HSMP, 1+3+1 EXTENSIONS

[ATBPLC]

From whatever perspective one views these changes, there is no doubt that UK Govt is not being faithful to us at all. First, age discrimination has been introduced just to create problems in the lives of some people. I magine the dislocation it will bring to the lives of those who had been resident here with their family for 4 years.

Some of us who are insulting others should be very careful as your faith is not decided yet, and may be they will need to display their CVS for us to see in order to compare that with the CVS of those working in Tesco. I think it all depends on your sector

The fact that some are working in Tesco does not mean they are not highly skilled. It all depends on whether your skill falls into shortage areas and you are in high demand. But can you blame thsoe in Tesco if there is no other work for them to do.

It has been a hell convincing employers when we were initially given initial 1 year, in fact some employers will never give you work on 1 year visa. Some dont even understand HSMP.

The problems engendered by the new HSMP changes call for methodical handlings because we are all affected differently. From my considered view, the following categories emerge:

a. New applicants
b. Existing HSMP with 1-year initial approval
c. Existing HSMP with 2 years initial approval
d. Existing HSMP with 1 year initial approval plus 3 years extension and would need extra 1 year extension to qualify for ILR
e. Existing HSMP WITH 1 year initial approval plus 4 year extensions and will NOT need any extension again before ILR

In view of the above I suggest we creat topics as per the categories above. For example, I fall into category d, and I have started discussion on this.

We certainly cannot change the policy but we can make them see reason while it should not be used as an umbrella to cover everybody.

My position is that those in my category should be free, because those who came after us who luckily have fallen into category e are free. THe emphasis is on initial approval and we have passed that.

We should reralise that it is not easy to get work permit. Youe employer must proof that no British or EU CITIZEN CAN DO THEV WORK.

I also believe vthat people in my category should be ready to defend this position legally, we cannot be asked to go back home after 4 year of hardwork and having paid taxes for 4 years

[chanelan]

http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
This group is already planning legal action. Many of you may be already aware of this.

[ATBPLC]

By way of emphasis, see below what in specific term, the new policy says


[b]"We will introduce a more robust points test for applicants looking for an extension of an initial period of leave under HSMP".[/b][/size].

So those who have taken 3 years extension should be excluded. Whoever has easy access to HO should confirm this.

INITIAL EXTENSION IS THE EMPHASIS

[Rog]

I have emailed the home office for clarification on this point and will post their reply on the board as soon as I hear from them. I am also in the 1+3 stage and affected by the ruling

[ATBPLC]

Thanks Rog.

You see its double calamity for our group because we were caught up in 4 to 5 years change and now in this.

Imagine those who got further extension after us, that gor 4 years. They surely will not be bothered now.

Although I sense my employer should be able to able to apply for work permit for me to cover the 1 year extension, but sometimes you cannot trust these people so it better to err on the side of caution. After all how important are you that the employer will want to go extra mile to apply for work permit for you.

I think HO will help our group if only a letter of reference from employer will suffice or a proof that you are in permanent employment.

[VinLopez]

I have emailed the home office for clarification on this point and will post their reply on the board as soon as I hear from them. I am also in the 1+3 stage and affected by the ruling

Rog tahnks for this. I am anxiously waiting for your post. I got 1+3 and I am a freelance contractor. After 4 years, there's no question of someone filing a work permit.

Currently under the new rules, I just qualify. But by 2008, they'd probably bring in more strict criteria for FLR.

[ATBPLC]

I am happy that people that belong to this group are coming together.

We should realise that the policy is still a general statement and very soon the working papers for the caseworkers will be ready.

The ealier we can bring into fore the injustice and unfairness in this policy on our group to HO, the better.

I think we should bombard them with letters. Or what do you think?

There are different categories in Work Permit, which one do we belong to.
Except the HO comes out with a policy paper on this it might be difficult convincing a big organization you have been working for 4 years ago that you now need Work permit. But if there is a policy paper, one can easily present same with his request.

But my prayer is a clarification that will except us under the new policy that is, our application should be appraised under the old policy

[LondonBlonde]

But my prayer is a clarification that will except us under the new policy that is, our application should be appraised under the old policy

Yes, this is my hope as well. I am in this same category and will apply for my last FLR next year when I reach the four year mark.

I don't have much hope for us being treated differently from the rest as there appears to be no acqnowledgement of our original settlement agreement. The new age penalty and language proficiency requirements are just shocking. Expecting us to study english full time, earn well above the average as a foreigner with what appears to anyone as a temporary working visa, and grow younger all the while defies belief.

Does anyone know which earnings table applies to us? I think it must be the more leanient one (12 months or less INITIAL Leave), but since they say PREVIOUS leave, it isn't clear to me.

