UK post-Brexit rules to 'turn off tap' of low-skilled foreign labour

[Nick]

Zero hour contracts are a curse, should be banned in most if not all circumstances. I'm familiar with Irish construction sites, not the UK. Like the UK, in IRL there is a high percentage of EU nationals in certain construction job types, usually low skilled but you still see plenty of Irish tradesmen, the influx of EU workers hasn't suppressed wages here. The decline of construction type jobs would be more attributed to less Irish teens are entering trades as a career, the high demand in business, finance, computing & biotech areas are attracting people because of the earning potential. Without the EU "back-fill" our economy would stall. Funnily enough this drain has caused a shortage in trades and an increase in wage.



To tackle the zero hr contract has always been a UK matter, it remains to be seen if post brexit will the UK improve or reduce working conditions, the soundbites from Patel would suggest more of this type of thing, not less.

The decline of construction jobs was due to the fact the Irish  economy tanked and left thousands of unfinished houses all over the place. Most of the building firms went bust so tradesmen retrained.



As for ZHC's, a lot of people like them so why should you be able to ban something you don't like?

[Borchester]

?  The statistics bear out that EU migration has only had a downward impact on wages in the lower skilled sector to the tune of a couple of percentage points.

The point is that many folk at the bottom of the economic scale can't afford to lose those percentage points. The Remainers never seemed to twig this and continued to demand unlimited immigration and to act as though the working class Brexiters wee just a temporary aberration that could be solved by a few articles in the Guardian.

[GerryT]

No Gerry immigrants are not working for less than the minimum wage , far from it in many cases .



They have though suppressed the wages in the construction industry for the local worker who has over the years since freedom of movement either moved into the domestic sector or quit the industry altogether . Go on any  major construction job in the UK and you will be hard pressed to find a British tradesman or labourer .

Many sites now operate what amounts to zero hour contracts , who in their right mind would put themselves forward for that as a career . Companies no longer train their own people , I haven't seen an apprentice on a job for over 15 years , companies now preferring a Romanian 'improver' to training a British school leaver .

All quite depressing really ,the industry has been given away and I don't think we will ever get it back, forever reliant on imported labour . The UK wont be turning off this  particular tap any time soon .

Zero hour contracts are a curse, should be banned in most if not all circumstances. I'm familiar with Irish construction sites, not the UK. Like the UK, in IRL there is a high percentage of EU nationals in certain construction job types, usually low skilled but you still see plenty of Irish tradesmen, the influx of EU workers hasn't suppressed wages here. The decline of construction type jobs would be more attributed to less Irish teens are entering trades as a career, the high demand in business, finance, computing & biotech areas are attracting people because of the earning potential. Without the EU "back-fill" our economy would stall. Funnily enough this drain has caused a shortage in trades and an increase in wage.



To tackle the zero hr contract has always been a UK matter, it remains to be seen if post brexit will the UK improve or reduce working conditions, the soundbites from Patel would suggest more of this type of thing, not less.

[Conchúr]

That's not my argument at all , its that mass immigration has had no benefit what so ever to the guy that goes to work every morning , its suppressed his wages  and regardless of any reports by those who want immigration to be seen in a good light on the whole  he would have been better off without it ..



Just to be clear Im not against immigration , it was the open door to millions from the eastern bloc that caused problems for many along with policies from the UK government . I suppose you have to be on the coalface to appreciate how much some people were effected ,reading reports just wont paint the picture that many have had to deal with .

Well,  what did people have to deal with?  And to what extent were those hardships caused by the recession and subsequent financial crisis rather than Eastern European migrants?  The statistics bear out that EU migration has only had a downward impact on wages in the lower skilled sector to the tune of a couple of percentage points.  So to what extent do you think the real cause of the problems many working class people have faced over the last 10-15 years are due to the fact that global financial system utterly collapsed in a manner not seen since the Wall Street Crash?



Ultimately, the working class aren't the only people who "get up in the morning" — office professionals still get up in the morning.  The only thing that's changed is that young British people are still getting up in the morning, but simply going to different jobs than their parents because that is where the market is going.  What we have seen over the past 50 years is a shift in the British market — a shift towards young British  people going into higher education and attaining degrees rather than gravitating towards the trades.  Why? Because it reflects the UK market having moved increasingly towards professional services (finance, law, accounting, technology/IT, business consultancy, research) and young people educating themselves accordingly.



So as young British people become increasingly skilled, and move towards professional services, that means less young British people are gravitating towards the trades.  And let's be honest, unless some of them end up running their own business in a trade, even a hefty increase in average wages for the lower skilled sector would still not come close to the remuneration on offer in professional services.  



It's in this context that migrant workers have come in — they address the competitive gap left by market movements.  If you have a motivated flexible migrant workforce who will gladly do what your business needs of them (and yes, probably with less wage demands and indeed working conditions demands than native workers), that means you can spend capital on growth that you otherwise wouldn't be able to spend.  That growth means you then need to employ who? That's right — skilled workers to help you run a business.  You also have to seek out the services of accountants, lawyers and other external advisors.  



