I feel so sorry for the UK research community. All this nonsense derives directly from the Conservative party's mania over Europe and their researchers' programs and pipelines of talent are impacted as a result.
Erasmus, free movement of EU workers, access to healthcare on EU terms, the ability to zip back and forth quickly and easily across the sea to collaborate with peers, all evaporated.
It was quite possible to have objections to the way the EU did things, and reform them, without leaving. But sadly the UK chose Brexit. An absolute tragedy.
I don't think this has much to do with Brexit, at least not directly.
The NHS surcharge predates Brexit and was over concerns of "medical tourism" by foreigners (ab)using the free NHS. If we assume this was a legitimate concern for the sake of the discussion, then there's a bunch of measures one can potentially take. Introducing an up-front surcharge is quite possibly the most idiotic measure you can take and just screams "fuck off foreigners we don't want you you fucking leech".
Why the hell should I pay £1,035 extra/year in addition to my taxes? Somehow your taxes are enough to pay for NHS but not mine? That just makes no sense. Having to pay five years up-front is just full-on idiocy on top of what was already idiotic.
Without a Brexit, all of this would still be the case for people from the Americas, Africa, Asia.
It is more insane than £1,035/yr extra - they ask to upfront pay for 5 years. From the article:
> A researcher granted a five-year global talent visa and who has a partner and two children would be liable to pay £20,974 upfront, with no option to spread the payments.
> The NHS surcharge predates Brexit and was over concerns of "medical tourism" by foreigners (ab)using the free NHS.
> If we assume this was a legitimate concern
It was not. It was actually a profit centre for the NHS as they can (and did) charge foreigners. Makes a good story though.
> then there's a bunch of measures one can potentially take
Force people to take private medical insurance, problem solved. I am utterly shocked the small state, pro free markets party didn't come up with this groundbreaking idea on their own.
>It was not. It was actually a profit centre for the NHS as they can (and did) charge foreigners. Makes a good story though.
"Migrants coming to work, study or join family members currently receive free NHS treatment in the same way as a permanent resident. The changes, part of the Immigration Act which became law last year, will ensure that migrants make a proper financial contribution to the cost of their NHS care."
Very stupid of the UK, but I guess it shows that the UK really doesn't want any immigrants unless they're very rich. I do wonder, however, why the companies that want to hire these top scientists, aren't paying all these fees for them. If they really want to recruit these people, then paying all necessary visa costs should be part of the job offer.
By way of comparison, getting a job like this here in Japan costs 3000 yen (about USD $19 right now) for the visa fee. Perhaps that's why this country is one of the "leading scientific nations" (according to the article): it's really, really easy to bring qualified professionals here, at least as far as immigration procedures and fees are concerned.
You don't think a fee of USD $27000 (fee for family of 4 from article) is a problem for a scientist? Just how much money do you think scientists make anyway? Even for a well-paid software engineer, that's easily enough money to make them not bother looking at jobs in that country, and the UK isn't known for high salaries either so it's even worse.
That's understandable, I think: This policy in the UK is so shockingly and bone-headedly stupid that it probably seems completely unbelievable, so your brain tries to interpret it in some other way that makes more sense.
>You don't think a fee of USD $27000 (fee for family of 4 from article) is a problem for a scientist?
Presumably the companies that really need to import talent would cover those fees for them if imported talent is actually necessary. Companies in the US pay similar fees to sponsor imported employees and no one complains about the costs.
I won't deal with a company covering those kinds of fees or even a headhunter in the UK for a European job. There's a lot of room there for problems and anyone who is worth paying $27k on top of generous relocation has a lot of choices that are better than the UK in terms of actually delivered compensation.
>There's a lot of room there for problems and anyone who is worth paying $27k on top of generous relocation has a lot of choices that are better than the UK in terms of actually delivered compensation.
That seems like an argument in favor of UK businesses paying these fees. It's an employee's market for top talent and employers bear the burden of paying any sorts of fees necessary to get top talent. The alternative is for that sort of industry to just not be viable in the UK.
A Post-doc at a prestigious research institute will probably be earning around £40,000, almost certainly in a HCOL area where rent for a 1 bed flat is £1,500+ a month. The fee is a legitimate financial concern for them.
Yeah, it's not just the UK. Scientists in the US make lousy money too. They're actually a lot better off taking their science degree, quitting science work, and going into patent law to work on patents that the underpaid scientists create. You don't even need a law degree; you can work under a patent attorney. (Obviously the pay isn't as good as someone with a JD or LLM, but it's better than the people doing the actual science work.)
