BBC in a tweet: "Immigration: No visas for low-skilled workers, government says"
The BBC is outright wrong about what the UK policy statement actually says. The phrase "low-skilled" is used once in the statement:
"We will not introduce a general low-skilled or temporary work route."*
That is immediately followed by this reference to "cheap labour":
"We need to shift the focus of our economy away from a reliance on cheap labour from Europe and instead concentrate on investment in technology and automation. Employers will need to adjust."*
The phrase "cheap labour from Europe" is bigoted wording. What the government should have said is "low-wage labour".
And, AFAICT, there is no explanation for where that "investment" is going to come from.
* The UK's points-based immigration system: policy statement
19 February 2020
That is linked in the article.
1
Immigration should be limited to the extent of 'reaping the benefits'. The only way is to restrict 'immigrats' to a 'foreign employment status' or 'foreign business status'. And there should be legal restrictions as to how much of 'earnings' can be channeled back to the 'home country' and to how much 'assets ownership' can be asserted by 'foreigners with permit to an occupation'.
1
I'm just waiting to see obese, habitual benefits recipients English underclass lining up to pick lettuce and strawberries. Also, is there research showing that immigrants will move, for USD 33k without potential for family reunification program to a xenophobic country that's already deporting its citizens? More worrying is that without the City, the service sector is driving the so-called full employment mantra. In about five years, look forward to bad food, dreadful services, more racism, and people living lives in different time zones in one nation England.
2
Here is one argument that I hear all the time that is so asinine it blows my mind. It's the one that goes like "well no citizen works picking agricultural products even at $20/hr, therefore the only solution is to import people who dont know they are getting ripped off."
Here is my response to that. Citizens line up by the dozen to get one coal mining job. Coal mining literally kills you yet American and British citizens line up to get those jobs all day. Why? Because they pay $40/hr with benefits!
Maybe picking strawberries outside in bad weather while being exposed to pesticides is worth $40/hr with benefits too! Has anybody considered that?!
I mean, if you work outside and tear up your hands and get sunburnt and exposed to pesticides maybe $20/hr is a rip off and Americans know it. Maybe paying an extra $1 for strawberries would allow citizens to get paid a fair wage for work that leads to an early death? I mean, liberals already pay $5 more per box of strawberries just to make sure its organic. Why wont they pay a $1 more so citizens of America would be paid enough to work at a job that literally kills you? They do it in coal already, why not agriculture?
3
"Because they [coal-mining jobs] pay $40/hr with benefits!"
Not to dispute your main point, but there are a variety of jobs in coal-mining, and the pay depends on the job. Here is an extensive list from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics:
May 2018 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates
NAICS 212100 - Coal Mining
https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_212100.htm
"Why wont they pay a $1 more so citizens of America would be paid enough to work at a job [coal-mining] that literally kills you?"
That's an oversimplification. Some people don't want to buy coal at any price, because energy production from coal is environmentally harmful.
However, some people DO pay more for so-called "fair trade" products, including fair trade bananas, fair trade cocoa, and fair trade coffee.
The Times has published several articles related to "fair trade". See, for example.
Chobani Turns to Fair-Trade Program to Help Struggling Dairy Industry
By Michael Corkery
July 2, 2019
New York Times
A web search for "fair trade" will find more info.
2
Sounds good. Liberals think this could never happen, but my guess is that companies will be forced to actually raise wages for low skilled workers when they cant just be replaced everytime they ask for more money.
I mean, it sounds crazy right? Like, if I had a business and there wasnt a constant stream of low skilled people to exploit, I would raise wages and benefits to attract workers? To a liberal this must sound absolutely insane. I mean, the only way to have wage growth is to keep pumping millions of low skilled workers into a country, right?
It's just funny how the left views immigration as this perfect thing that never has a downside. And then they wonder why inequality has gotten worse and why wages have stagnated for 40 years.
2
Ms. Patel announced late today that all 8.4 “economically inactive” workers will complete training by next week, followed by their transition into new careers assembling $200,000.00-$2M+ McLaren sports cars. There should be a huge domestic market for the cars, given the enormous universal increase in British wages that will occur once those pesky “furriners” have been expelled...
2
It is outrageous to call nurses and care-givers "low skilled' (or to compensate them as such.) Good luck trying to get any service in British hotels in future (and don't fall ill, the NHS is sinking fast at it is..).
2
"It is outrageous to call nurses and care-givers "low skilled' ..."
