New 35K Salary Rule for Migrant Workers !!!!

[rdrp]

On the other hand, where no shortage exists - for example in IT, the minimum 35k doesn't even come close enough. If you are in IT and making less than 50k, you are undercutting the market.

Hi Settled_Now, it seems you have done a lots of research to say "less than 50K in IT sector is undercutting the market", can you please prove it?

I 'm in this industry for last 5years(in UK), i came across only fewer jobs advertised above 50K outside London, those jobs are either in Financial sector or for very experienced developers.

In my company i'm the highly paid non british worker in IT development(still fall below 50K), rest of my colleagues are well below your arbitray 50K, i am wondering if you provide more links to your statement it will be great helpful for everyone in this forum, otherwise please keep your arbitrary 50K just for yourself(sorry for being offensive to your reply, i just want to highlight it is better to be quieter than talking loads of rubbish with no logic).

[/quote]

I agree with this. I dont think all people from IT earn more than 50k. I am in the IT industry for over 13 years and in the UK for close to 5 years and managed to get past the 50k mark only few years ago. And I know that the median salary for my team members with 8 years of exp is around 42k. And most of them are British Nationals.

[xinl]

It's pretty hard to live in the UK on less than 35k - once you get that range you'll be quite aware of the cost of benefits to your net pay!

I'm sure you will be able to extend your leave until you get to that salary level.

At least it's possible to get ILR after 5 years.

In the US, the wait can easily be over 10 years!

I agree with 'settled_now', if people are "brightest and the best" and working in IT they should be able to get more than 50k (if they want to) with 5 years experience before settlement. But this rule shouldn't apply to the people who are already in UK as it is simply unfair to ask people leave after they invest 5 years in this country.

[settled_now]

I agree with 'settled_now', if people are "brightest and the best" and working in IT they should be able to get more than 50k (if they want to) with 5 years experience before settlement.

Thanks.

Unfortunately, in some cultures, doing IT for cheaper means you are just more clever or productive.

Having worked in many different countries in my IT career, I have always felt my duty as a foreigner is to do my best to earn MORE than the locals, rather than less. Bringing up their salaries certainly helps me receive a warm welcome rather than a negative one!

[settled_now]

I agree with this. I dont think all people from IT earn more than 50k. I am in the IT industry for over 13 years and in the UK for close to 5 years and managed to get past the 50k mark only few years ago. And I know that the median salary for my team members with 8 years of exp is around 42k. And most of them are British Nationals.

I am very happy to hear this. Higher salaries are a motivation to all! Motivate your colleagues to make more!

Maybe my world is different than others - I specialized early.

However, nobody is arguing that exceeding 35k in IT is difficult. Some foreign IT workers definitely do earn <35k. Not giving settlement to those individuals is quite correct in my eyes. Particularly when no shortage exists.

[katwmn6]

It's pretty hard to live in the UK on less than 35k

Sorry, but that is absolute rubbish. I have lived in Central London for 5+ years on <£35k (sometimes far less than that). All of my friends in Central London also make £20-28k tops and we are all doing just fine.

Many of the jobs that arguably contribute most to the UK (e.g. social services, education, health) are very poorly remunerated. Deciding that earning £35k+ makes you worthy of staying in the UK is arbitrary at best, cruel at worst.

[bond.boy203]

I am not on anybody's side here as I am also one of them who oppose this rule.

But One thing is for sure, this will at least stop indian IT firms exploiting the rule and paying pennies to Migrants as I have seen a case where the salary increased to 40K ( becuase of the rule change recently) for tier 1 extension...

[lokesh]

Those are average advertised salaries. I have never accepted a role at an advertised salary and know nobody who has. I don't see a single figure in the average advertised salaries under 35,000. Do you?

My question was for 50K and not for 35k, even if i consider 35K i could see plenty of jobs in Manchester,Liverpool.

I know of nobody with any experience working for under 50K - 35k is for somebody with 1 or 2 years experience.

Similiary i know many british people who are with 10yr experience and still fall under 35K to 50K

Does the UK really need ICT visa workers coming here and earning 24,000? If you're not making 50k after 5 years then let me suggest this is why. Probably many ICT visa workers sitting right around you.

I don;t understand why you dragged ICT here??....ICT has already been removed from the settlement rights. To answer your question, yes it is needed to run a business which got mutiple offices across the continent. ICT may have been misused for cheap labour but there always be pros and cons on every immigration route.

In my company i'm the only non british employee, so there is nothing related to ICT workers reducing our pay. I love my job, which suits my life style, afterall money can't buy everything.

Now, show me a shortage of IT workers and tell me why IT workers should come to this country and work for less than 35k when there clearly is no shortage?! :

If that was the case why they let us in?, do you think people earning 35K does not contribute to the society? My friend has recently been transferred from London to Blackpool from the same company which reduced his gross pay by 5K to 35K taking into consideration the living cost in Blackpool. Now do you reckon he is not eligible for ILR beacuse he lives in blackpool?