It's not especially easy to bring people to Japan because of all the other administrative barriers around housing, bank accounts, etc., as well as the language requirement. As can be seen from the low immigration rate.
>It's not especially easy to bring people to Japan because of all the other administrative barriers around housing, bank accounts, etc., as well as the language requirement. As can be seen from the low immigration rate.
Wrong. It was really easy for me. The low immigration rate is because it's not a terribly popular place to live, and because of the language barrier. It's also historically been not very immigration-friendly (legally, the immigration laws were strict), but that's changed radically in the last decade or so. Now if you have in-demand skills and a company wants to hire you, you're in.
Housing and bank accounts aren't a problem. I got multiple bank accounts pretty quickly after moving here. Housing is pretty easy: some (individual) landlords won't look at you if you don't speak Japanese, but the corporate landlords don't care, as long as you have a guarantor and a job that pays enough for the rent.
The language is the biggest barrier, but that depends on your job. Companies that try to recruit skilled foreign professionals have strong English-language support.
it has, but not a lot. industry and location also matter, but chances are you're not being recruited abroad to be a fisherman or noodle-maker in a 2nd tier city.
It depends on where you work, like any place. If you work in a western (or westernized) company that uses English internally and where all your coworkers are expats, it's probably not too different from a typical US tech company.
Your own comment kind of proves the fact that it's only easy if you have corporate sponsorship though. Getting housing and bank accounts is essentially impossible without it, that's not really something that happens in western nations.
Huh? How exactly do you propose to emigrate anywhere (such as the US) without a job? You can't just show up in some country, get a bank account and an apartment, and start living life there. If you want to move to the US, you need corporate sponsorship there too, to get a work visa, which is the same in pretty much every developed nation. There are some ways around it, such as "investor's visas" (for very rich people), and spousal visas, but we're not talking about those kind of people. (Also, unlike the US with its EB5 investor visa, Japan doesn't have any such thing. There is a new "digital nomad" visa I think though, but it's very new and I don't know anything about it.)
You might need a company to sponsor the job in the US, depending on your visa, but you don't need them to help you deal with basic contracts and services like renting an apartment or opening a bank account. That's just comparing to the US. People move all around Europe without needing a company to help them get an apartment and setup basic accounts for utilities and bank accounts.
You don't need a company to sponsor you for a bank account in Japan either, but if you just moved into the country, they do want to know who your employer is. Same for landlords: why would anyone rent you an apartment if you don't have an income?
Where did you get the idea that you need your company to help you set up a bank account? I was able to do it easily at 2 banks all by myself.
The UK collectively decided to fuck itself into oblivion, repeatedly, for more than a decade. My only hope is that in a hundred years the sun will still rise over Avebury on the solstice, the white horse will still leap over uffington, and some miserable subsistence farmer, desperately searching for nonexistent rotten potatoes in the chalky soil will one morning look out through the rain, see the wind moving through beech trees on the crest of the chiltern hills, hear a red kite flying overhead, and feel a rush of warm acid through their blood in absolute certainty that the land is so much more permanent than the rotting bones of a million dead politicians, crushed underfoot
>The UK collectively decided to fuck itself into oblivion, repeatedly, for more than a decade.
As an outsider, it definitely seems like that. Obviously the US has been making some really dumb decisions lately too, but the UK almost seems like they are intentionally footgunning themselves and are happy to continue doing so.
My BiL is currently doing his PhD in CS(AI/ML)[1] at a University in the Midlands.
Despite the scholarship/funding, he had to pay a rather heavy NHS fee for my him, my sister and the kids, and this is before the increase.
I keep urging him to to move to the US, he will be done by next year and I think don't think that even if he were to win the global talent visa after that, (and pay the NHS fee again) he would ever earn a salary good enough to cover that, since UK salaries are so low.
He's hesitant, but I don't believe I will have to push hard, if such policies continue.
So stupid, that they (UK) attracted talent, paid for it, and yet might lose it.
____
[1]: He tried to explain it to me, it's something about audio/speech processing and using AI to do something about that, the funding is in a medical context, iirc.
35 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 83.6 ms ] threadErasmus, free movement of EU workers, access to healthcare on EU terms, the ability to zip back and forth quickly and easily across the sea to collaborate with peers, all evaporated.