LondonBlonde

[raj]

ATBPLC, Thanks for starting this string which is really relavent to us and would help us putting limelight on the Key issue which is impacting only 1+3+1 group.

SO here is my statistics

I am on 1+3 and will be required another +1

If I apply today for extention I will get following points:

Salary : 45
Qualification : 35
Age (29) : 20
UK experience : 5

Total : 105 , so qualifying under new points system sounds piece of cake but Hold on.

My extention will be due in early 2009 which means the points which I can be certain are below:

Salary : ????? (who knows what will happen after 2 years)
Qualification : 35
Age (31) : 10 ( I will be 31 after 2 years)
UK experience : 5

Total : 50, Which means I am no difference than any one else who are falling under 1+3+1 trap, I would still be required to in Job for 12 months out of 15 months immidiately preceding the date I apply for my last extention ( assuming no further changes take place in rules of the unfair game) and would be required to earn minimum 25 points (i.e. £26K P.A. Job) which is still not bad but whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy?? why do we need to go through all this!!!! why us!!

Guys I am in and would like to join hands with you all to have our voice heard.

regds
Raj

[shahzad40]

I started my job on 31st July and I should apply for 3 years xtension by the end of Feb 2007. Although my salary is 32K but according to new rules, I donot acumulate the required earning points. In such situation, is it possible that they give me an extension of say 1 year or will they totally refuse my application.

[ATBPLC]

Shahzad40, sorry you dont belong to the 1+3+1 group. You belong to the initial extension group, so the policy is very clear on you, 75% or back home. Very stupid, isnt it? Afterall they promised you settlement, they didnt tell you along the way clogs will be thrown in the wheel towards settlement.

My brother, it seems UK only wants refugees and illegal immigrants.

[MUGHAL]

IF U are affected by the new rules for hsmp then open the site below and rise ur voice to MP

http://www.writetothem.com/?keyword=loc ... EQod0hw0AQ

[Rog]

In response to my e-mail, the home office mailed through an automatic reply, the FAQ in their website with note hoping that it would answer all my queries. I have replied back to them again specifying my query regarding how they would treat those at 1+3 level and what salary level they would consider while making up 75 points

[LondonBlonde]

Rog - I've emailee the HO with the same question last week. So far, no reply on this end. I think that easier earnings table applies to us (if we have to do this at all at the four year mark).

Will let you know when I have a response,

LondonBlonde

[shahzad40]

Dear All,
I spoke to HO in the morning and shared with them my individual case and the responded mentioned that so far the rules are not really very clear and that i must wait till 1st week of dec when the rules are more defined.
My suggestion is to email or call the HO so that they are aware of the problem people are facing and they might show some flexibility in defining the rules. Email your case to:

pointsbased.comments@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

or call HSMP help line on 0114 207 4074.

Please be heard!!!

[Rog]

I would like to believe that the 1st and easier table should apply to us but until the HO explicitly confirms we can't be sure as they are looking to weed out and deport everyone. I have elaborated in my e-mail to Home Office that in the 1st year, due to the visa being less than one year, employers refuse to give you a permanent job, and subsequently when one gets a permanent job after the 3 year extension, the miserable wages you earned in a temporary/contract job in the 1st year becomes the base from which your salary grows and it is not possible to reach 32k so soon unless one is an IT programmer or super highly skilled professional.

Whoever who gets an authentic confirmation on the salary level applicable to us please post the same on the board.

[Mobig]

Hei,
I also fall in the same category 1+3, although i am working within my profession but not earning more than 18000/annum and age is more than 35.
I need to know all the changes occured in these days, what we will have to show for 1 year further extension for ILR, will anybody help to refer those pages plz

[Rog]

From everyone's discussions the following points emerge as the validation of unfairness of the HO towards the HSMP holders 1+3 year stage (other than the general betrayal of HSMP holders by retrospectively applying criteria not part of original schem)

1. Age discrimination to those over 30 - a serious point.
2. Unfairly treated for no fault of ours in comparision to those with 4 year extensions after 1 year thereby not being affected by the ruling .
3. Difficulty of a person reaching 32k salary levels quickly after 1st year on temp/contract jobs due to employers refusal to give permanent jobs.

Please everyone bombard the HO with emails highlighting these points. Any other points which I may have missed out are welcome.

[Smit]

This is one of the grounds that the Home Office used when implementing the 4 to 5 years ILR requirement:

The change is not regarded as controversial. In order to qualify for settlement after 4 years applicants were required to show that they will remain in employment or viable self supporting activity for the foreseeable future. We are simply asking this state of affairs to continue and to be marked after 5 years instead of four.

I don't see how the above fits in for people on the HSMP scheme applying for a second extension i.e. 1+3+? to get to the 5 years ILR mark, being scored against the new points system.

