Fate of EU citizens in the UK post Brexit

[Gramsci]

More potential confusion.

Employers must check EU nationals' right to work, says minister

This appears to contradict a press briefing this summer in which the Home Office indicated it would not require employers to make immigration checks on staff who are EU citizens.

When questioned by MPs, Nokes conceded that it would be difficult for employers to make such checks, given that longstanding residents from EU member states had a guaranteed two-year period to go through the “settled status” programme, proving their right to remain and to work.

When asked how employers could be expected to make the checks, Nokes said she did not know, and would have to write to the committee later.

This is about what happens in transition period after Brexit. After Brexit EU nationals here will have two year period to apply for settled status.

“If somebody hasn’t been here prior to the end of March next year, employers will have to make sure they go through adequately rigorous checks to evidence somebody’s right to work,” Nokes said, in an apparent new policy disclosure.

So this means after Brexit comes into effect in March no EU nationals can come here. In the transition period of two years existing EU nationals will not necessarily have obtained the settled status. So there will be mix of those EU nationals who can apply for settled status and those who come here after March. The immigration minister Nokes is expecting employers to distinguish between the two.

Is this correct reading of this? Of have I misunderstood it?

A recipe for confusion imo. Also employers may take the position its to difficult to take on someone who is from EU post march.

Does anyone else understand this? I thought in the transition period of two years EU nationals could still come here and apply for settled status. I'm not clear on this.

 

[zahir]

Does anyone know how the right to rent would be affected by a no deal brexit? Would landlords still be able to rent to EU nationals arriving after March, and if not how would they be able to distinguish them from EU nationals with the right to apply for settled status?

According to Shelter on the right to rent:

Your landlord must take steps to end your tenancy if your household includes someone who doesn't have the right to rent. The landlord can take steps to evict everyone in your household, including children and those who do have the right to rent.

So it isn’t just a case of who is named on the tenancy agreement.

 

[ska invita]

More potential confusion.

Employers must check EU nationals' right to work, says minister



This is about what happens in transition period after Brexit. After Brexit EU nationals here will have two her period to apply for settled status.




So this means after Brexit comes into effect in March no EU nationals can come here. In the transition period of two years existing EU nationals will not necessarily have obtained the settled status. So there will be mix of those EU nationals who can apply for settled status and those who come here after March. The immigration minister Nokes is expecting employers to distinguish between the two.

Is this correct reading of this? Of have I misunderstood it?

A recipe for confusion imo. Also employers may take the position its to difficult to take on someone who is from EU post march.

Does anyone else understand this? I thought in the transition period of two years EU nationals could still come here and apply for settled status. I'm not clear on this.

People are already being denied work, basically just because certain employers think that's the mood. Once that becomes official government policy..... Which in fact basically it just has. It's officially out there now. To announce this without detail shows the utter disregard, in fact you have to presume it's deliberate disregard on the effects on the 3.5million.

Confusion is the (polite) word, the question is is it deliberate. Looks it. Has hallmark of Tory nudge unit going into overdrive to sharp elbow in the ribs followed by a kick between the legs.

Same as with the landlord thing certain landlords will err on the side of caution whatever and deny people a let.... It's already happening....Those 3.5 million added to the list with the other discriminations that landlords practice, though here they have government encouragement.

 

[Gramsci]

I've googled transition period for Brexit and now come up with this:

Downing Street yet to decide on freedom of movement for EU citizens after no-deal Brexit

The rights of existing EU nationals and those coming here during the transition period are unclear. Different ministers and senior civil servants say different things at different times. Then go back on what they said previously. As in Nokes case.

Javid says:

“There will need to be some kind of sensible transition period. I mean, these are the kinds of things I’ve been working on for months and months.”

So the situation for EU people who rent and work in this country post Brexit is crystal clear. The answer to zahir question is that I don't think a landlord or employer will be absolutely sure what to do. As landlords and employers under Mays hostile environment strategy are now co opted unwillingly to protect "our" borders, with heavy fines if they don't, its likely as ska invita says they won't take the risk of taking on EU people post Brexit unless they really need to.

Home Office minister Javid has been working on this for months. Tosser.

Whether this is deliberate policy or not as ska invita says is good question. If these Tories really cared they would have sorted this out months ago.

 

[harpo]

Friend of mine, a Portuguese national, working as a community interpreter, has been told by her agency that they won't be offering her work after March.

 

[Gramsci]

Joint Council for the Welfare of immigrants last November started legal challenge due to government going back on promises to (non UK) EU nationals about the "settled status"

The are being helped by the Public Law Project.