The UK policy statement focuses on salaries, and nurses are cited as an example:
"Likewise, a nurse wishing to come to the UK on a salary of £22,000 would still be able to enter the UK on the basis that the individual would be working in a shortage occupation, provided it continues to be designated in shortage by the MAC."*
And "low-skilled" is mentioned only once:
"We will not introduce a general low-skilled or temporary work route."*
"... (or to compensate them as such.)"
That's a completely separate subject. The UK proposal does not set salaries.
NB: "MAC" means "Migration Advisory Committee".
* The UK's points-based immigration system: policy statement
19 February 2020
That is linked in the article.
Part of the problem in the UK ( and the US) is the culture of driving down wages of the lowest skilled workers to minimum wage or less if they can get away with it. Yet, those at the top CEO's etc, think it is ok to take 100 or more times what the low paid workers get paid. They also think it is ok to take a big bonus even if the company is making a loss.
Things have steadily got worse since the UK joined the EU with a never ending pool of cheap labour from eastern Europe. Employer's have actively advertised in Europe and bypassed those in the UK.
Hopefully, the new immigration system will change the culture and force employers to make work opportunities more attractive to the resident workforce.
4
Every successive government in Britain has made immigration a priority (supposedly) but have done little in the way of investing in the talent pipeline. So we have people coming out of schools virtually illiterate, very little desire to continue to remain in education beyond what is required and high cost spent on degrees that make no sense to me (e.g. fashion studies).
It’s interesting to read the comments from the minister urging employers to up skill people and pay a fair wage(as they should), but I’d like to hear what the government plans to do to ensure we have an employable workforce: apprenticeship programs, tertiary education.
Employers can and should pay a fair wage but the reasons we as a country are dependent on immigrant labour is because Britons either don’t want ‘low paid’ jobs or for the better paying jobs, have to compete with stiff competition from other countries.
If the motivation is to promote British industry longer term then the solution has to be more than a point system.
3
Can someone explain to me how an economy can be near full employment when there are over 8 million people who are "economically inactive"?
Where is the difference between that and being unemployed?
Especially when 2 million of these people say that they would actually like to work.
This again shows to me how numbers can be twisted by politicians by simply redefining the parameters. The pols know that the vast majority of voters will believe anything the tabloids are telling them and that they don't nearly have the attention span to detect the fraud and manipulation.
6
'... when there are over 8 million people who are "economically inactive"?'
The article should have explained that. Here is the official definition:
"Economic inactivity: People not in employment who have not been seeking work within the last 4 weeks and/or are unable to start work within the next 2 weeks."
That's from the ons.gov.uk web site, which I found by doing a web search. Presumably, the Times's reporters and editors know how to do web searches.
".. how numbers can be twisted by politicians by simply redefining the parameters."
In this case, it would seem that your beef is with the terminology, although "ONS" means "Office for National Statistics", so you are half right. :-)
1
@OHK
Thanks for providing the definition, but I still believe that this term is just another way of sugar coating a bad economic situation. I surmise that many of these people are disenchanted by what they perceive are hopeless prospects in a dysfunctional economy or the work that is available is beneath them.
Like harvest work in the fields. They prefer the dole queue to getting their hands dirty. But that may have to change now after Brexit.
1
See what happens on a planet full of human beings all just trying to survive yet penned into artificial boundaries? Wealth is merely theft from someone else.
1
It again fascinates me that this is not the liberal case study for what must happen. Populations must stabilize and then decrease, for reasons of climate and habitat. Expectations that every possible good and service be available cheaply have to come up against the fact that that relies on the first world, which doesn't train enough high-skilled laborers or pay low-skilled laborers enough, only achieves it by leveraging second- and third-world education systems and labor pools. Close borders to immigration, adapt markets and education, provide adjusted foreign assistance (a first-world debt), and stop mass migrations.
2
As it was told, both my (now deceased) mother (born in Rochdale, UK) and (very properly British) grandmother illegally immigrated from Canada to the US in the trunk of a car...
3
"[some ancestors] illegally immigrated from Canada to the US in the trunk of a car..."
So does that mean you were born in the US and therefore automatically became a US citizen?
@OHK
Yes, but several decades after they became naturalized citizens and my mom married a career USAF officer (ex-POW) at the onset of WW II.
1
@OHK
Yes, but several decades after they became naturalized citizens and my mom married a career USAF officer (ex-German POW) prior to his departure for England at the onset of WW II.
Nice try, OHK...
Nothing like having agricultural labor linked with low skills. This seems to happen again and again. Its an ignorant statement and one even a presidential candidate is taking heat for - yet here, the NY Times, puts it front and center in their article adding to the delusion that farm work is low skilled.
