overseas tuition fees factored in.

• Skilled worker visa - to be eligible they would have had to show that they had sufficient English (evidenced by getting a Masters taught at an English university) and that they had a job, from an employer who is a licensed sponsor, and that they will be paid the "going rate" for the job (and no less than £41,700).
• The 'skilled worker' part relates to how skilled the job is, not to how many people want to do it. A graduate level job is a skilled worker job; working in Pret is not.
• If French friend is an "events director" then her occupation code is 1139 and she would have to show a salary of over £70k.
• If Scandi friend is a "researcher otherwise unspecified" then her occupation code is 2162 and she would have to show a salary of over £43k.
• Neither of them are eligible for the "immigration salary list" which is what we used to call shortage occupations, in which we agree that it's okay to pay migrants 80% of the going rate because nobody local will do these jobs.
• However, if they are under the age of 26, and are recent graduates, then they can be paid 70% of the going rate, to reflect that they are an entry level salary (otherwise we expect a far higher salary for a recent foreign graduate than a recent British graduate, which would be grossly unfair to a recent British graduate).

I think what you might be recalling is the Resident Labour Market Test, where an employer had to show that they couldn't find a local applicant to take a job if they wanted to employ a foreign worker. That was applied to Tier 2 visas (workers) and was abolished when the Tier 2 visa was replaced by the Skilled Worker visa. The employer now has to show that there is a 'genuine vacancy' instead.

The abolition of the RLMT was partly because it was ineffective, and partly because with skilled workers the idea is that we want to attract the brightest into these positions. That has had the effect of pushing the competition up to the university-educated middle classes, but that was the effect that the government in power at the time intended.

The idea, enthusiastically supported on these pages IIRC, is that we only want vetted skilled migrants taking competitive well paid and highly taxed jobs, not unskilled migrants willing to undercut the local population by a considerable amount, topping up their poor pay with benefits and putting local unskilled people out of work.

Your daughter's friends will have a) interviewed well, because if they are from privileged enough backgrounds to study a Masters at overseas rates then they probably have done various unpaid internships AND they speak at least two languages AND they have global experience, and b) been highly motivated to get the jobs because their graduate visas would turn into pumpkins after a relatively short time.

You're not wrong to recognise that your daughter as a Masters educated woman seeking graduate work is competing at a global not a local level. You are wrong to think the answer is to blame her friends though.

On a sample size of 3

A historically unprecedented level of immigration is a problem.
And buying in skills from overseas rather than investing in training British workers is a problem.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to employ a candidate with skills you need. I am saying you should have to look for British candidates first.

My partner worked in the US for several years, he is very highly qualified (PhD), but his employer had to show that they couldn't recruit any American with his skills before they were allowed to sponsor his visa.

From Hell, and Hull, and Halifax, good Lord deliver me...

I might be completely wrong on this, but I would imagine this is designated a skilled worker in order to grease the visa wheels. Precisely because, as other PP have said, philosphers need to travel for conferences, teaching etc. An opera singer who will be performing in another country for a period of time will apply under the Creative Worker visa route. Your DDs friends are doing the right thing - travelling, gaining experience in different places, broadening their horizons. Could DD look at jobs abroad and do the same? Get experience in different academic institutions in the world? Especially ones that are well known for her chosen discipline. This is just a quick Google search, but Uni of Southern California is apparently well known for its meta-ethics faculty.

Yes, I did say the opposite of what I meant, I was posting quite late. I think the meaning is clear in any case.

You can have your migrant sentiments. This on one side. I am foreign and have felt severe sentiments like that from kitchen worker to volunteers to whomever on a more massive bully type scale but whatever also. My tummy needs to be filled, too, my CV enriched with all the amazing volunteering I have done in British institutions.

however and it a massive one:
these two girls do not work in philosophy studies, they applied for cultural positions and their own culture perhaps was more sought in these organisations, yes, on British soil.

It might not be fair and it might be a far cry from the posts of Tommy supporters but you have all the rights to feel exactly as you want and share what you want on a British led forum.

I believe your daughter will get a wonderful job somewhere and a wonderful British man, will have the nice house and car and all that and these foreign girls might not be even here after few years and having to keep paying for visas or thinking what their next step in life would be.

Why not live and let live

Is that you Donald?

but seriously. I'm aware of the issues re training posts for doctors but I don't really care if I have shared cultural understanding with a doctor treating me. I just need them to be good at their job. Vast majority of foreign trained doctors will have excellent English. The rest will be anecdotal stories that don't amount to much

If true that's crazy and no wonder the UK is seeing people turned off immigration.

I'm curious though, does your employer consider whether these candidates are likely to demand the same salary or benefits as a local person?

Oh, and as an addendum to my long post above, even if the Resident Labour Market Test had still been in place, it wouldn't have helped in this situation as Tier 4 students switching to Tier 2 visas were exempt from it!

I don't think anyone has blamed the friends.
We are blaming an immigration system that gives visas to foreign workers (highly privileged foreign workers, who are as you say at an advantage in the job market) so they can get entry level jobs in preference to native Brits.
There is no need for recruitment at this level to be 'global', in the way that recruiting a CEO for a major corporation may need to be global.

Seriously man, most countries do. British people have no right to work in other places. And most countries protect their own workforce.

The level of parochialism among the British middle classes is staggering sometimes.

We live in a global market economy.

The British jobs for British people thing is tired and outdated in the world we live in. Of course employers should be able to choose the best candiates for a job and not be hindered by nationality, so long as all legal obligations are being fulfilled.

As an aside, foreign work ethic, especially from countries like Germany and Japan, is often on another level to British work ethic. My partner and I both work in fields where we have an easy, direct comparison between the work ethic shown by different nationalities, and I also recall a TV program a few years back making direct comparisons. Work is taken far more seriously in some other nations.

Generalising, of course (because there are also hardworking Brits - my partner is one of them), but I have come across many more lazy British-born workers who don't understand that they cannot browse on their phones during work hours, do the bare minimum, use work as a social break, take frequent smoking breaks and max out their sick days every year and complain they lose out to people who were raised in cultures where hard work is expected as standard. The education system and the work culture in Britain do not reward hard work - they often punish it, through social exclusion and through giving additional work to those who get through their tasks in time, often relieving those who are too lazy to do their own from their responsibilities.

We both work for large organisations, and we have both seen this over and over.

I was raised in a culture where hard work was what you did and working in Britain was a bit of a culture shock in that regard. It, again, comes down to soft skills, which foreigners are often able to demonstrate at a higher level than British-born people who did not have to push themselves quite as hard.

I agree. DD2's degree was in English and Philosophy (no Masters) Her career is in journalism.

Have you considered the possibility that these girls are smarter and more hard working than your DD?

Or do you think British citizens should get jobs even if they can't do them?

It's bad economic policy for a nation.

It means local workers are more liley to end up on public support.

It depresses wages and other employee entitlements.

It discourages employers and the state from investing in good education and training.

Ultimately it also foments political unrest.

your degrees are just part of the equation. Her friends may have other skills which make them more employable.

Particularly after reading your second post I think its difficult to read too much into this situation as it’s such a tiny sample.