JCWI challenge to Brexit-related changes to the Immigration Rules - Public Law Project

PLP are representing the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) – a small charity who promote migrants’ rights in the UK. With our help, JCWI have issued a claim challenging Brexit-related changes to the Immigration Rules. The claim focuses on the inconsistencies between who the Government said would be excluded from the UK after Brexit, and the much wider group who will actually be excluded because of how the Government have drafted the new Rules. JCWI asked the Government to address the inconsistency and lack of transparency about what they are doing, but they have refused to do so. So today JCWI have served their legal claim on the Government, and are now waiting for the court’s decision as to whether they can proceed with their claim.

I can't see if this will be allowed to proceed yet.

 

[zahir]

There’s also a legal challenge from JCWI on the right to rent. I think this was being heard in December so it may now be waiting on a decision (I’ve no idea how long these kinds of hearings take).

Right To Rent Is A Policy That Leads To Discrimination

 

[ska invita]

Talking of legal challenges I wonder if this kind of thing

Friend of mine, a Portuguese national, working as a community interpreter, has been told by her agency that they won't be offering her work after March.

can be challenged. It doesnt seem justifiable. Discrimination surely. needs a landmark case

 

[Pickman's model]

Talking of legal challenges I wonder if this kind of thing

can be challenged. It doesnt seem justifiable. Discrimination surely. needs a landmark case

Surely in part depends on contract, if zero hours no obligation to offer work for example

Not saying it's right, just that it may not be illegal or unlawful

 

[ska invita]

Surely in part depends on contract, if zero hours no obligation to offer work for example

Not saying it's right, just that it may not be illegal or unlawful

yeah i can see how it could escape/bypass employment law...yet theyve said "From March" which suggests theres an explicit reason relaitng to Brexit for disallowing person mentioned from working and based on their nationality. That sounds like discrimination to me. Porbably not worth (me) speculating that much more here tbh. Its a complex legal matter.

 

[Pickman's model]

yeah i can see how it could escape/bypass employment law...yet theyve said "From March" which suggests theres an explicit reason relaitng to Brexit for disallowing person mentioned from working and based on their nationality. That sounds like discrimination to me. Porbably not worth (me) speculating that much more here tbh. Its a complex legal matter.

Yeh it's shit but it strikes me as possibly to do with new financial year and if charity possible changes in funding

Anyway re speculation that's our meat and drink here

 

[harpo]

Talking of legal challenges I wonder if this kind of thing

can be challenged. It doesnt seem justifiable. Discrimination surely. needs a landmark case

It isn't. It's not legal, it's not moral, but this is what's happening.

It is because of Brexit and her being Portuguese. It's a zero-hours contract but employment discrimination laws still exist. However, I don't know if this has been tested or whether there is the legal framework to test it. I suspect the agency can justify it by the uncertainty that EU nationals have been left in following this fucking shambles.

 

[Poi E]

Here's the fate of some Romanian guys at the hands of British nationalists Brutal attack on five Romanian men blamed on loyalist paramilitaries - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

 

[Pickman's model]

It isn't. It's not legal, it's not moral, but this is what's happening.

It is because of Brexit and her being Portuguese. It's a zero-hours contract but employment discrimination laws still exist. However, I don't know if this has been tested or whether there is the legal framework to test it. I suspect the agency can justify it by the uncertainty that EU nationals have been left in following this fucking shambles.

When I had a zero hours contract it stated my employer was under no obligation to offer work. I imagine the thing's the same here. They're not being sacked, they're simply not being offered work. Yeh it stinks but I'd like to see some actual evidence of illegality, all I see at the moment is sharp practice

 

[SpookyFrank]

More potential confusion.

Employers must check EU nationals' right to work, says minister



This is about what happens in transition period after Brexit. After Brexit EU nationals here will have two year period to apply for settled status.




So this means after Brexit comes into effect in March no EU nationals can come here. In the transition period of two years existing EU nationals will not necessarily have obtained the settled status. So there will be mix of those EU nationals who can apply for settled status and those who come here after March. The immigration minister Nokes is expecting employers to distinguish between the two.

Is this correct reading of this? Of have I misunderstood it?

A recipe for confusion imo. Also employers may take the position its to difficult to take on someone who is from EU post march.

Does anyone else understand this? I thought in the transition period of two years EU nationals could still come here and apply for settled status. I'm not clear on this.