If you eat everyday and dont die after the meal, you can thank the skilled workers who brought you the food. Imagine that on a global scale. Feeding billions, successfully. Lets talk about the skills it takes. And so the UK will learn, as will the US as we move toward the same policies. It takes a lot more than just hands and feet to make it all work.
6
"Nothing like having agricultural labor linked with low skills."
Not "linked", but a statement of fact. Picking cabbages, as in the photo, requires no training that can't be provided on the job.
What you really should be fretting about is the machinery and chemicals that can harm field workers. And if you look carefully at the photo, you will indeed see machinery.
2
This is EXACTLY what we should be doing here in the U.S. Bravo!
9
Let's have a tourist industry they said. Britain has so much to offer tourists and it will provide employment for our people.
Tourists arrive and to their delight find that the workers in the tourist hot spots are just as foreign as they are.
This would be tragic except that the Brits themselves think tourist trade jobs are for immigrants anyway.
Cue transition to farce.
6
At some point the ponzi scheme of endless imported cheap labor will have to stop, and then British employers will have to pay fair wages for those jobs that Britons supposedly won't take. As it is in Japan, where somehow work mysteriously gets done without a huge volume of low-skill immigration.
127
@Jeff
Good. I am willing to pay more.
19
@Greg Actually the work doesn't get done because there are fewer people demanding fewer goods and services so the work becomes unnecessary. It's one of those things that is repeated over and over unquestioned even if a little research would show it to be false, like that the 2nd Amendment protects us from government tyranny or that the Chevy Nova sold poorly in Latin America because its name translated as "Doesn't Go".
9
@Greg
Per Wikipedia only 20% of Japan's land is suitable for cultivation, and the agricultural economy is highly subsidized. Agriculture in the United Kingdom uses 69% of the country's land area.
Apples and oranges.
12
Good.
Now UK businesses need to increase their wages and salaries to attract British workers.
We should do the same in America.
98
@John They won't. Fewer people means fewer workers but it also mean fewer consumers.
13
@John Who in America is going to work from sun up to sun down picking fruits and vegetables, picking the eggs and milking the cows, feeding the pigs and cattle not to mention all the meat processing plants that employ immigrant labor? No America is willing to do the work even at $20.00 an hour since there are many jobs openings in Iowa for that type of labor and it goes unfilled except when immigrants move in and do the work.
42
@Jacquie
There are supply and demand curves for labor and where those two curves intersect sets the price for labor. Instead, businesses today set the price of low wage labor artificially low and then claim no one will do the job. Supply and demand tells us that the businesses need to respond by raising wages, not encouraging an endless supply of recent immigrants to undertake their poor paying jobs for the cheapest.
16
The world has a big problem: we're producing people faster than we're producing jobs, and much of the population growth is in the poorest areas with the fewest jobs. And so the only hope for many is to migrate. Many of the migrants have an unparalleled eagerness to work at anything that will keep them alive.
59
Home Secretary Priti Patel says the new system would “attract the brightest and the best from around the globe, boosting the economy and our communities, and unleash this country’s full potential.”
Who is she kidding? The brightest and the best will RUN from England and the U.K.!!
56
@Susan Baughman
And some day, all those self-entitled Britons will wake up and those really smart non-white people with non-British names and accents (“brightest and best”) will have displaced them.
Oh well, there is always agricultural work for the lazy or undereducated segments of British “society”...
8
@Susan Baughman
Priti Patel also conveniently ignores the fact that her own parents would have not been allowed into Britain if the point system she advocates would have been used to evaluate them.
She suffers from the clarence thomas syndrome:
take advantage of all the resources you can but deny them to others who come after you.
10
@Susan Baughman Right? They act like they're better than everyone and then pretend that the greatest people in the world will come running...for what? The hassle of their horrible immigration system? Bad weather? The misery of commuting in London? Obscene rents in anywhere that isn't a complete dump? Serious social problems? The country is so deluded it blows my mind.
11
"U.K.’s New Immigration Rules Will Restrict Low-Skilled Workers"
Europeans, or their own?
3
Britain is just like the US, but maybe worse. Britons just don't want to work, really, and it's fairly understandable because their salaries are so low.
Nurses in the NHS start out at less than 30k USD, a tiny sum. No wonder they can't get British nurses and have to poach staff from other countries, the reward being a visa, not the salary. Until Britain raises salaries, cuts benefits, and gets rid of their feudal land system, there will be little incentive for Britons to take the terribly low-paid jobs in social care, medicine, agriculture, and construction.
23
@jz
I'm no high falutin' economist, but I wonder if by turning off the spigot of cheap labor into Britain that will give low-wage workers more leverage to demand higher salaries and improved benefits?