And so we come full circle >>> young British people go on to university and into professional services careers >>> migrants fill the gap left by less young people moving towards the trades >>>> businesses use a migrant workforce who provide the flexibility for business growth >>>> business growth generates opportunity for the young British people going to university.

[Streetwalker]

Is the problem that immigrants are working for less than the minimum wage and that's stopping a local getting a job.



If not then how is the immigrant taking a locals job, if they will both work for the same wage how can someone travelling all across Europe with no family support able to secure a job ahead of a local

No Gerry immigrants are not working for less than the minimum wage , far from it in many cases .



They have though suppressed the wages in the construction industry for the local worker who has over the years since freedom of movement either moved into the domestic sector or quit the industry altogether . Go on any  major construction job in the UK and you will be hard pressed to find a British tradesman or labourer .

Many sites now operate what amounts to zero hour contracts , who in their right mind would put themselves forward for that as a career . Companies no longer train their own people , I haven't seen an apprentice on a job for over 15 years , companies now preferring a Romanian 'improver' to training a British school leaver .

All quite depressing really ,the industry has been given away and I don't think we will ever get it back, forever reliant on imported labour . The UK wont be turning off this  particular tap any time soon .

[GerryT]

That's not my argument at all , its that mass immigration has had no benefit what so ever to the guy that goes to work every morning , its suppressed his wages  and regardless of any reports by those who want immigration to be seen in a good light on the whole  he would have been better off without it ..



Just to be clear Im not against immigration , it was the open door to millions from the eastern bloc that caused problems for many along with policies from the UK government . I suppose you have to be on the coalface to appreciate how much some people were effected ,reading reports just wont paint the picture that many have had to deal with .

Is the problem that immigrants are working for less than the minimum wage and that's stopping a local getting a job.



If not then how is the immigrant taking a locals job, if they will both work for the same wage how can someone travelling all across Europe with no family support able to secure a job ahead of a local

[Streetwalker]

Your argument seems to hinge on the belief that there is an army of native workers out there chomping at the bit to do the jobs that migrant workers from Eastern Europe are currently gravitating towards.  Do you have data to support that ?

That's not my argument at all , its that mass immigration has had no benefit what so ever to the guy that goes to work every morning , its suppressed his wages  and regardless of any reports by those who want immigration to be seen in a good light on the whole  he would have been better off without it ..



Just to be clear Im not against immigration , it was the open door to millions from the eastern bloc that caused problems for many along with policies from the UK government . I suppose you have to be on the coalface to appreciate how much some people were effected ,reading reports just wont paint the picture that many have had to deal with .

[Conchúr]

Its like banging my head against the wall . So the eastern Europeans get the jobs because they are more flexible giving business more profit and the chance to create more jobs for the more flexible Eastern Europeans  :fcplm:



Meanwhile the Brits struggle for low paid work because they are not flexible enough but should be fecking thankful because prices haven't gone up .

Well you only have to look at Priti Patel's comments on the "8 million economically inactive" to get an idea of what the government itself thinks of the 'vacuum' created for native workers — and its thinking is stupendously insane.   This huge number would suggest that the government also intends that severely disabled people might be talked out of being severely disabled, or that the elderly might be trained to ...well...be younger.  



There are plenty of studies out there that show that the flexible workforce provided by migrant workers allows business expansion which creates jobs that natives themselves take (http://giovanniperi.ucdavis.edu/uploads/5/6/8/2/56826033/peri_sparber_task_specialization_immigration_2010.pdf">http://giovanniperi.ucdavis.edu/uploads ... n_2010.pdf">http://giovanniperi.ucdavis.edu/uploads/5/6/8/2/56826033/peri_sparber_task_specialization_immigration_2010.pdf).

Your argument seems to hinge on the belief that there is an army of native workers out there chomping at the bit to do the jobs that migrant workers from Eastern Europe are currently gravitating towards.  Do you have data to support that ?

[Streetwalker]

Yes but can you not see how the fiscal and commercial usefulness of migrants  actually complements earning opportunities / quality of living? Studies bear out that EU migration from Eastern Europe has only negatively affected wages in the lower skilled sector, and only to a fairly minuscule percentage.  The Bank of England conducted studies on this back in 2015: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/2015/the-impact-of-immigration-on-occupational-wages-evidence-from-britain">https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working ... om-britain">https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/2015/the-impact-of-immigration-on-occupational-wages-evidence-from-britain



Ultimately, what we are talking about here is EU migrants in the lower skilled sector having a slightly negative impact on average wages in that sector.  But there is more to it than that — it is also borne out in analysis that the migrant workforce is much more geographically flexible for employers than the native one (http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/60358/2/FlexibilityImmigrationEurope_BJIR.pdf">http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/60358/2/Fl ... e_BJIR.pdf">http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/60358/2/FlexibilityImmigrationEurope_BJIR.pdf), allowing businesses themselves greater flexibility in working on projects in various locations throughout the country and abroad.  If business have to pay more to native workers to entice them to be as geographically flexible as, say, Eastern European migrants then that diminishes the business spending power to expand and create new jobs.



