UK immigration - increased salary threshold

rick_chasey

In reference to the above post.

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

I don’t have an accent so it doesn’t come up.

Mother on the other hand.

What a strange comment.
Everyone has an accent.

Sure but some of us don't have an obvious regional accent. Or pick up an accent from wherever they live.

pblakeney

rjsterry said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

I don’t have an accent so it doesn’t come up.

Mother on the other hand.

What a strange comment.
Everyone has an accent.

Sure but some of us don't have an obvious regional accent. Or pick up an accent from wherever they live.

I'm willing to bet that you do. It's just that you sound similar to those around you.
Americans don't think they have an accent either.

rjsterry

It's obviously an English accent but you'd struggle to identify where I'm from within England.

First.Aspect

rjsterry said:

It's obviously an English accent but you'd struggle to identify where I'm from within England.

I bet it's easy to figure out where you aren't from, which will leave roughly where you are from.

First.Aspect

Not having an accent is such a SE centric thing to say.

Do you all really think there are people from, or who have an accent from, the rest of the country that have the same accent as you, with another group of people unfortunate enough to have developed a regional accent?

If not, you have an accent.

rick_chasey

Delighted you got some mileage of taking a quote of out context.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

Delighted you got some mileage of taking a quote of out context.

You could never be accused of being SE centric.

rick_chasey

All I meant was I don’t sound Dutch so I don’t get the “where ya from?” Or “you’re not from round here”

Until of course I go up north. Which I do a lot.

It’s never meant in a positive way.

Pross

I think that’s more a case that you’ve decided it must be meant negatively rather than it always being the case. If I’m speaking to someone who was obviously raised outside the UK I’ll ask them. As someone who isn’t great at doing small talk I find it an easy conversation starter and get lead to learning about places.

It was a regular topic when I was sat next to strangers on my recent holiday where I spoke to Americans, Kiwis and Aussies. I was also asked the same question by numerous English people (often followed by ‘we went to [insert somewhere in Wales 4 hours and 200 miles away] on holiday once’. There were several Spanish speaking people onboard and I would have been interested in finding out where they were from as the language covers such a large part of the globe.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

It's obviously an English accent but you'd struggle to identify where I'm from within England.

I bet it's easy to figure out where you aren't from, which will leave roughly where you are from.

I'm from Bristol but have something close to an RP accent. I spent my first 19 years there and never had a Bristolian accent. I was asked why I didn't speak like everyone else at junior school 🤷🏻‍♂️. I'm the 'wrong' side of the trap-bath split for a Bristolian and I don't use a rhotic 'r'.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap–bath_split

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

It's obviously an English accent but you'd struggle to identify where I'm from within England.

I bet it's easy to figure out where you aren't from, which will leave roughly where you are from.

I'm from Bristol but have something close to an RP accent. I spent my first 19 years there and never had a Bristolian accent. I was asked why I didn't speak like everyone else at junior school 🤷🏻‍♂️. I'm the 'wrong' side of the trap-bath split for a Bristolian and I don't use a rhotic 'r'.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap–bath_split

Like me then, not having a Bristolian accent. So you've got a generic southern accent. Though if I'm with proper Devonians (a dwindling number, sadly), I'm aware that my accent drifts a bit to that of a farmer. I only realised I'd developed a slight twang when a young lad, who is the son of a friend of quite a posh family I know, said to his dad, "Daddy, what's a ceow?" (That's the best I can write down the Devonian for "cow".)

A friend of mine at university (Exeter) was from Middlesborough, and every time he went home he got accused of having a bit of a southern accent, whereas to all of us at Exeter he was proper Middlesborough.

There is no neutral accent, though sadly the hyper-localised variants are disappearing rapidly.

rjsterry

Only reason I can think of is always having Radio 4 on when I was growing up. I can mimic Bristolian reasonably well but don't speak it naturally. My dad had a slight Nottinghamshire accent but my mother has roughly the same RP accent as me despite her parents having had (I think) Cheshire accents. My cousin's children were all born in the South East but developed Fife accents after they moved up there.

pblakeney

briantrumpet said:

...
There is no neutral accent, though sadly the hyper-localised variants are disappearing rapidly.

That's true. When I was at secondary school you could place a person within 2 miles just from hearing them speak. Most spent their entire lives in the towns where they were born.

That's not to say anything was better, just a reflection of change.

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

Only reason I can think of is always having Radio 4 on when I was growing up. I can mimic Bristolian reasonably well but don't speak it naturally. My dad had a slight Nottinghamshire accent but my mother has roughly the same RP accent as me despite her parents having had (I think) Cheshire accents. My cousin's children were all born in the South East but developed Fife accents after they moved up there.

