ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator
I think we can't do much now except sending a formal letter and / or email to Theresa May and the PM. We should not expect a response but at least we can convey our message.sadafshah31 wrote:Can't we modify this e-petition into email send it to Theresa May/D Green?
Those who are staying in and around London can do that.cuberoot wrote:I think we can turn the blue petition into a Word document with space for signatures, names and addresses. Then we can print out hardcopies ourselves and get signatures from people we know.
We then collect these petitions centrally and send the whole lot with a covering letter to Number 10.
I can create the Word document very soon.
Who would be willing to collect these centrally and deliver at Number 10?
I don't think it would be an easy step asking my boss to contact HR to write to HO about contributions of Tier 1 Migrants.......An easier step is to ask them to sponsor me for a Tier 2.....gordon wrote:Bearing in mind that the Government have orientated their attention toward employers rather than employees (cf the consultation as well as the resulting shift away from T1G), I question whether a petition or letter-writing campaign from Tier 1 visa-holders will carry very much weight. I would have thought that a series of letters to Cameron, May, Green, and/or Cable from high-profile employers who (a) attract a number of highly skilled migrants, esp those on T1G and (b) can demonstrate that their existing T1G employees are all in highly skilled work, would make a far more convincing case for confirmation of transitional arrangements that would support employers' ability to retain the highly skilled staff that the Government have agreed should be retained. And employers at the moment have a very strong position to which we (collectively) should attempt to associate ourselves.
In contrast to the employers' relatively strong position, I think T1G visa-holders as a group suffer from a serious credibility problem: on the one hand, we as a group (certainly in the proposed petition) claim to be making contributions as highly skilled migrants, but that claim, on the other hand, is weakened irreparably by the data that the HO presented in October. A request for blanket transitional arrangements from (and for) T1G visa-holders might otherwise lead the Government to believe that the resulting system would not filter out precisely those that they do not want to encourage to remain. Most problematically, an appeal to fairness (in a policy framework) will ring hollow and ironic, if the Government are of the view that a significant minority of T1G people didn't live up to the principles and spirit of the programme.
I am not trying to be derisory, but I think insufficient attention has been paid to how the communications might be received, or to the Government's view on us as a group at the moment. Hence my view that employers should instead be the vehicle used to convey your collective points.
[PS mentioning settlement is probably not relevant at the moment, since the issue is not T1G-specific.]
Roll your eyes if you like, but remember that the Government and the MAC listened to all those employers who supplied responses to the consultation that brought us to this point. So why would the views of individuals carry comparable weight ? They never have done before, and that can be expected to continue now, especially when their argument is less concrete and more emotional in nature.MICKS wrote: I don't think it would be an easy step asking my boss to contact HR to write to HO about contributions of Tier 1 Migrants.......An easier step is to ask them to sponsor me for a Tier 2.....
cuberoot wrote:I think gordon has a very good point, but at this moment I dont know how we can raise this issue with our employers and then get them to take it up with the PM. This would require a big appeal from businesses and would require a big campaign.
For now the only thing I can think of is for us to raise our concerns independantly. gordon, if you have any ideas to create a much more compelling campaign from businesses then please let us all know.
Stage 1:
I will create a simple Word document with the petition and some space for signatures tonight. Then we can all print it out and get it signed by people. We need this done soon. We need a lot of signatures.
Stage 2:
Collect these all centrally. Im not sure who could do this. Any volunteers?
Stage 3:
Post the collected petitions and a covering letter to the Prime Minister.
If we can get all this done before the UKBA announces more information I will be very impressed.
It's a bit confusing. What I understand is you are going to make a word document and upload it somewhere, then we will print it, sign it and post it to somone who will centrally manage it?cuberoot wrote:I think gordon has a very good point, but at this moment I dont know how we can raise this issue with our employers and then get them to take it up with the PM. This would require a big appeal from businesses and would require a big campaign.
For now the only thing I can think of is for us to raise our concerns independantly. gordon, if you have any ideas to create a much more compelling campaign from businesses then please let us all know.
Stage 1:
I will create a simple Word document with the petition and some space for signatures tonight. Then we can all print it out and get it signed by people. We need this done soon. We need a lot of signatures.
Stage 2:
Collect these all centrally. Im not sure who could do this. Any volunteers?
Stage 3:
Post the collected petitions and a covering letter to the Prime Minister.