So if costs for business goes up, what else goes up? Yes, prices.  And if prices go up, which section of the working population does this affect the most acutely? That's right, the lower skilled sector.  What's essentially being talked about here is eliminating an issue which has an average 1-2% negative impact on lower skilled wages, while making prices more expensive which in turn affects lower skilled workers more than anyone else in the working population.

Its like banging my head against the wall . So the eastern Europeans get the jobs because they are more flexible giving business more profit and the chance to create more jobs for the more flexible Eastern Europeans  :fcplm:



Meanwhile the Brits struggle for low paid work because they are not flexible enough but should be fecking thankful because prices haven't gone up .

[Conchúr]

And people still don't get  part of why  we voted to leave the EU . We don't care about fiscally and commercially we care about OUR earning opportunities and OUR quality of living that was ,has been  and is still  effected by mass immigration from the poorer parts of Europe .

Yes but can you not see how the fiscal and commercial usefulness of migrants  actually complements earning opportunities / quality of living? Studies bear out that EU migration from Eastern Europe has only negatively affected wages in the lower skilled sector, and only to a fairly minuscule percentage.  The Bank of England conducted studies on this back in 2015: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/2015/the-impact-of-immigration-on-occupational-wages-evidence-from-britain">https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working ... om-britain">https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/2015/the-impact-of-immigration-on-occupational-wages-evidence-from-britain



Ultimately, what we are talking about here is EU migrants in the lower skilled sector having a slightly negative impact on average wages in that sector.  But there is more to it than that — it is also borne out in analysis that the migrant workforce is much more geographically flexible for employers than the native one (http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/60358/2/FlexibilityImmigrationEurope_BJIR.pdf">http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/60358/2/Fl ... e_BJIR.pdf">http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/60358/2/FlexibilityImmigrationEurope_BJIR.pdf), allowing businesses themselves greater flexibility in working on projects in various locations throughout the country and abroad.  If business have to pay more to native workers to entice them to be as geographically flexible as, say, Eastern European migrants then that diminishes the business spending power to expand and create new jobs.



So if costs for business goes up, what else goes up? Yes, prices.  And if prices go up, which section of the working population does this affect the most acutely? That's right, the lower skilled sector.  What's essentially being talked about here is eliminating an issue which has an average 1-2% negative impact on lower skilled wages, while making prices more expensive which in turn affects lower skilled workers more than anyone else in the working population.

[papasmurf]

Now if our system of points stays flexible so that if jobs become available in certain areas then, even if they are low skilled, we can open up the gates as necessary, then surely it will work well? My worry is that we tend to set things in concrete here and tuck them away never to be re-assessed in living memory.

It isn't  flexible as announced and seasonal agriculture workers are never going to make the annual income limit with 6 to 8 months works.

[T00ts]

I was absently watching the 'Down Under' programme while doing something else and was interested to hear that a couple who wanted to go to Australia were told twice that roles which had been wanted in certain areas were no longer required therefore they were denied their visa. After a change of destination a third time they discovered that their skills were still wanted and so they finally got there. After a couple of years they moved to the area they first wanted having upgraded their skills and finding vacancies.



Now if our system of points stays flexible so that if jobs become available in certain areas then, even if they are low skilled, we can open up the gates as necessary, then surely it will work well? My worry is that we tend to set things in concrete here and tuck them away never to be re-assessed in living memory.

[Baron von Lotsov]

It is not a smart move to state the "economically inactive" can fill the gap when any check on the data and demographics shows that statement is nonsense.

It's a general principle and it holds true. Pay well and be nice to staff and they will stick around, or if not, they will go. Then if you are a businessman, really and truly it is your own fault if you are short of staff. My advice is to look to the way you treat people and the answer will be forthcoming. Also another tip for business short of staff is if you place an ad on the web and someone emails you then reply to them. It's basic stuff like this the dodos get wrong.

[Streetwalker]

  Sure, they didn't apply the restrictions on Eastern European migration that they could have done, but even if you actually remove migration from the old member states from the equation — thus accounting only for migration from the post-2004 expansion member states — it still works out as a positive net fiscal contribution.  Ultimately, it seems to me that the UK never sought to employ the full scope of restrictions available because these Eastern European migrants actually proved useful fiscally and commercially. I wouldn't quite call that "f**king up"  

And people still don't get  part of why  we voted to leave the EU . We don't care about fiscally and commercially we care about OUR earning opportunities and OUR quality of living that was ,has been  and is still  effected by mass immigration from the poorer parts of Europe .

[papasmurf]

It's a smart move because of the law of supply and demand. As the low-skilled toddle off home, employers will have to raise their rates, so they are a fair bit more than the minimum wage, which often represents the breadline for families.

It is not a smart move to state the "economically inactive" can fill the gap when any check on the data and demographics shows that statement is nonsense.