Inability to recruit the best for the job; brain drain if current workers had to leave. ... of the current marker requir
MIGRANT WORKERS IN STEM ROLES PROSPECT SURVEY MAY 2015 Introduction 1. It is widely recognised that the STEM workforce is international in nature. As the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CASE) notes: ‘Part of the reason for the UK’s global pre-eminence in these fields is our current and historical ability to attract the world’s most talented minds, from university students to experienced professionals’. 2. Prospect members working in STEM have long experience of working with colleagues from across the world, and many have expressed concerns about the potential impact of the Migration Advisory Committee’s review of Tier 2 of the points-based immigration system. The EU referendum is adding to members’ uncertainty. A resolution of Prospect’s recent national conference called for a campaign against blunt anti-immigration policies that damage workforce health and productivity and for enhanced understanding of the need for qualified specialists from outside the UK, so that such groups are welcomed at work and in the community. 3. To inform our approach, Prospect conducted a survey of STEM membership areas. We received responses from 45 organisations; 60% from civil service and NDPBs and 40% from the private sector. 71% reported that their organisation employs migrant workers from within the EU in STEM roles including 83% of those in the public sector and 48% from the private sector. 62% employ migrant workers from outside the EU in STEM roles, including 75% in the public sector and 39% in the private sector. Whereas EU migrant workers are most likely to be focused in particular functions in the private sector, 76% of public sector respondents reported that they are of some importance across the organisation. Migrant workers from outside the EU are important across organisations from both sectors. Significance of the EU migrant workforce in UK STEM
Latest revision of this document: https://library.prospect.org.uk/id/2016/01220 This revision: https://library.prospect.org.uk/id/2016/01220/2016-06-29
Significance of the non-EU migrant workforce in UK STEM
4. Respondents reported that migrant workers undertake a wide range of roles including:
Development, testing and maintenance of software and systems;
Patent examination;
Plating, welding, scaffolding and fabrication;
Engineering roles including design, aeronautical, diagnostic, systems and specialist engineering;
Science roles including research, forecasting, radiological protection, biology, agriculture and ecology, plasma physics;
Operational management;
Administration;
Infrastructure planning;
Medicine and nursing.
5. Other respondents noted that migrant workers:
Train others in skills learned elsewhere.
Bring alternative perspectives and experiences.
Contribute to the normal daily operation of the organisation.
Represent the organisation within the relevant scientific communities.
One respondent commented that ‘It is impossible for every university to lead science in every topic, so the scientific community (and this society as a whole which benefits from scientific advances and understanding) relies on geographically specific skills development’. 6. Asked about the consequences if their organisation was no longer able to employ migrant workers, respondents said:
Dire.
We would have a severe problem; approx. 30-50% of workforce could be affected.
More demand for these skills within the UK.
Key projects would be unsupported and our ability to sustain excellence would be rapidly reduced.
Manpower shortage leading to project delays.
It would be very difficult to recruit capable, suitably qualified staff to many roles.
There would be a decay in reputation and ranking of both the science and forecasting skills to overseas institutions.
Inability to recruit the best for the job; brain drain if current workers had to leave.
We would not fill posts. Over the last 3-4 years the number of non-UK science staff has increased markedly because our pay in the UK is not competitive but still attractive to many in the EU and further afield. Without these migrant workers many jobs would have remained vacant.
We would very quickly lose our status as a world player in environmental research. Nobody can do serious science without an international workforce.
Reduced competitiveness on the international market due to: a) limited hiring pool and therefore lower chance of matching the skills and qualifications required by an organisation to a given candidate b) lack of diversity in perspectives and possibly out of date knowledge of the current marker requirements as well as limiting possibility to broaden networking opportunities with international organisations of relevance c) lack of interest from potential international business partners/investors with an opposite vision to national exclusivity.
7. It is clear that the proposal to increase the salary threshold for migrant workers is a major cause of concern for public sector respondents.
Is the proposal to increase the salary threshold for migrant workers causing concern in your organisation?
Respondents’ comments show that the main cause for concern relates to pay levels in their organisations being too low to meet the Tier 2 threshold, though in the private sector there are also concerns about the creation of a two-tier workforce with migrant workers employed for fixed terms paid at lower rates than permanent staff:
It would exclude support scientists, general staff and post-docs from being employed here.
Most are paid less than the threshold; moreover the threat to leave the EU means people feel even more exposed to uncertainty.
Our pay is so low that it is virtually impossible to get someone in below senior level, yet we are too top heavy already and desperately need to recruit at lower levels where the pay for UK nationals is just totally unacceptable.
The threshold is far too high and would exclude PhD students, post docs and other early career employment, stunting both immediate opportunities and long-term development of the organisation.
The salary threshold would act as a bar to post-doctoral researchers working in science, blocking world class talent from working at our organisation.
The thresholds indicated would see pretty much no technicians anymore, so who’s actually going to do the work?
8. Against this background, 76% of all respondents and 86% from the public sector do not believe that the MAC approach of seeking to control migration from outside the EU through salary thresholds strikes the correct balance. This is seen as a blunt instrument that ignores the need to attract staff on the basis of their skills and qualifications:
Seeking to restrict migration by salary assumes that there is an effective market operating – so a shortage drives the pay up. However in general there are many skilled areas where pay levels are relatively low despite shortages – If the market is broken it is foolish to rely on it to determine and satisfy skills needs. The measure is a complete nonsense. I am an EU migrant worker currently on a salary which is less than £35,000. I was recruited because I was the best qualified for the job. If this threshold is approved the message will be that I am doing a good job but because I don’t earn enough money, I am going to be sent back to my country. Like myself, there are other EU and non-EU migrants facing the same problem within my organisation. 9. Our members report that the EU referendum is adding to concerns about migration, both for their organisations’ management but especially for staff. Is migration causing concern in your organisation in the context of the EU referendum?
Concerns include reduced ability to recruit key scientists and loss of EU funding streams, though there are also concerns about personal and social relationships:
Opportunities would be reduced both for UK workers to gain experience in other EU countries and vice versa if restrictions on travel were introduced. Also for workers from other countries who have recently settled and formed relationships in this country, the potential for future restrictions could be concerning. The same applies to workers who have formed relationships with migrant workers and may face having to move to another country to remain in the relationship or be forced to separate. This could lead to loss of skilled UK workers to other countries where migration restrictions are not as severe.
Conclusions 10. Although this was a small-scale survey, it does reveal genuine and deep concerns about the implications of migration policy for STEM in the UK, and very strikingly so in the public sector. It gives a particular focus to concerns about pay levels, not simply for the individuals concerned, but for the
organisations they work for too. A high proportion of our respondents talk about reliance on migrant workers for business-critical functions and of the risks that their non-availability poses to sustainable high quality science. International collaboration in this sphere is not an option if the UK is to maintain its reputation and influence, so it is important that the challenges posed by the current direction of public policy and fully understood and openly debated.