6
The article says “ Under new post-Brexit rules starting next January, migrants will have to meet a number of criteria to qualify for a work visa, including specific skills and an ability to speak English.”
What a great idea! Why can’t we do this in the US?
I assume the migrants to the UK must also show they are unlikely to become public charges (go on welfare), too, which also makes sense.
14
If only people (I mean everyone on this planet) would take the time to see how alike we are, as opposed to finding differences. For example, when I hear someone say that person is "wierd", I substitute the phrase "different than me". We are much more alike than we are different. So, act like it. Be incusive, not exclusive. This is what I think, as well as what I do. It is not hard to do.
6
"Kansas". I think that says it all.
7
I can’t wait to see images of Boris Johnson washing his own dishes, growing and picking his own produce, sweeping the street outside 10 Downing, etc.
Who knows- perhaps they can train Corgis to do all the manual labor that Britons consider “beneath them”...
9
It should not go unnoticed that this policy was rolled out by the home secretary, Priti Patel, who intuition tells me is not native to the British Isles.
9
@Mike
She was born in London.
9
@Steve Paradis
But, her parents weren't which isn't relevant, except it points out her hypocritical attitude toward immigrants.
"Brightest and the best..." hahahahahaaaa
Why would best and brightest come when they will be scorned by a large part of UK population because they have darker skin than John Bull?
For US equivalents see Nicky Haley and Steven Miller, who are actually even more loathsome than Patel
11
@Mike
Her parents are immigrants who would not have been allowed in if they had to meet the criteria of the point system that she is advocating.
5
The problem was British employers pressured the government to open up its labor markets to Eastern block countries, because they saw it for what it was, an opportunity to get people from economically depressed countries at low wages, and that is exactly what happened. It wasn't just low skill jobs, the same thing happened, much like with H1B visas in the US, with higher skilled jobs, trained people from Bulgaria and Romania and Poland and so forth came to the UK at wages well below what a native born UK citizen was getting, and it depressed wages in tech as well, all to the merriment of corporations. When you have countries that in part because of the Soviet background that has trained skilled workers, but an economy that can't offer them anything, this is what happens. The difference after Brexit is that while they give preference to skilled workers immigrating to the UK, they also can limit the numbers and make sure that wages aren't depressed, with the 2004 policy it was open borders and open season on wages.
13
@music observer
Unfortunately we now have a Government in the UK who does NOT care about workers rights and least of all wages.
The government apparently does not care about business either as I am sure that any business that depends on tariff free trade with the EU is currently scrambling for an exit to Ireland or some other EU country.
Just like Trump we have a government based on bluff, bluster and lies, that will make the majority of the population poorer.
13
@music observer
I don't have much sympathy with British business. We used to have examples of bus companies needing to recruit drivers, advertising and hiring in Eastern Europe. Successful applicants were told to report for work on a date in the UK. I know the Brexiters have an ugly look about them but an awful lot of them just want to know; is it a market place, or a country?
8
The UK government is responding to voter preferences, but what it is proposing is nothing more than mimicking the Canadian model. Canada has a points based system that grants preference to the educated with needed skills, and those that are fluent in English or French. In other words, immigrants likely to integrate into society most easily.
That does not mean that Canada does not allow any family immigration; just that it is a much smaller % of immigration than in the US. They also allow relatively more legal immigration than the US, but they have a much smaller illegal immigrant problem. And Canada is generous in its acceptance of refugees. I wish the US would adopt this model and I hope the UK includes the refugee part.
12
“they have a much smaller illegal immigrant problem”
Well...yes. And also, Canada’s only land border is with the United States. Yes, these policies sound great - but you’ll pardon me if I’m fairly confident that that lone geographical fact might be the single biggest reason for their “success” in that particular area...and unless we pick up the U.S. and move it somewhere else, an immigration policy that does not account for or have to grapple with the reality of wide-scale illegal immigration in one way or another - its costs, benefits, effects on wages, cultural backlash, security issues, political impact, etc - is not a “model” the United States can strictly follow.
6
@luxembourg
The real reason that Canada doesn't have an illegal immigration problem is that it strives to make everyone legal.
Don't have the skills requirements to meet the points system? Too poor to buy an investor visa, but still doing well? Buy yourself admittance at a university, or a private career college (i.e. diploma mill) if you're poorer.
Still can't make it in? No worries, you can come on a temporary work visa to work menial jobs. Employers get those approvals rubber stamped in 2 weeks and don't have to hire costly lawyers to do labor market assessments or fill out hundreds of pages of paperwork.
