Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

International student for Law. Job/visa opportunities? Watch

    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    This is intriguing, because I have heard that one large offeror of TCs in the City (which shall remain nameless) uses the opposite strategy of retrospectively re-advertising individual TCs with requirements so tailored to their offeree that only that offeree could satisfy them.

    It's possible that what I have heard is baloney, though it would be surprising as it was from a non-EU friend who got a TC at said firm.
    That is quite feasible. They probably didn't have the right processes in place from the start to obtain the tier 2 visa and so had to retrospectively "re-advertise" the vacancy to ensure they were compliant.

    Its a real pain in the backside to do it that way though and a lot of extra work. Having it all in place from the very beginning is a lot easier!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    pinkisthefloyd - where you able to make a decision on this. My daughter is in same situation like yours.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by srini234)
    pinkisthefloyd - where you able to make a decision on this. My daughter is in same situation like yours.
    Yes, I was able to make a decision actually. Before I share it with you though, I'd like to ask if it'd be better suited if you messaged me personally since it's a personal conversation?

    Otherwise, I'm also happy to discuss it here.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J-SP)
    That is quite feasible. They probably didn't have the right processes in place from the start to obtain the tier 2 visa and so had to retrospectively "re-advertise" the vacancy to ensure they were compliant.

    Its a real pain in the backside to do it that way though and a lot of extra work. Having it all in place from the very beginning is a lot easier!
    Hi,

    Thanks for your reply - I just revisited this thread due to the new replies and saw your response.*

    Something else intriguing is what you said in previous posts about firms with thousands of applicants having an easier time proving a non-EU applicant is needed. Do you mind expanding on that? It's just that another friend of mine (non-EU again) secured a TC with a highly prestigious City firm and was told that the volume of applications made it virtually impossible for them to prove that she was objectively better than the EU applicants they didn't make offers to.

    The visa process for her was actually a real nightmare. I understand the firm was reliant on an exemption of some kind whereby you have to switch directly from student visa to work visa - any gap between the two or switch to another visa type in the interim would have meant they couldn't sponsor her. I was pretty surprised by all this considering the numbers of non-EU trainees other top firms manage to hire. Does it sound like it would tie in with what you said about only some firms having a sponsorship certificate?*
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    Hi,

    Thanks for your reply - I just revisited this thread due to the new replies and saw your response.*

    Something else intriguing is what you said in previous posts about firms with thousands of applicants having an easier time proving a non-EU applicant is needed. Do you mind expanding on that? It's just that another friend of mine (non-EU again) secured a TC with a highly prestigious City firm and was told that the volume of applications made it virtually impossible for them to prove that she was objectively better than the EU applicants they didn't make offers to.

    The visa process for her was actually a real nightmare. I understand the firm was reliant on an exemption of some kind whereby you have to switch directly from student visa to work visa - any gap between the two or switch to another visa type in the interim would have meant they couldn't sponsor her. I was pretty surprised by all this considering the numbers of non-EU trainees other top firms manage to hire. Does it sound like it would tie in with what you said about only some firms having a sponsorship certificate?*
    Sorry for the long response - I'm by no means a legal expert on this, can only see it from how it has worked for me in the past....

    It depends on the quality of the applications received. If you get 1000s of applicants that are equal to the applicant you are trying to hire, then it would be more difficult. But it really depends how thorough your recruitment processes are - if you don't record basic details (like scores or reasons for rejecting) it can be more difficult. The main way you prove your ability to obtain a tier 2 though is to show you have advertised the role throughly. Most firms have to get letters from at least 3 universities to confirm campus activity, plus show their website + other job board advertising to show the role has been widely marketed.

    The only difference between those who have a gap in their tier 4 to tier 2 is that they are part of a national quota for tier 2s. Those who move directly from tier 4 to tier 2 are not part of the quota. The process is identical though, the only other difference is that the person with a gap would have to return home to obtain their tier 2.

    As far as I am aware the quota was only hit this time last year and they thought that was due to the high amounts of graduate programmes starting in September (http://www.workpermit.com/news/2015-...for-first-time). However even then, some firms applied again the following month when the new quota was available and still managed to get their visas in time. The monthly quota rolls over if it isn't used which has meant 99% of the time it's been an easy process to obtain a tier 2 (as long as you meet the basic criteria).

    Based on this, a firm's theory that they cannot get a visa for someone if they are not directly transferring from another visa type is questionable. Maybe they just saw it as too risky somehow...

    Like most organisations, an employment contract would state that any offer is subject to you obtaining the right to work in the UK. I guess firms might be concerned about losing a recruit weeks before a start date (firms with small intakes will be more worried about that), or the potential loss of money of training someone (LPC fees etc) who can't then start. They might not also want to additional costs of the candidate flying back to their home country (a lot of firms don't cover those costs anyway though and make it clear the candidate will have to cover it).

    So to me any of those perceived risks are fairly minimal, especially where the quota has only been reached once in roughly 5 years.

    But even if it did happen, my thought would be that as a firm you'd just reapply for the tier 2 and at worse move the person to the next trainee intake. That's what I have done before when there have been delays in the work permit process. The only way you wouldn't be able to do that is if you didn't meet the criteria for the work permit, but then that would be the same case if you were moving directly from a tier 4.

    So I suspect the whole truth is not being explained by the firm in question.

