Even Bill Gates wont qualify for Extension in New Rules..

[Don13]

Have a look at this link

http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=76320

Join the fight against injustice
http://www.hsmpforum.co.uk/

Kind Regards,

Don13

[pantaiema]

Fighting against restrospective change of HMSP is fine, I agree that resrospective change to HSMP is unfair.

However I do not see the point comparing people like Bill Gates with HSMP extension.

People like Bill Gates do not need HSMP.
People with a lot of capital could immigrate in the UK using Investors route, so they do not HSMP.

Have a look at this link

http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=76320

Join the fight against injustice
http://www.hsmpforum.co.uk/

Kind Regards,

Don13

[Don13]

Dear Pantaiema,

The point is to consider a case of Hightly Skilled Magnate like MR Gates who would have achieved in the old rules would suffer in new rules; The changes have been made in the mid game which is unfair its deviating from the promised norms, Even person of his caliber with Huge Significant achievement would not be able to get extension and would have to face repercussions of changes made retrospectively.

Don13

Fighting against restrospective change of HMSP is fine, I agree that resrospective change to HSMP is unfair.

However I do not see the point comparing people like Bill Gates with HSMP extension.

People like Bill Gates do not need HSMP.
People with a lot of capital could immigrate in the UK using Investors route, so they do not HSMP.

Have a look at this link

http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=76320

Join the fight against injustice
http://www.hsmpforum.co.uk/

Kind Regards,

Don13

[nionlight]

you are right. the UK system is like butcher. in any other country like australia or canada, if you enter to the country with a rule and after entering the country if the rule changes then it wont affect the person who entered with old rule. but UK is like butcher who is changing the rule every now and then and asking people to match with it. why the hell i have to match with new rules. they are like robbers black mailing people. bringing the people with some rule and then saying you have to match with new rule now. *SIGH*

[pantaiema]

Poeple like Bill Gates is highlyunlike are going to apply to HSMP. So it is utterly irrelevant to make rule to accomodate this sort of people. Also as I mentioned before there is another route e.g investor for people with a lot of capital which is easier than HSMP.

But under the new system unskilled people might qualify for HSMP which is probably the loophole of the new system.
Let see for example:
1. MSc degree+ 35 Points
2. Earning:23 K = 20 points. A reasonable no. of taxi drivers, people working in Tesco etc could exceed this income especially if they are working two shifts e.g. 10-12 hours a day, 7 days a weeks.
3. Age: Under 29 = 20 points
4. UK experience = 5 points.

Total > 75 points Pass thereshold points

Dear Pantaiema,

The point is to consider a case of Hightly Skilled Magnate like MR Gates who would have achieved in the old rules would suffer in new rules; The changes have been made in the mid game which is unfair its deviating from the promised norms, Even person of his caliber with Huge Significant achievement would not be able to get extension and would have to face repercussions of changes made retrospectively.

Don13

Fighting against restrospective change of HMSP is fine, I agree that resrospective change to HSMP is unfair.

However I do not see the point comparing people like Bill Gates with HSMP extension.

People like Bill Gates do not need HSMP.
People with a lot of capital could immigrate in the UK using Investors route, so they do not HSMP.

Have a look at this link

http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=76320

Join the fight against injustice
http://www.hsmpforum.co.uk/

Kind Regards,

Don13

[Don13]

Dear Pantaiema,

Thanks for accepting my point that Bill Gates will have to apply as Invester not as highly skilled person with his Significant achievements and qualifying criteria as first time hsmp holder based on his skills which would enable him to come to uk under old rules but eventually he wont succed as eligible hsmp visa extender just based on his skills; secondly I appreciate your judgement and analysis as you pointed out a loop hole; so according to you what should be the justice,

I hope with your concent that you agree to the fact that retrospective changes are unfair; and are with us in joining the fight and must have became a member of the said forum by now,

Thanks for your concern and Support,

Kind Regards,

Don13

Poeple like Bill Gates is highlyunlike are going to apply to HSMP. So it is utterly irrelevant to make rule to accomodate this sort of people. Also as I mentioned before there is another route e.g investor for people with a lot of capital which is easier than HSMP.

But under the new system unskilled people might qualify for HSMP which is probably the loophole of the new system.
Let see for example:
1. MSc degree+ 35 Points
2. Earning:23 K = 20 points. A reasonable no. of taxi drivers, people working in Tesco etc could exceed this income especially if they are working two shifts e.g. 10-12 hours a day, 7 days a weeks.
3. Age: Under 29 = 20 points
4. UK experience = 5 points.