Once your temporary work visa is close to running out, just pay an immigration consultant $30K. For that you can buy yourself a "manager" job making sandwiches for Subway. The government approves your permanent resident status because hey, you have a permanent managerial job.
1
As in the US, there are many unskilled citizens who have the excuse of unemployment and wages having been undercut. There will be more and more due to advances in technology. All nations must adapt to these obvious realities - Canada did years ago and have seen only positive outcomes from those changes.
While the immigration of entrepreneurs, high skilled talents make every nation better, most nations have now understood that they must address the issue in line with the nation's needs.
Denmark's socialists won their election last summer only after reversing their position on mass migration and immigration that they now see have caused great damage since 2015 to the social system they took decades to build for their citizens.
This is not unique to the UK, but still not being addressed in the same terms in the US.
10
The UK under the Johnson Government is moving to a hard Brexit with the EU, with their ludicrous negotiating position, which will mean that the UK will leave the Customs union and the single market, with no Trade Deal.
The UK as an economy only has 10% manufacturing jobs. The anti - business position of this government has already meant that many financial companies and banks have already relocated to Ireland. The aerospace industry and car industry will also likely leave the country as their business will be subject to massive EU tariffs.
So who do the Tories think will want to come here?
It is much more likely that there will be a massive brain drain from the UK, which is evidenced in the vast number of people that have already obtained an Irish passport since the Brexit vote in 2016.
12
Gee, maybe employers will have to increase wages and/or be more accommodating to low income workers to fill these jobs.
13
The US should be watching Britain carefully, much of what Trump wants to do is being previewed by Boris Johnson. We have an opportunity to learn if we have the eyes to see.
5
In old posts I stated they would initially face hard times with Brexit but would triumph in the end. The Coronavirus exposed even more the problems with the global economy and the need for nations to be self reliant. It also exposed the rampant poverty in China and other so called emerging countries. All the global economy did was make the world an even bigger playground for the rich while they move poor desperate people around like chess pieces. Immigrants from poor corrupt countries need to stay home and make changes while also assessing how they got into such a mess.
This is the future, there are finite resources. Democrats need to understand this or they will be as shocked as some were by the victories of Boris Johnson. Take heed and stop with the sanctuary nonsense.
7
@Hellen
A zero sum world ends with everyone losing.
5
@Hellen
OK, Hellen- it’s your turn to go out and pick the crops- I slaughtered the cows yesterday.
If we are to be “self-reliant”, in your words, let’s start by relocating all U.S. military forces to the continental United States, and reducing their size by 50 percent.
5
Sick of employers complaining—they just have to raise wages. It’s quite simple.
29
I wait with baited breath to see how many Britons race toward the jobs that immigrants 'stole' from them. Probably the same count as Americans who raced toward manual labor in food processing here. Which is to say: none.
14
@dortress
There is the possibility of doing what other nations do.
Unemployment and other benefits are given so long as people prove they are really looking for work or being trained and accept any suitable jobs that are offered .... or benefits stop.
This has worked quite well in Nordic countries and Switzerland.
3
@Si Seulement Voltaire The same countries that provide health care to their people, regardless of whether they're employed or not. Oddly enough, if you go even a fraction over the limit here, we cut you from food and healthcare.
I wonder if that's a disincentive for people who are in jobs that don't offer either?
4
@dortress They'll come if employers raise wages, which they'll have to in the UK. Right now American farmers benefit from a huge illegal population so they can keep wages low.
4
Good. Send the globalists and neo-liberals packing before they do anymore harm to these societies.
13
'To a chorus of complaints from employers ...'
And to cheers from overall population, as expressly demonstrated a few weeks ago at the elections.
Good or bad, that thing with the low-skilled workers, that is what UK wants. Respect that.
17
Maybe, employers will be more inclined to keep on perfectly good and highly skilled british workers over the age of 50 rather than consigning them to the scrap heap.
59
@NP
Right. Because they all want to be underpaid nurses and home care workers. Not so much.
2
The UK and the US have a significant aging population that will require an ever increasing large workforce to staff nursing homes. These are awful jobs, often run by operators with every incentive to have minimum staff, care, and benefits.
While visiting aging relatives in facilities in a major city, where the level of care was passable and still expensive, nearly every staff member, from entry level to doctors, was an immigrant. If these hardworking individuals were swept away, as a significant part of our population dreams, these thankless roles are not going to be filled by native born citizens. No one with better options wants to clean up human waste, deal with strangers with dementia, or face death on a daily basis.
The aging population will have few good options, but while the wealthy will be able to buy their way into decent care, most English and Americans can count on being warehoused in a minimum care location with a call button that doesn't work.