It was quite possible to have objections to the way the EU did things, and reform them, without leaving. But sadly the UK chose Brexit. An absolute tragedy.
The NHS surcharge predates Brexit and was over concerns of "medical tourism" by foreigners (ab)using the free NHS. If we assume this was a legitimate concern for the sake of the discussion, then there's a bunch of measures one can potentially take. Introducing an up-front surcharge is quite possibly the most idiotic measure you can take and just screams "fuck off foreigners we don't want you you fucking leech".
Why the hell should I pay £1,035 extra/year in addition to my taxes? Somehow your taxes are enough to pay for NHS but not mine? That just makes no sense. Having to pay five years up-front is just full-on idiocy on top of what was already idiotic.
Without a Brexit, all of this would still be the case for people from the Americas, Africa, Asia.
> A researcher granted a five-year global talent visa and who has a partner and two children would be liable to pay £20,974 upfront, with no option to spread the payments.
> If we assume this was a legitimate concern
It was not. It was actually a profit centre for the NHS as they can (and did) charge foreigners. Makes a good story though.
> then there's a bunch of measures one can potentially take
Force people to take private medical insurance, problem solved. I am utterly shocked the small state, pro free markets party didn't come up with this groundbreaking idea on their own.
"Migrants coming to work, study or join family members currently receive free NHS treatment in the same way as a permanent resident. The changes, part of the Immigration Act which became law last year, will ensure that migrants make a proper financial contribution to the cost of their NHS care."
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/migrant-health-surcharge-...
and pay tax in the same way as a permanent resident
> will ensure that migrants make a proper financial contribution to the cost of their NHS care
They already made the exact same "financial contribution to the cost of their NHS care" as a non migrant, tax.
The National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 1989 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/306/contents/made
By way of comparison, getting a job like this here in Japan costs 3000 yen (about USD $19 right now) for the visa fee. Perhaps that's why this country is one of the "leading scientific nations" (according to the article): it's really, really easy to bring qualified professionals here, at least as far as immigration procedures and fees are concerned.
The real issue is the symbolism where people don't feel welcome I guess.
I think I misunderstood the article.
That's understandable, I think: This policy in the UK is so shockingly and bone-headedly stupid that it probably seems completely unbelievable, so your brain tries to interpret it in some other way that makes more sense.
Presumably the companies that really need to import talent would cover those fees for them if imported talent is actually necessary. Companies in the US pay similar fees to sponsor imported employees and no one complains about the costs.
That seems like an argument in favor of UK businesses paying these fees. It's an employee's market for top talent and employers bear the burden of paying any sorts of fees necessary to get top talent. The alternative is for that sort of industry to just not be viable in the UK.
my buddy was paying around $5k/month USD for his rent when he was doing FAANG work in SF.
Wrong. It was really easy for me. The low immigration rate is because it's not a terribly popular place to live, and because of the language barrier. It's also historically been not very immigration-friendly (legally, the immigration laws were strict), but that's changed radically in the last decade or so. Now if you have in-demand skills and a company wants to hire you, you're in.
Housing and bank accounts aren't a problem. I got multiple bank accounts pretty quickly after moving here. Housing is pretty easy: some (individual) landlords won't look at you if you don't speak Japanese, but the corporate landlords don't care, as long as you have a guarantor and a job that pays enough for the rent.
The language is the biggest barrier, but that depends on your job. Companies that try to recruit skilled foreign professionals have strong English-language support.
Where did you get the idea that you need your company to help you set up a bank account? I was able to do it easily at 2 banks all by myself.
As an outsider, it definitely seems like that. Obviously the US has been making some really dumb decisions lately too, but the UK almost seems like they are intentionally footgunning themselves and are happy to continue doing so.
Hopefully things turn around because the last 14 years of conservatives/tories have been not awesome (unless you’re wealthy, own property or are old).
Despite the scholarship/funding, he had to pay a rather heavy NHS fee for my him, my sister and the kids, and this is before the increase.
I keep urging him to to move to the US, he will be done by next year and I think don't think that even if he were to win the global talent visa after that, (and pay the NHS fee again) he would ever earn a salary good enough to cover that, since UK salaries are so low.
He's hesitant, but I don't believe I will have to push hard, if such policies continue.
So stupid, that they (UK) attracted talent, paid for it, and yet might lose it.
____
[1]: He tried to explain it to me, it's something about audio/speech processing and using AI to do something about that, the funding is in a medical context, iirc.