THERE MAY YET BE HOPE....

[LMcD]

I was right about Ian Austin.

He's now left Labour but has not joined the anti Brexit group because he's a pro Brexit Blairite.

It could almost look like we are witnessing the end of the phenomenon that is the political party.

But I doubt that we are.

…and wouldn't that be lovely (unless, of course, you're a party manager/whip/other kind of discipline enforcer)?

[Lat-Literal]

…and wouldn't that be lovely (unless, of course, you're a party manager/whip/other kind of discipline enforcer)?

Yes, in a way, although voters want simplicity. If they were faced with a choice of a bunch of independents who were not there for just one policy, they would be asking themselves "is this person really a Labour sort of person or a Conservative?" and then "what sort of Labour and what sort of Conservative?". I'm not sure that most folk would be bothered to do it.

"The government has proposed that a minimum salary of £30,000 will be required to grant a ‘skilled worker’ visa. This salary threshold would exclude many technicians, particularly those working outside London; Russell Group data indicates that approximately 27 per cent of skilled technicians at UK universities earn £25,000 or less."

There seems to be a tendency among a lot of people, at whatever grade, to feel that whatever they earn they are paid either 'averagely' or not very well for what they do. So £30,000 is a 'modest to low income' - which it may be if you are 50 with a lot of experience. There is no real understanding of how many others fall below the income that they earn, no matter how skilled they are.

Isn't this subject to review?

It makes no sense in my opinion to base it on anything other than needed skills irrespective of income.

Plus I couldn't be happy with a policy that favoured the better off to the exclusion of everyone else.

[MrGongGong]

Then again, who needs experts and/or scientists? https://eandt.theiet.org/content/art...-paul-nurse%2F

What does he know?
And anyway he is only a "nurse" not a real saw bones like Foxy

[MrGongGong]

"The government has proposed that a minimum salary of £30,000 will be required to grant a ‘skilled worker’ visa. This salary threshold would exclude many technicians, particularly those working outside London; Russell Group data indicates that approximately 27 per cent of skilled technicians at UK universities earn £25,000 or less."

There seems to be a tendency among a lot of people, at whatever grade, to feel that whatever they earn they are paid either 'averagely' or not very well for what they do. So £30,000 is a 'modest to low income' - which it may be if you are 50 with a lot of experience. There is no real understanding of how many others fall below the income that they earn, no matter how skilled they are.

This (more or less) excludes most musicians / composers.
And anyway do we really want the government deciding which of our skills are "needed" ?
(hang onto your passport Richard, you might be needing it )

[french frank]

Isn't this subject to review?

Possibly, but the salary level is unlikely to go DOWN.

"You’ll usually need to be paid at least £30,000 per year or the ‘appropriate rate’ for the job you’re offered - whichever is higher."

https://www.gov.uk/tier-2-general/eligibility

As I understand it, the review is [was?] about the cap on numbers, not the salary level.

"The UK can only approve the visas of 20,700 highly skilled workers per year, and has hit the monthly maximum limit for the last five consecutive months. The income-based method used to decide which applicants succeed meant that, in April [2018] , no one earning under £50,000 a year was offered a visa."

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/home-secretary-javid-announces-review-of-tier-2-immigration-system/

[Dave2002]

What does he know?
And anyway he is only a "nurse" not a real saw bones like Foxy

In his case nominative determinism has no play.

[Lat-Literal]

Possibly, but the salary level is unlikely to go DOWN.

"You’ll usually need to be paid at least £30,000 per year or the ‘appropriate rate’ for the job you’re offered - whichever is higher."

https://www.gov.uk/tier-2-general/eligibility

As I understand it, the review is [was?] about the cap on numbers, not the salary level.

"The UK can only approve the visas of 20,700 highly skilled workers per year, and has hit the monthly maximum limit for the last five consecutive months. The income-based method used to decide which applicants succeed meant that, in April [2018] , no one earning under £50,000 a year was offered a visa."

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/ho...ration-system/

The problem is with student numbers.

In 2016-2017, there were nearly 150,000 from China, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan. A further 60,000 were from the US, India, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria. There were many more from other countries. In fact, the total number of non-UK students studying in the UK in 2016-17 was 442,375 which is absolutely ludicrous when the figure you quote for skilled workers is less than one twenty-second of that number. 42% of students studying at postgraduate level in the UK were from outside the EU and UK. There are now almost as many Chinese students as British students working on Masters degrees in England. We receive more Chinese students than we receive from the 27 countries of the EU. This is the new corporatized version of academia running wild, often on the basis of who has become its major funders. I do not support the specific details of the employment caps you mention but they are largely there as compensation. Compensation that is necessary because the university sector is contemptuous about broader employment needs and nation-orientated targets.

Slice heavily into higher education's neoliberal profit making overdrive and we will be getting somewhere sensible on figures in the round.