30
Is the issue
Give us your poor... yearning to breathe free
Or
Who’s going to change my diaper in a few years?
1
@SeattleGuy
The future will see the aging population housed in their homes not warehouses posing as nursing homes. Technology will allow vital stats and medicine to be delivered without office visits. Enough with the scare tactics.
There will be a temporary blip with a large percentage of elderly boomers but it will decline along with declining birth rates. Unskilled immigrants and even skilled immigrants are fleeing their countries because they are overpopulated with limited opportunities. They should deal with their own problems they created.
6
@SeattleGuy
The ageing population rationale is a losing one. A serpent biting its tail....
How many more will be "needed" when current numbers reach retirement?
3
UK used to have Highly Skilled Migrant Work Visa where you could sponsor yourself (through 2010 at least). Now this one is similar but less Highly Skilled and no need for a uni degree.
Plus it's an effective way to minimize the black market cash jobs as well. One must declare one's job and income (all of it hopefully) when getting the visa.
Didn't they also get rid of Citizenship by Birth a few decades ago due to perverse incentives and behaviors.
Maybe they can start a robust Temp Worker Visa program (sans wives and kids) for unskilled workers. All above board of course.
6
Wow!!
The British is now getting it. The immigration system that requires points for skills and language for merited entrance. They will now, instead, invest in "their citizens" on the lower economic level. They have chosen to not allow open unfettered borders. Not bad.
39
@DAWGPOUND HAR
“...points for skills and language...”
This from a person writing, “The British is now getting it.”
smh
8
@John E. You get the point though, right?
7
@DAWGPOUND HAR And they will never invest in citizens on the lower rungs. Keeping them where they are is the British way.
4
The main cause of Brexit was immigration. The English are extremely class conscious and xenophobic. Having lived and worked in the London environment for four years, I witnessed first hand the English superiority complex. The English look down on the Welsh and the Irish with great distain. They tolerate the Scots, barely. They truly despise their Indian, Pakistani, Chinese and Caribbean Island inhabitants, who migrated to their isle with the collapse of Empire.
With deep seated feelings of primacy, the English wanted first and foremost to halt the freedom of movement across borders, enshrined in the EU charter. Now, with Brexit, they can better control their class distinctions. They expect that the "low skilled" jobs will be filled by Welsh, Irish, Scots et al.
48
Not to worry, now that Britain has committed itself to economic suicide, the low unemployment shouldn't be a problem for much longer.
16
Times quoting Kristian Niemietz of the IEA: "... the scheme is likely to have a significant negative impact on staffing levels ..."
Niemietz has a PhD in Political Economy, so he should have said something about how wages and prices would be affected, but he does not*.
Niemietz: "... especially in the short-term."
That's fuzzy econo-speak. When does "short-term" become long-term?
* The full statement is online at iea.org.uk:
IEA responds to Government’s post-Brexit immigration proposals
19 February 2020
1
Yet America allows millions of illegal immigrants to come into the country and cheat the system by either working under the table or for rock bottom wages that undercut legal American workers.
31
@John Of course, there are American workers lining up to clean hotel rooms, kitchens, to be maids and yard workers, and let us not forget the lucrative career path at the car wash and boxing. Boxing? Yes, boxing fruits and vegetables.
7
@Pricky Preacher Meatpacking and hotel cleaning used to be union jobs that paid a decent wage. They're looked at as bad jobs now because employers fired their entire workforces and replaced them with illegals who got paid nothing.
13
So, Britain is not Canada, the US, or Australia. It’s just some average country in Europe, now no longer part of the EU. Points for what?
Instead one should ask: What will the EU decide on British subjects trying to get into EU territory. Mr. Bernier may well look to a similar point system when he decides what kind of immigration deal to give to Britain. There could be points for speaking Spanish, French, or Polish, or being able drive on the right side of the road.
10
@Wolf Bein It seems the British would agree with you. A YouGov poll out today says 83% of Brits say that if someone moves to another country to live or work, then they should have to learn the language of that country. And Brits are already quite competent at driving on the other side of the road when in mainland Europe, millions do it each year - it isn't difficult. And they manage to do it quite easily driving a manual transmission too (a skill that would befuddle most Californians, Wolf).
7
@Martin
Most people use public transport, so driving ability is moot. Language skills, on the other hand, are vital and almost always completely absent in the English population. The Welsh can speak Welsh and English, but that's it.Similarly with the Irish and the Scots. Nobody in the EU cares about Welsh, Gaelic or Scottish.