[chanelan]

I am in 1+3+1 group. I had sent a mail to HO asking clarifications about new changes and it's applicability to my case. As usual i did not get the reply straight to the point instead they have sent me list of FAQs. One of them says as below.

12. I have been in working in the UK for 4 years and my HSMP visa is about to expire, can I apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain?

No, the minimum requirement for Indefinite Leave to Remain is now 5 years. You should apply for Further Leave to Remain, which is normally granted for 3 years, but you can apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain as soon as you reach the 5-year minimum.

[Rog]

The change is not regarded as controversial. In order to qualify for settlement after 4 years applicants were required to show that they will remain in employment or viable self supporting activity for the foreseeable future. We are simply asking this state of affairs to continue and to be marked after 5 years instead of four

The above statement by Home Office does not take into account that crucial decisions like mortgages which may have to be put off keeping families in uncertainity of rented accomodations as banks are reluctant to lend with an uncertain residential status

[LondonBlonde]

Ok, got a response from the HO today on the question of which earnings table applies to us?;

Thank you for your enquiry about the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP).

Unfortunately, due to an unprecedented level of requests for information by e-mail we have compiled a list of "frequently asked questions" that we hope will address your query.

The email was bounced around internally as no one seemed to know the answer. Finally someone fired back this response.

I don't think they have these new rules worked out yet...

LondonBlonde

[Smit]

It is clear that the applicants who fall in the 1+3+? category are being discriminated vis a vis the 1+4 HSMP holders by (1) being subjected to a further extension application (and incurring further costs) and (2) by being scored against the new rules of 7/11/06.

IMHO, this would be a strong ground to use against the Home Office.

[pakistan]

Hi,
Rog,U r 100% correct.This was the same response from Home Office to me via my MPabout 4-5 years ILR.

[ATBPLC]

For the ionformation of all concerned in this post I sen the below to

pointsbased.commentsw@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk


Dear Sir/Madam,

I do recognize that UK Home Office has the prerogative to change/amend and strenghten policies particularly on immigration but I wish to submit that executing retrospective implementation will be too derogatory to the image of Grear Britain as a just country

I write in reference to the recent changes in HSMP, in April 2006 and 7th 0f November 2006. The changes no doubt have significant impact on the life and welfare of beneficiaries, quite against what we were promised before we left our countries to relocate to UK.

The changes were all against the article of faith signed with the Highly skilled migrants.

Specifically, I feel that those who have already come in under HSMP should be speared the ordeal of the latter changes. They should be treated under the policy in place when HSMP approval was given.

I belong to the group that had already got 3 years extension, and will be expected to ask for additional 1 year extension to make 5 years in order to qualify for ILR . THOSE WHO CAME AFTER US GOT 4 YEARS EXTENSION AND SPARED OF THIS ORDEAL.

In order to be fair to all concerned. those who have got 3 years extension should only be expected to proof that they are employed permanently, because getting employers to apply for work permit on their behalf might be as easy as HO envisaged.

I cannot decipher why age discrimination is now being brought to the fore by a country like Great Britain while the same country has made same illegal . Do not forget that those above the ages of 32 applied and got approval from HO. sO WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF SCORING THEM ZERO IN THE NEW SCHEME?

It is true that Highly skilled Migrants are expected to occupy senior positions that will attract good pay packages as envisaged by the new changes but it is on record that what HSMP beneficiaries face in UK is not as easy as potrayed .

The same Highly skilled Migrants that heeded the clarion call of UK to come and help build the economy, when the scheme was introduced in 2002, are now been treated as Lepers. This is certainly not fair

For your information some of the things that have worked against migrants are :

1. Many employers are not quite aware of the HSMP
2. The initial 1 year visa was not acceptable by employers for a permanent job
3. All employers were requesting for UK experience to give jobs

Given the problems highlighted above many, if not all the Migrants have no choice than to find a way of been economically active and gain UK EXPERIENCE, thereby settling for mean and indignifying jobs. THE SAME MEAN JOBS LATER FORMED THE BASIS UPON WHICH FURTHER EMPLOYMENTS WERE BASED.

It is therefore not the fault of the Migrants but the system that created HSMP but did not create an enabling enviroment for its implementation.

Migrants only accepted the challenges posed by the new live in UK. MANY HAD TO SELL ALL BELONGINGS IN THEIR COUNTRIES BECAUSE OF THE ASSURANCE GIVEN BY UK GOVERNMENT THAT HSMP WOULD LEAD TO SETTLEMENT.

PLEASE BE FAIR AND ENSURE THAT THE NEW CHANGES APPLY TO NEW APPLICANTS.

As you are now preparing the work papers for case workers I hope you will give the contents of the letter a serios consideration.

Many thanks for your custom