    They either haven't got a certificate of sponsorship in place (feasible but then they couldn't recruit any other non-EU person into any kind of role unless it was someone who already worked at the firm).

    Or it is possible that their selection processes/recording of them are not robust enough to obtain the visa.

    Or that the role does not meet the tier 2 criteria, which is usually only down to pay.

    Or they are concerned about the additional risk + potential costs of someone being on the quota system.

    But to say it is because of the tier 2 process because of an "exemption" is not quite accurate in my eyes. With the exception of the final reason (which to me is pretty weak anyway), the same would apply if you were transferring directly from a tier 4 to a tier 2. Unless things have changed recently that I am not aware of!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J-SP)
    Sorry for the long response - I'm by no means a legal expert on this, can only see it from how it has worked for me in the past....

    It depends on the quality of the applications received. If you get 1000s of applicants that are equal to the applicant you are trying to hire, then it would be more difficult. But it really depends how thorough your recruitment processes are - if you don't record basic details (like scores or reasons for rejecting) it can be more difficult. The main way you prove your ability to obtain a tier 2 though is to show you have advertised the role throughly. Most firms have to get letters from at least 3 universities to confirm campus activity, plus show their website + other job board advertising to show the role has been widely marketed.

    The only difference between those who have a gap in their tier 4 to tier 2 is that they are part of a national quota for tier 2s. Those who move directly from tier 4 to tier 2 are not part of the quota. The process is identical though, the only other difference is that the person with a gap would have to return home to obtain their tier 2.

    As far as I am aware the quota was only hit this time last year and they thought that was due to the high amounts of graduate programmes starting in September (http://www.workpermit.com/news/2015-...for-first-time). However even then, some firms applied again the following month when the new quota was available and still managed to get their visas in time. The monthly quota rolls over if it isn't used which has meant 99% of the time it's been an easy process to obtain a tier 2 (as long as you meet the basic criteria).

    Based on this, a firm's theory that they cannot get a visa for someone if they are not directly transferring from another visa type is questionable. Maybe they just saw it as too risky somehow...

    Like most organisations, an employment contract would state that any offer is subject to you obtaining the right to work in the UK. I guess firms might be concerned about losing a recruit weeks before a start date (firms with small intakes will be more worried about that), or the potential loss of money of training someone (LPC fees etc) who can't then start. They might not also want to additional costs of the candidate flying back to their home country (a lot of firms don't cover those costs anyway though and make it clear the candidate will have to cover it).

    So to me any of those perceived risks are fairly minimal, especially where the quota has only been reached once in roughly 5 years.

    But even if it did happen, my thought would be that as a firm you'd just reapply for the tier 2 and at worse move the person to the next trainee intake. That's what I have done before when there have been delays in the work permit process. The only way you wouldn't be able to do that is if you didn't meet the criteria for the work permit, but then that would be the same case if you were moving directly from a tier 4.

    So I suspect the whole truth is not being explained by the firm in question.

    They either haven't got a certificate of sponsorship in place (feasible but then they couldn't recruit any other non-EU person into any kind of role unless it was someone who already worked at the firm).

    Or it is possible that their selection processes/recording of them are not robust enough to obtain the visa.

    Or that the role does not meet the tier 2 criteria, which is usually only down to pay.

    Or they are concerned about the additional risk + potential costs of someone being on the quota system.

    But to say it is because of the tier 2 process because of an "exemption" is not quite accurate in my eyes. With the exception of the final reason (which to me is pretty weak anyway), the same would apply if you were transferring directly from a tier 4 to a tier 2. Unless things have changed recently that I am not aware of!


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Hi J-SP,

    How would a firm prove that a non-EU applicant is better than all other applicants?
    I'm asking because I'm an international student who got a 2:2 in first year and a mid 2:1 in second year, from a RG university- but I worry that the 2:2 in first year dashes any hope I have of a firm proving that I should get the visa and the TC.

    Thank you.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by grisham)
    Hi J-SP,

    How would a firm prove that a non-EU applicant is better than all other applicants?
    I'm asking because I'm an international student who got a 2:2 in first year and a mid 2:1 in second year, from a RG university- but I worry that the 2:2 in first year dashes any hope I have of a firm proving that I should get the visa and the TC.

    Thank you.
    You generally have a set of criteria, of which academics tend to be one. Other aspects could be other evidence like work experience, written style or understanding of the career/firm. Some firms may also include things like languages, although these tend to be for specific programmes where the training contract is split over multiple jurisdictions. Some firms will just state at an application stage whether the individual candidate meets their required standard or not, and let further assessments provide that evidence though.

    So it isn't just the information in the applications stage - you'd also have to show a strong performance in any subsequent assessments (psychometric testing, exercises, interviews etc).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J-SP)
    You generally have a set of criteria, of which academics tend to be one. Other aspects could be other evidence like work experience, written style or understanding of the career/firm. Some firms may also include things like languages, although these tend to be for specific programmes where the training contract is split over multiple jurisdictions. Some firms will just state at an application stage whether the individual candidate meets their required standard or not, and let further assessments provide that evidence though.

    So it isn't just the information in the applications stage - you'd also have to show a strong performance in any subsequent assessments (psychometric testing, exercises, interviews etc).
    thanks J-SP!
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 7, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.