If we can get all this done before the UKBA announces more information I will be very impressed.
MICKS wrote:I have already posted two letters today to the following addresses:
Theresa May MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Damian Green MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
I suggest you all do the same as the petition option is no longer available. Feel Free to use the text from Petitions from this forum.
Can we also please have these addresses posted on our FACEBOOK Page with a request that They should write asap as well......
If the question is whether the HO will provide T1G with a mechanism to extend on the same terms as before, then one might try to convince employers that they want to retain the T1G staff that they now have (with the argument that, if those staff are sufficiently high-powered, they would remain only if they could retain the flexibility that they currently have under T1G). Arguably this does not apply to employees who are more easily substituted.mtuckersa wrote:gordon my first hand experience with Tier 1 with my employer was not good. I asked if they would pay for my existing visa since I had stayed with the company for 2 years. The response I got from them was 'We dont pay for Tier 1 visas only Tier 2' . Essentially saying that if you have the freedom to move around then you have to pay for it yourself. They were very keen to get me onto a Tier 2 but I wasnt keen been locked to the company.
Anyways, so i wrote off the fact that they will NOT pay for exisiting visa. Now its time for renewal of Tier 1. So I thought I would ask company again if they would sponsor cost of Tier 1. The answer again was NO, but Tier 2 YES.
Frankly I just dont see companies standing up for us in support of Tier 1. If WE want Tier 1 to stick around for extensions we gonna have to go it alone without their support. I cant see companies backing us, the argument is that they can always go for the cheaper Tier 2 that also keeps them to the company.
I 100% disagree with gordon's statement, it does not reflect reality...unfortunately
The more I think about this the more I can see bad news coming our way, anyways we can only try, if we dont try we cant make a difference
I say CONTINUE with the petition as planned
viki83: I meant the first option.viki83 wrote:It's a bit confusing. What I understand is you are going to make a word document and upload it somewhere, then we will print it, sign it and post it to somone who will centrally manage it?cuberoot wrote:I think gordon has a very good point, but at this moment I dont know how we can raise this issue with our employers and then get them to take it up with the PM. This would require a big appeal from businesses and would require a big campaign.
For now the only thing I can think of is for us to raise our concerns independantly. gordon, if you have any ideas to create a much more compelling campaign from businesses then please let us all know.
Stage 1:
I will create a simple Word document with the petition and some space for signatures tonight. Then we can all print it out and get it signed by people. We need this done soon. We need a lot of signatures.
Stage 2:
Collect these all centrally. Im not sure who could do this. Any volunteers?
Stage 3:
Post the collected petitions and a covering letter to the Prime Minister.
If we can get all this done before the UKBA announces more information I will be very impressed.
On the other hand, I understand from your saying that you will print a document and post it as a chain to all of us one by one which could take 500 days to circulate?
what you saying may be true for small to medium sized companies where you have more influence as an individual. But where I worked it was a 40000+ employee company worldwide. At that sort of size company you just become a number and the company has rigid structures/policies/procedures in place.gordon wrote:If the question is whether the HO will provide T1G with a mechanism to extend on the same terms as before, then one might try to convince employers that they want to retain the T1G staff that they now have (with the argument that, if those staff are sufficiently high-powered, they would remain only if they could retain the flexibility that they currently have under T1G). Arguably this does not apply to employees who are more easily substituted.mtuckersa wrote:gordon my first hand experience with Tier 1 with my employer was not good. I asked if they would pay for my existing visa since I had stayed with the company for 2 years. The response I got from them was 'We dont pay for Tier 1 visas only Tier 2' . Essentially saying that if you have the freedom to move around then you have to pay for it yourself. They were very keen to get me onto a Tier 2 but I wasnt keen been locked to the company.
Anyways, so i wrote off the fact that they will NOT pay for exisiting visa. Now its time for renewal of Tier 1. So I thought I would ask company again if they would sponsor cost of Tier 1. The answer again was NO, but Tier 2 YES.
Frankly I just dont see companies standing up for us in support of Tier 1. If WE want Tier 1 to stick around for extensions we gonna have to go it alone without their support. I cant see companies backing us, the argument is that they can always go for the cheaper Tier 2 that also keeps them to the company.