[ukisheadache]

I am not sure unless it is not official how people on this forum can speculate what the rules are going to be ?

Let's not forget it was Sun's first publication on Sunday and they obviously have made a great come back by touching sensitive topic like Immigration. I see it as Sun's publication attempt to attract more readers and seems for certain that they have attracted people if we keep going on about it.

How can Sun's 35K published report over rule MAC's recommendation scales between 31k-40k starting from 2016.

Lets not speculate and wait for an official update on UKBA.

Any thoughts?

[Drizz]

I am not sure unless it is not official how people on this forum can speculate what the rules are going to be ?

Let's not forget it was Sun's first publication on Sunday and they obviously have made a great come back by touching sensitive topic like Immigration. I see it as Sun's publication attempt to attract more readers and seems for certain that they have attracted people if we keep going on about it.

How can Sun's 35K published report over rule MAC's recommendation scales between 31k-40k starting from 2016.

Lets not speculate and wait for an official update on UKBA.

Any thoughts?

Agreed. People are always worried about changes and seek ways either to scare or assure themselves.

IMHO it would be a very BAD policy if they apply this rule to all existing immigrants. Settlement is a key consideration when migrating to another country. I am not sure will UK can withstand having 40,000+ or so skilled workers all leaving their jobs and returning to their country. Remember Settlement takes 5 years so theres bounded to be more than 40,000 migrants affected by this rule change.

Still you never know - Politics are short sighted affair and they can throw the baby out along with the bath water!

[Smam]

Hello Every One
Well I dont really want to argue on the income threshold of £35K or higher or lower.

All I wanted to say is that the Govt should have to mention this thing to us when issuing our Visas I believe when I got my WP there was no question of any such rules and the last moment changes makes you feel really frustrated about the fact that you haven't been told about it in the begning. They should have to mentioned this clearly in the Sun or in the Times article that this rule is for New Employees or is it going to be applicable to every single person regardless new or old.

I am talking from a very broader spectrum in my debate or in my arguments I have met many many IT professionals who started working in many reputable organizations like Cisco UK,Accenture UK and they were recruited by the employment agencies and even after getting good 5 years of experience they are still on the same salary threshold as they were 5 years a go as most of the these firms use the recruitment agencies and you wont get your salary reviewed if you are not working directly for that organization. The unfortunate thing is that I dont have any proof for my argument. I have met many Finance Professional Working in Glasgow and Edinburgh in invetment banks and they are on half of the salary package as compared to some of their counterparts doing the same job in London in the Financial Sector.

My only point here is that for the Govt that JUST MAKE THINGS CLEAR TO EVERY BODY AT THE BEGNING not at the end of their journey.

Many thanks for all of your replies.

[settled_now]

If that's your only point, then you don't have one!

The UKBA makes the rules and makes it clear they are subject to change at any time:
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas ... ettlement/

"The Immigration Rules are subject to change, and you must meet all the requirements of the rules that are in place at the time when you apply for settlement."

[ban.s]

Could I ask anyone who has seen anything that would seem to indicate that this would apply to people with EC prior to April 2011 to please highlight the source.

It will be interesting to see the implementation of the new proposed threshold. As per the earlier communications any new change will be effective from april 2016 i.e. applicants that received EC on/after april 2011. There were also reports that it would be legally difficult to backdate such rules (in view of various previous judgements against UKBA), so new rules will only be effective on the date of the formal announcement.
However, as the previous post states - "The Immigration Rules are subject to change, and you must meet all the requirements of the rules that are in place at the time when you apply for settlement."
So let's wait and watch!

[Smam]

If that's your only point, then you don't have one!

The UKBA makes the rules and makes it clear they are subject to change at any time:
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas ... ettlement/

"The Immigration Rules are subject to change, and you must meet all the requirements of the rules that are in place at the time when you apply for settlement."

Then I believe if that's the case then the UK govt will turn back tomorrow and say that due to our so called un controable Immigration numbers we would like to take some of the ILR back or we would like to cancel few British Citizen ships recently issued as we didnt thought about the fact at the time if issuing them. Same as the fact that we didnt thought before issuing the WP.

What would you like to say "settled_now" on that. As it was previously mentioned in this forum discussion that the UK Constitution is Unwritten and can be change eaisly.

[settled_now]

No need to jump on me about the rules. I don't make them.

As an immigrant, I need to abide by them too - including changes. Two good examples of immigration rules affecting my livelihood:

1) ILR
- First entered the UK in 2000 ( but left shortly thereafter ) ILR was 4 years and 90 days per year ( 360 days ) absence allowed
- Entered the UK again in 2006 - 220 days allowed at this point ( I thought it was still 90 days per year - didn't keep up with the changes - only my fault )
- 1 year before ILR, I learned that 180 days absences were allowed I was very very close and turned down a very nice role that required frequent travel ( stayed unemployed to avoid the absences and qualify for ILR )

2) Naturalization
- only allowed 90 days out of country this year
- turned down an extremely good role the first week of January that required ongoing travel to Central Europe ( best money I would have made in my time in the UK )

I probably could have gotten away with the taking the first job - maybe not. The second one, no chance. The rules are strict - I admit they don't make it easy!