We were a Radio 3 house, but anyway north of the river (WoT), and aspiring middle-class parents, so no chance of a Bristolian accent for me. You had to get down to Bishopsworth ONO for prapper Brizzle.

briantrumpet

And, of course, RP pronunciation has changed massively over the years... listening to the change in QE2's accent over the years is educational, not least in how contorted her early accent was, to today's ears.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBRP-o6Q85s

First.Aspect

For some reason I can't place a Richmond Park accent.

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

For some reason I can't place a Richmond Park accent.

It's in Richmond Park.

HTH.

pep.fermi

ugo.santalucia said:

I would reverse the policy and only issue visas for those earning up to 40k.

Some bigoted voters do not like the poor. Irrespective of ethnicity, religion, origin, whatever. And because they can't really kick out poor fellow Brits, they decide to keep out poor foreigners.
Never mind 38k (or whatever) is not poor, and even if it was, the policy is against the interest of most of those supporting it....

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

briantrumpet said:

...
There is no neutral accent, though sadly the hyper-localised variants are disappearing rapidly.

That's true. When I was at secondary school you could place a person within 2 miles just from hearing them speak. Most spent their entire lives in the towns where they were born.

That's not to say anything was better, just a reflection of change.

Still get that in South Yorkshire for sure.

First.Aspect

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

pblakeney

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The problem for the UK is that there is a requirement for all professions so the points system is negated. A high percentage of vacancies could be fulfilled by Brits but...

pep.fermi

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

First.Aspect

pep.fermi said:

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

But that's the point of a points system. If you have skills we already have, you need a LOT of money to come. If we are short of skills, give those skills more points.

Pross

First.Aspect said:

pep.fermi said:

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

But that's the point of a points system. If you have skills we already have, you need a LOT of money to come. If we are short of skills, give those skills more points.

It seems obvious really. Surely the whole point of legal immigration is to bring in the people you need. I assume there already is a list of jobs that we need so for example you couldn’t just offer a job to an engineer from India if you can fill the role locally (or offer the jobs to foreigners at a lower salary than market rate).

On a tangent, having spent yesterday in a few care homes I can see why they have to rely on immigrant workers. It’s a scandal that most of them are getting paid minimum wage.

First.Aspect

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

pep.fermi said:

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

But that's the point of a points system. If you have skills we already have, you need a LOT of money to come. If we are short of skills, give those skills more points.

It seems obvious really. Surely the whole point of legal immigration is to bring in the people you need. I assume there already is a list of jobs that we need so for example you couldn’t just offer a job to an engineer from India if you can fill the role locally (or offer the jobs to foreigners at a lower salary than market rate).

On a tangent, having spent yesterday in a few care homes I can see why they have to rely on immigrant workers. It’s a scandal that most of them are getting paid minimum wage.

The main issue in the care sector is that you can get paid more at a checkout. This does have to be looked at. I believe that it is marginally better in the special needs sector, but not a lot. There's huge churn in staff there too and it is one of the reasons we uprooted from Scotland - to be near enough to be the squeaky wheel that gets oiled.

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

pep.fermi said:

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

But that's the point of a points system. If you have skills we already have, you need a LOT of money to come. If we are short of skills, give those skills more points.

It seems obvious really. Surely the whole point of legal immigration is to bring in the people you need. I assume there already is a list of jobs that we need so for example you couldn’t just offer a job to an engineer from India if you can fill the role locally (or offer the jobs to foreigners at a lower salary than market rate).

On a tangent, having spent yesterday in a few care homes I can see why they have to rely on immigrant workers. It’s a scandal that most of them are getting paid minimum wage.

The main issue in the care sector is that you can get paid more at a checkout. This does have to be looked at. I believe that it is marginally better in the special needs sector, but not a lot. There's huge churn in staff there too and it is one of the reasons we uprooted from Scotland - to be near enough to be the squeaky wheel that gets oiled.

It's also an issue with classroom assistants - to be done well, it also needs skill, but all too often it just ends up being taking written notes for people with dyslexia (for instance) and just giving the notes to the pupil afterwards. But I guess that the box has been ticked, so it's all fine.

In other news, Scottish education might be up a creek...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/10/scottish-schools-have-tumbled-from-top-of-the-class-this-is-what-went-wrong

The latest comparative data on outcomes for 15-year-olds across OECD countries, published last week, shows a Scottish school system in steep decline, blighted by rising levels of social inequality. The drop in standards is the equivalent of today’s teenagers missing around 16 months of maths teaching compared with those in 2012, 18 months of science, and eight months of reading. Scottish educationalist Lindsay Paterson describes the situation as “catastrophic”.

It is striking that the SNP was able to introduce this curriculum with little political opposition, but also little pushback from the Scottish educational establishment. Apart from the three-yearly Pisa study, there is a lack of data by which to hold politicians and civil servants accountable; Paterson in 2018 described Scottish education as “a data desert”. The Labour critique of the SNP is depressingly woolly and ungrounded in evidence-based reform that could make a difference for Scottish children.