I 100% disagree with gordon's statement, it does not reflect reality...unfortunately
The more I think about this the more I can see bad news coming our way, anyways we can only try, if we dont try we cant make a difference
I say CONTINUE with the petition as planned
The issue of whether employers would pay for visa applications was not one that I addressed; that is not the support I had in mind. For strong employees, the issue of the employers' actual cost for the T2 visa is largely incidental to the retention argument. I have also found that my employer (for instance) has the incentive to support the continuation of T1G so as not to have those applicants' extension applications possibly take up part of the quota for T2 (if they were otherwise to be switched), and to avoid the very expensive aggro of recruitment exercises to replace difficult-to-replace T1G staff. It is a matter of making the employer see the common ground with employees' interests; when discussing interests and incentives, it is not always reducible to pounds and pence.
Frankly, I can't see that the Government would take any notice of an argument that doesn't lay out in explicit terms what they (the Government) stand to gain. Why should they care what economic migrants claim to have given up in their home countries ? Why should they care about a litany of demands from a population segment whose utility has (in their view) been drawn into question ? Do the letter-writers address why the Government should not try to filter out under-performers ? The value of T1G is not a forgone conclusion by any stretch; one should not speak as if it were.
The problem is one of collective action, and one in which the articulation must come from a sector that they trust. T1G isn't that sector at the moment, whilst employers are trusted. At present, these politicians are about to receive a pile of letters with a list of expectations without any substantive offerings; were I one of them, one of the first things that would come to mind would be, how many of these people wrote these letters between stacking shelves or hanging out at a security kiosk ?
Which is why I've contacted my vice-chancellor's office and Universities UK (I work in a university), rather than writing direct to Cameron and May et al. I would not discourage all of you (collectively) to send letters, but by no means should you underestimate the scale of some employers' vested interests in T1G. In this Government, employers can and do exercise far more influence than groups of private citizens; completely to ignore the reality of your strongest potential advocate, is strategically flawed.
I agree...I can get 3 or 4 people to sign it...We can forward the document as an email to as many people as we know and in the end, people can post it to some central place....before doing anything like that, do decide who is the central person so that you can put his / her address to post back the document....and put a clear guideline at the top such as...after getting the document signed by your peers, please post it to xyz address...cuberoot wrote:viki83: I meant the first option.viki83 wrote:It's a bit confusing. What I understand is you are going to make a word document and upload it somewhere, then we will print it, sign it and post it to somone who will centrally manage it?cuberoot wrote:I think gordon has a very good point, but at this moment I dont know how we can raise this issue with our employers and then get them to take it up with the PM. This would require a big appeal from businesses and would require a big campaign.
For now the only thing I can think of is for us to raise our concerns independantly. gordon, if you have any ideas to create a much more compelling campaign from businesses then please let us all know.
Stage 1:
I will create a simple Word document with the petition and some space for signatures tonight. Then we can all print it out and get it signed by people. We need this done soon. We need a lot of signatures.
Stage 2:
Collect these all centrally. Im not sure who could do this. Any volunteers?
Stage 3:
Post the collected petitions and a covering letter to the Prime Minister.
If we can get all this done before the UKBA announces more information I will be very impressed.
On the other hand, I understand from your saying that you will print a document and post it as a chain to all of us one by one which could take 500 days to circulate?
We all print out a common petition template, then get it filled in with as many signatures as possible. Family, friends and work colleagues. This should take 1 week.
We then all send these completed templates to a central person. Once all the templates are collected we deliver them together in a single large envelope to the Prime Minister.
Sending things round in a chain would take forever.
That is perhaps a valid point in the business sector; it seems a bit dehumanising, but I'm sure it has its compensations. I work in a provincial university that has only 10K employees (an SME, I suppose), so access to the top is certainly relatively easier than in a large multi-national company with 40K+ people. I suppose there are advantages after all for one to work in a 900-year-old university: the structures are by no means rigid; in fact, they scarcely exist.mtuckersa wrote:what you saying may be true for small to medium sized companies where you have more influence as an individual. But where I worked it was a 40000+ employee company worldwide. At that sort of size company you just become a number and the company has rigid structures/policies/procedures in place.
I am in high demand field where you literally can not find anyone in the UK to do the same job. But that didnt matter, they were still unable to pay for Tier 1 because of their rules.
I recently resigned and am now starting with a smaller company. They are more likely to back me on a Tier 1 visa but still think most companies dont want to get involved with Tier 1. They are all focused on Tier 2. Now that Tier 2 quota has gone up would also mean they probably wont support Tier 1.