Complaining doesn't change the rules - so I don't. I just do my best to work with them.

[settled_now]

btw. Immigration is a parliamentary matter in the UK - not a constitutional one!

[hsmpengineer]

mr settled now i think you have now made your point so please kindly leave it there and let those genuinely affected and concerned about this matter continue the discussion from a similar perspective. im sure you understand where i'm coming from. cheers

[push]

No need to jump on me about the rules. I don't make them.

As an immigrant, I need to abide by them too - including changes. Two good examples of immigration rules affecting my livelihood:

1) ILR
- First entered the UK in 2000 ( but left shortly thereafter ) ILR was 4 years and 90 days per year ( 360 days ) absence allowed
- Entered the UK again in 2006 - 220 days allowed at this point ( I thought it was still 90 days per year - didn't keep up with the changes - only my fault )
- 1 year before ILR, I learned that 180 days absences were allowed I was very very close and turned down a very nice role that required frequent travel ( stayed unemployed to avoid the absences and qualify for ILR )

2) Naturalization
- only allowed 90 days out of country this year
- turned down an extremely good role the first week of January that required ongoing travel to Central Europe ( best money I would have made in my time in the UK )

I probably could have gotten away with the taking the first job - maybe not. The second one, no chance. The rules are strict - I admit they don't make it easy!

Complaining doesn't change the rules - so I don't. I just do my best to work with them.

I hope you recognise that this topic discusses the concerns and worries of members who are potentially affected by the proposed changes. I do not understand how debating the justification of the proposed "level of threshold" benefits such people. I am not trying to silence you, but clearly see this discussion getting more personal and going tangent if the reason behind the original discussion is not kept in mind while posting. Can advise more measured expression of opinion therefore.

[mayana]

No need to jump on me about the rules. I don't make them.

As an immigrant, I need to abide by them too - including changes. Two good examples of immigration rules affecting my livelihood:

1) ILR
- First entered the UK in 2000 ( but left shortly thereafter ) ILR was 4 years and 90 days per year ( 360 days ) absence allowed
- Entered the UK again in 2006 - 220 days allowed at this point ( I thought it was still 90 days per year - didn't keep up with the changes - only my fault )
- 1 year before ILR, I learned that 180 days absences were allowed I was very very close and turned down a very nice role that required frequent travel ( stayed unemployed to avoid the absences and qualify for ILR )

2) Naturalization
- only allowed 90 days out of country this year
- turned down an extremely good role the first week of January that required ongoing travel to Central Europe ( best money I would have made in my time in the UK )

I probably could have gotten away with the taking the first job - maybe not. The second one, no chance. The rules are strict - I admit they don't make it easy!

Complaining doesn't change the rules - so I don't. I just do my best to work with them.

I hope you recognise that this topic discusses the concerns and worries of members who are potentially affected by the proposed changes. I do not understand how debating the justification of the proposed "level of threshold" benefits such people. I am not trying to silence you, but clearly see this discussion getting more personal and going tangent if the reason behind the original discussion is not kept in mind while posting. Can advise more measured expression of opinion therefore.

I completely support your comment pls allow those that are affected to comment, lets keep all exagerated job offers in europe to ourselves, the issue now why are they always changing the rule.
settled_now I wish you best of luck

[settled_now]

Why are they always changing the rule?

They can. And they state just that on their website under settlement!

[santoshganpath]

Seems like Tier 1 is becoming "Tears 1"

[settled_now]

[timarli]

If that's your only point, then you don't have one!

The UKBA makes the rules and makes it clear they are subject to change at any time:
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas ... ettlement/

"The Immigration Rules are subject to change, and you must meet all the requirements of the rules that are in place at the time when you apply for settlement."

That statement has been there for 1 year only.

[ukswus]

No need to jump on me about the rules. I don't make them.

2) Naturalization
- only allowed 90 days out of country this year
- turned down an extremely good role the first week of January that required ongoing travel to Central Europe ( best money I would have made in my time in the UK )

I probably could have gotten away with the taking the first job - maybe not. The second one, no chance. The rules are strict - I admit they don't make it easy!

Even if your travel in the last year was for more than 180 days, but less than 450 days overall (which seems likely to be the case), you could have gotten away with your absences for occupational reasons, as specified here:

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/briti ... cesfromuk/

[arsenal49]

btw. Immigration is a parliamentary matter in the UK - not a constitutional one!

>implying UK has a single core constitution to begin with!

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituti ... ed_Kingdom

[raykau]

Will these affect people who are under old WorkPermit from 2008 or only who will be coming into the new PBS from 2011/2012? Can somebody advice please?

Thanks