The SNP has dismally failed Scottish children, especially those from poorer backgrounds. Declining standards have been known about for years but, instead of serious efforts to address them, the SNP has tried to mask them with spin – last week, it claimed the data shows Scotland is “maintaining its international standing” – and shiny but unrealised manifesto pledges such as giving every schoolchild a free laptop.

rjsterry

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

pep.fermi said:

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

But that's the point of a points system. If you have skills we already have, you need a LOT of money to come. If we are short of skills, give those skills more points.

It seems obvious really. Surely the whole point of legal immigration is to bring in the people you need. I assume there already is a list of jobs that we need so for example you couldn’t just offer a job to an engineer from India if you can fill the role locally (or offer the jobs to foreigners at a lower salary than market rate).

On a tangent, having spent yesterday in a few care homes I can see why they have to rely on immigrant workers. It’s a scandal that most of them are getting paid minimum wage.

It is currently legal to recruit overseas at up to 20% below market rate. The idea that the Conservatives are in any way serious about controlling immigration is for the birds.

ugo.santalucia

I am not sure you can do much to control migration, short of closing the borders or declare war to the country you share borders with. Brexit did not reduce migration, setting unrealistic targets will only create obstacles, but will not ultimately reduce migration. For as long as the UK is more attractve than other surrounding countries, you will have people prepared to take the longer journey. I don’t think it would be impossible to convince even the most racist gammon that without migration they would be fuxxed, so why not trying, instead of setting up this pantomime which is doomed to fail?

TheBigBean

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

pep.fermi said:

First.Aspect said:

Getting back to the point, I thought there was supposed to be a points system coming? A salary threshold would be fairly reasonable in that context, and I believe both Australia and Canada have this. But not as a binary thing, unless at a much higher threshold. Same as assets I think. The point being have you got lots of money to spend, or are you going to be a drain on the state. However, you can vet points for other things, such as academic qualifications. Selected professions, having a sponsor, having a job offer, speaking French, having studied there etc.

Where is the UK with that. Is it in place or have we not had a home secretary in post for long enough to get to that part?

The UK needs people with LOW qualification and income. To work as carer, in agriculture, in hospitality.
Saying "unless they're well off, or highly skilled, we don't want them" is shooting yourself in the foot.
Plus, these are people possibly at the lower end of the skill and income spectrum, but that's a long way off from being a drain on the state.

But that's the point of a points system. If you have skills we already have, you need a LOT of money to come. If we are short of skills, give those skills more points.

It seems obvious really. Surely the whole point of legal immigration is to bring in the people you need. I assume there already is a list of jobs that we need so for example you couldn’t just offer a job to an engineer from India if you can fill the role locally (or offer the jobs to foreigners at a lower salary than market rate).

On a tangent, having spent yesterday in a few care homes I can see why they have to rely on immigrant workers. It’s a scandal that most of them are getting paid minimum wage.

The main issue in the care sector is that you can get paid more at a checkout. This does have to be looked at. I believe that it is marginally better in the special needs sector, but not a lot. There's huge churn in staff there too and it is one of the reasons we uprooted from Scotland - to be near enough to be the squeaky wheel that gets oiled.

It's also an issue with classroom assistants - to be done well, it also needs skill, but all too often it just ends up being taking written notes for people with dyslexia (for instance) and just giving the notes to the pupil afterwards. But I guess that the box has been ticked, so it's all fine.

In other news, Scottish education might be up a creek...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/10/scottish-schools-have-tumbled-from-top-of-the-class-this-is-what-went-wrong

The latest comparative data on outcomes for 15-year-olds across OECD countries, published last week, shows a Scottish school system in steep decline, blighted by rising levels of social inequality. The drop in standards is the equivalent of today’s teenagers missing around 16 months of maths teaching compared with those in 2012, 18 months of science, and eight months of reading. Scottish educationalist Lindsay Paterson describes the situation as “catastrophic”.

It is striking that the SNP was able to introduce this curriculum with little political opposition, but also little pushback from the Scottish educational establishment. Apart from the three-yearly Pisa study, there is a lack of data by which to hold politicians and civil servants accountable; Paterson in 2018 described Scottish education as “a data desert”. The Labour critique of the SNP is depressingly woolly and ungrounded in evidence-based reform that could make a difference for Scottish children.

The SNP has dismally failed Scottish children, especially those from poorer backgrounds. Declining standards have been known about for years but, instead of serious efforts to address them, the SNP has tried to mask them with spin – last week, it claimed the data shows Scotland is “maintaining its international standing” – and shiny but unrealised manifesto pledges such as giving every schoolchild a free laptop.

I'm sure someone started an education thread.