1
@Martin
Kind of like the way winning World Wars without the help of Californians befuddles most Britons...
1
Essentially, the UK is implementing a points-based immigration system much like the one we have here in Canada. Thus, you get X points for speaking one of the official languages (English/French), Y points for a particular skill set, Z points for something else, etc and once you achieve P points, you are eligible to become a landed immigrant (the path to citizenship from that point is straightforward). This works very well for Canada because:
- we get to select immigrants based on our needs at a particular moment in time and it allows flexibility because the points system can be modified to change weightings as our needs evolve (e.g. at some point we were awarding more points for hair dressers which were in short supply, now less so)
- these selected immigrants are generally high-performing, ambitious people that are willing to sacrifice much security to make it here in Canada - they generally instill the same ethos in their kids who tend to outperform native-born Canadian children (although this advantage disappears several generations in)
- they are generally working-age and so have many years of working life ahead of them, helping to support our aging population.
- we still allow refugees who are seeking safety and who are allotted a fixed number of spots per year
- we can still bring in temporary workers (with no limited path to citizenship) if we need to to address shortages in particular industries (e.g. farm work, care giving, etc.).
- win-win all around.
26
@Wonderer
Not a win for low-skill immigrants who can't get in.
4
@vbering Why is that the problem of the UK?
4
@Wonderer
Hair dressers? Don’t give trump any ideas...
A little off the top, leave the sides alone, eh?
There aren't going to be labor shortages, the economy doesn't work that way. With fewer people, there will be fewer consumers. Did Britain have no low wage workers in 1981 when the foreign born population was less than half of what it is now?
8
"With fewer people, there will be fewer consumers."
That's a specious argument.
The UK *exports* products, so consumers are not just in the UK. Do a web search for "UK economy".
6
@OHK
And who helps make those products?
1
Mathias: "And who helps make those products?"
I'm not sure if you don't understand the comment or the reply or both.
Anyway, please clarify your point with a *declarative* sentence.
1
Trump uses the H-2B visa nonimmigrant program at Mar-A-Lago which permits employers to hire foreign workers to come temporarily to the United States and perform temporary nonagricultural services or labor on a one-time, seasonal, peak load or intermittent basis. Trump uses the law to avoid paying a living wage.
34
@PoliticalGenius
Economic migrants - legal or illegal - still want to be here as they earn 5x more an hour and often in cash, gross income. They remit a large portion back to the homeland.
All countries need above board Temporary Worker Visa Programs. Will California farm industry go for it? Or fancy hotels?
1
@PoliticalGenius
Using migrant workers is the only way that Trump can keep the costs down at Mar a Lago. Trump is only charging the American taxpayers $650/night for each of his Secret Service entourage he takes to his resorts every week. Can you imagine how much more it would be if he wasn't using illegal immigrants to make the beds?
6
I guess the swells in The City (London's Wall St.) will have to start sweeping the streets and emptying bedpans when they get tossed.
10
@george eliot
No, but they will have to pay native-born Britons about double to triple the current going rate to do the job.
That's a good thing.
15
@vbering well said. Ditto for the US as well. Would solve a great many problems for this class of workers.
3
@vbering Who pays for this speculative double and triple rate?
1
This is a little off topic, but apropos of the health care debate in this country, I notice that nurses in the UK earn less than the low-wage threshold of the equivalent of $33,000 per year. That means they are paid near to or below the $15 per hour US minimum wage target. Keep that in mind when we compare Britain's NHS with whatever we call our system in America. If we adopt a single payer health care system I don't think we will be cutting nurses salaries to minimum wage levels. That's why we have to look closer at claims that a single payer system will cu healthcare cost by 50% or more.
8
@PWR
Most Registered Nurses without further qualifications (read, fairly junior nurses) in the UK earn around £25,000. That's genuinely not a lot of money; however, it's well above the minimum wage, and about £7,000 more per annum than the UK Living Wage outside of London.
Comparisons to the US aren't 1:1 either, as living here is significantly cheaper than living in the US, especially because healthcare isn't factored into living costs.
However, while less so with nurses, you could certainly argue that doctors in the US are massively overpaid. At the higher end of the spectrum, senior US doctors are making 3-4x what a doctor in the UK makes, and (senior, at least) NHS doctors are well-compensated and able to live quite comfortable lives.
6
@PWR Why look at the nurses' salary? I suggest you look at the salaries and dividends of the CEO's of hospitals, insurance companies and the huge Pharma companies, all heavily funded by our healthcare $$$ when you think about restructuring our dysfunctional healthcare system. People who make these kind of comments usually have a great insurance and have never found themselves in a position in which they had to haggle with the insurance, hospital, etc. over egregious bills . I would also like to hint to you that many salaries in the EU are overall lower than in the US.