Sounds like one of those situations where a bunch of contradictory back-of-an-envelope drivel becomes actual public policy and traps people in bureaucratic purgatory.

 

[harpo]

When I had a zero hours contract it stated my employer was under no obligation to offer work. I imagine the thing's the same here. They're not being sacked, they're simply not being offered work. Yeh it stinks but I'd like to see some actual evidence of illegality, all I see at the moment is sharp practice

Well if someone doesn't have the right to work then it's not illegal not to give them work. Thee shambolic part is that, with less than three months to go, the legal position isn't clear.

 

[Pickman's model]

Well if someone doesn't have the right to work then it's not illegal not to give them work. Thee shambolic part is that, with less than three months to go, the legal position isn't clear.

I think it's abysmal the way things have been done, and the atmosphere the tories have created is vile. My heart goes out to your friend, and to all those in the same boat. It's the greatest fuck up I've ever known

 

[Gramsci]

The reason I opposed Brexit was because so much of the run up to referendum was about "getting our borders back" and immigration. I thought Brexit vote would lead to not less but more immigration controls. I have been proved right. This is no accident.

As harpo says the legal position is not clear.

This is imo intentional.

There are parallels with the 70s. A Black British friend of mine in Brixton said, in run up to referendum, that the way Poles etc were being blamed for low wages etc was the same as his father from Carribbean got back in sixties and seventies. Back then post war the Commonwealth was area of free movement. This was curtailed in 70s.

So I'm coming to position that these fuck ups by government aren't fuck ups. They are intentional.

 

[ska invita]

So I'm coming to position that these fuck ups by government aren't fuck ups. They are intentional.

Some recent Tory Nudge Unit previous
Behavioural Insights Team - Wikipedia

 

[ska invita]

Current rejection rates on applications for permenant residence are at around 25%
\https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-rejects-over-1-in-4-eu-residency-applications/
If replicated on the new registration process that would be 900,000 rejected (if everyone actually applied)

...and include tripping people of up on not having documentation people didnt know they needed to have, such as succesive health insurance certificates
EU citizens 'denied residency documents'
...though it seems most often its about not filling in the form correctly or providing certain required evidence.

 

[Pickman's model]

Some recent Tory Nudge Unit previous
Behavioural Insights Team - Wikipedia

founded by the red tories i see.

 

[ska invita]

founded by the red tories i see.

its become a praxis for them (if im using the word right)

 

[DexterTCN]

Current rejection rates on applications for permenant residence are at around 25%...

jesus

I doubt it will go down.

 

[ska invita]

Reading this - not the clearest paragraphs:

"The expansion of the scheme follows two “private” test phases. The second phase saw 29,987 applications submitted with 27,211 decisions made. Of those, no cases were refused. However, the second phase was open to 250,000 people in selected universities, health and social care bodies.

The Home Office said 70% of applicants had been granted settled status with the remaining 30% granted pre-settled status, which is given to those who have been in the country for fewer than five years. There was positive feedback from 77% of applicants."

Sounds to me like a 30% rejection rate and a 77% take up rate

 

[butchersapron]

A 0% rejection rate surely. I mean, it literally says that.

 

[danny la rouge]

Reading this - not the clearest paragraphs:

"The expansion of the scheme follows two “private” test phases. The second phase saw 29,987 applications submitted with 27,211 decisions made. Of those, no cases were refused. However, the second phase was open to 250,000 people in selected universities, health and social care bodies.

The Home Office said 70% of applicants had been granted settled status with the remaining 30% granted pre-settled status, which is given to those who have been in the country for fewer than five years. There was positive feedback from 77% of applicants."

Sounds to me like a 30% rejection rate and a 77% take up rate

See above. Bold.

 

[ska invita]

See above. Bold.

In the first phase which involved a very direct contact with individuals. The stats are for second phase I think .

The general rate of rejections in the real world is 25per cent (see posts higher).

ETA: from this poorly written article
EU citizen registration in UK could become 'new Windrush', say migration experts
Poor in that it's not clear

 

[butchersapron]

That's 25% under an entirely different process/scheme. Not the EU settlement scheme which only starts a test phase today.

 

[danny la rouge]

In the first phase which involved a very direct contact with individuals. The stats are for second phase I think .

The general rate of rejections in the real world is 25per cent (see posts higher).

ETA: from this poorly written article
EU citizen registration in UK could become 'new Windrush', say migration experts
Poor in that it's not clear

I thought you were asking for clarification of the bit you quoted.

 

[skyscraper101]

Lend us yer Android phone, mate.