Total > 75 points Pass thereshold points

Dear Pantaiema,

The point is to consider a case of Hightly Skilled Magnate like MR Gates who would have achieved in the old rules would suffer in new rules; The changes have been made in the mid game which is unfair its deviating from the promised norms, Even person of his caliber with Huge Significant achievement would not be able to get extension and would have to face repercussions of changes made retrospectively.

Don13

Fighting against restrospective change of HMSP is fine, I agree that resrospective change to HSMP is unfair.

However I do not see the point comparing people like Bill Gates with HSMP extension.

People like Bill Gates do not need HSMP.
People with a lot of capital could immigrate in the UK using Investors route, so they do not HSMP.

Have a look at this link

http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=76320

Join the fight against injustice
http://www.hsmpforum.co.uk/

Kind Regards,

Don13

[OFCHARITY]

A person with a Msc. is not necessarily unskilled just because he works at Tescos or as a cab driver. The new rules have actually made it near impossible for unskilled and skilled persons alike without at least a first degree to qualify even if you are earning 100k per year. It is unfair for them to make these changes retroactive as it disrupts the lives and plans of persons who uprooted themselves and came to the UK under the previous rules thinking they only needed to be economically active to continue to stay. They set the new criteria based on what the govt. thinks the UK market needs, I suppose the intention is to attract only those persons with at least a first degree who can fill vacancies for jobs in the higher earning income band (higher tax revenues for the govt) and the younger the better. That seems to be the intention of the Home office, whether it is a good idea to exclude persons who may not have a degree but have years of experience and are truly highly skilled is another matter.

[Constant]

OFCHARITY, what you have written makes a lot of sense!!!!

[global gypsy]

The quoted article clearly states that Mr Gates could come in on investor visa, but would find it difficult on HSMP criteria.

To play devil's advocate on this topic:
Any country's immigration criteria can seem a bit arbitrary. But some rules still need to be set up. Any criteria one comes up with could filter out excellent candidates, while allowing in not-so-good ones. That's inherent to the system. What we can question is whether the system 'works' overall.

Of course, retrospective application of rule changes is quite unfair.

[gordon]

One might argue that having concessionary arrangements for younger workers makes sense on three counts: (1) earnings are more correlated with age in the first decade of one's career, and so age points adjust for potential rather than realised productivity; (2) younger workers are more likely to take the risk of migrating to another country, compared to older people, as the age profile of migrants from the newly acceded EU countries would attest; and (3) younger workers are more likely to migrate without dependants. From a managed migration perspective, one could even argue that the old system discriminated against the young by not accounting for their age-biased earnings, even though they possessed potential skillsets that the UK might seek to attract at relatively lower social cost.

And as for Bill Gates, I wonder whether his hypothetical caseworker would grant points in his application for any of his honorary doctorates - after all, the guidance notes merely require that the degrees be conferred, not necessarily that they be earned in the usual way.

AG

[1971]

Dear All,

Perpection is different. Everyone is right in their opinions. But I stand on the ground that all the changes in HSMP are very deceptive and no clear cut way out of it. The only truth us that if you meet the criteria for extension at ease, you might appreciate what others who do not are going through.

God help us all. I don't have to state my case because the administrator deleted my last posting which I know a lot of FLR(HSMP) applicants with transitional self-employed category will learn from. I am not very impressed with that attitude.This should be a very fair forum where people should share their experiences with HSMP, FLR(HSMP) and ILR concerns.

I pray again, there's politics everywhere and as such its always/sometimes at play. 'Dig deep for knowledge for experience is the best teacher.'

I Wish you all.

1971.

[JoshAhoy]

Hi,

Under the (prospective) new rules, extension will be given to those candiates who have demostrated high earnings or a significantly skilled job.

Even if the Tier 1 ends up being very similiar to the existing HSMP, what exactly would qualify as a high earnings or a significantly skilled job (apart from scientists & entrepreneurs)?
As per the current rules, someone earning over 40k+ will qualify. Will it remain the same??

I understand that unless the HO comes out with the new rules, it is all a speculation. But it would be great to hear your thoughts on this..

88. Tier 1 is a route to settlement and
people in this route will be allowed to bring
dependants to the UK.The proposal is that the
initial grant of leave will be for 2 years. After
this period, the points will be re-assessed and
the person will have to demonstrate high
earnings or a significantly skilled job in order to
have their leave extended.We are considering
the possibility of allowing the most successful
to move directly to settlement after 2 years.