7
@PWR equivalent to 45k US, with a higher quality of care. Polls show a higher rate of satisfaction among healthcare workers as well. How do they do it? No insurance industry profitting on the sick.
7
The new statistics shows that wages for low-skilled workers in the US started to climb only after the drastic restriction in illegal immigration, and the climbed most in cities where illegal immigrants tended to go most. After Arizona passed its E-Verify-like laws, wages for the low-skilled immediately climbed up 10-15%.
There is no question that limiting low-skilled immigration helps most precisely those citizen who need the help most.
62
@Kai The stats I have seen don’t show wage increases of 10-15% but rather something like 3.9% of which .5% is attributable to increases in the state minimum wage. Also, coincidence is not causality and I would suggest that while restrictions in low skill immigration may be a factor there are likely other factors as well. Finally most economists are wondering why in our hot economy wages aren’t rising faster.
11
@Jeff
Actually, the stats show that low-skilled non-Hispanic men who were working during implementation of E-Verify saw their average wages increase by as much as $154 a week, or about 10% to 20%, after the E-Verify mandate was put in place.
$150 a week is significant of money for a low-skilled worker.
The problem, of course, remains that E-Verify is not adequately enforced.
16
@Kai
Did the minimum wage increase?
Thank you for acknowledging that it was BUSINESS that wants those no skilled low pay workers. They drove this. Now the people are revolting and saying we want tighter controls on who gets to work in our country. Germany is very specific and very direct when they tell you there is almost no opportunity for citizenship and you can be deported at almost any time. Sweden is going the same way. I view this as caring more about your own citizens than foreigners.
72
@Per Axel So Per, what specifically are you referring to in Germany? As a business owner and person firmly committed to employing people regardless of their backgrounds, we have regular interaction with local authorities including labour and immigration.
There is no issue whatsoever obtaining permission to employ refugees and once a refugee has employment, their future is secure. Additonally, the German constitution ensures that no-one may be deported when their lives or physical wellbeing would thereby be at risk.
So what is it you are referring to, other than some propaganda?
30
@Per Axel Well, it's also consumers who want no-skilled, low-pay workers who keep prices low.
4
@Per Axel
The article says “ Under new post-Brexit rules starting next January, migrants will have to meet a number of criteria to qualify for a work visa, including specific skills and an ability to speak English.”
What a great idea! Why can’t we do this in the US?
I assume the migrants to the UK must also show they are unlikely to become public charges (go on welfare), too, which also makes sense.
Of course, as shown in the US and elsewhere, when low-skilled, non-English-speaking migration is reduced, the wages for citizens go up.
That’s called a win-win situation.
3
Schadenfreude! Sorry to post Brexit UK, that's not English, but perfect at this time.
1
This is pretty close to what I would propose for the American immigration system
67
@John How many people will migrate to a city from say, rural Kentucky to work for under $10 an hour in slaughterhouses, hospital laundry rooms, hotels, landscaping companies, stores, restaurant kitchens, or to live in a trailer on a farm picking strawberries? My guess is not many. Limiting immigration to highly skilled workers will lead to a huge labor shortages and disruption to the economy. As the birth rate falls and immigration is limited, the real impacts of shutting the borders will become evident in a few years.
26
@John I agree with you that immigration needs to be regulated. I am always wondering who and really who is going to do these jobs when there are no immigrants here to do it. Are you willing to pay a fair wage to the people (US citizens) tending to your garden, working on pig farms, slaughtering animals and tossing the contents of you bed pan, etc. If so, start saving. Because even Trump hires "foreigners" to clean the toilets in margo la.
12
@Lucy
Ask yourself who did the jobs before millions of illegal immigrants arrived in the last 30 years?
Do you think there were massive labor shortages?
Absolutely not.
The jobs were done by Americans.
14
Pay more and citizens will take the jobs.
48
@Patrick.
Then everyone must be prepared for the cost of goods to increase because as we all know that is the segment of the economy that will 'pay more,' not the actual employers.
18
@dlb a few years ago I would have agreed with this sentiment but now as I try to find quality over quantity in my life I'd be fine with a bump in prices if the trade off is better product/service.
Frankly, I'm tired of cheap, plastic things from low wage countries/sectors.
34
@Mich Hmmm, Monday morning Detroit product or German import. Maybe imported labor is healthy competition and helps shore up the SS demographic balances. Andy Capp is laughing at Parliament. Trump Resorts are filing for visas.
1