Post-Brexit Britain and the UK’s Shrinking Tech Talent Pool
hired.com
hired.com
It doesn't include anything other than percentages or their sources, no total numbers.
We have no way of knowing how statistically significant it is.
The post also bundles EU and non-EU candidates into "foreign candidates" which distorts the picture as a whole.
What has historically been a system which favours EU candidates over other International ones has now been leveled.
As long as there is work to do!
Positive side: Less tech people = more money (which already has happened IMO, although maybe that's simply because accounting in big companies is in USD). Negative side: Less tech people...
EU techies have already started to move away. And some of the UK companies I've kept in touch with are really struggling to hire now. Personally, I'd always take a good office atmosphere/culture over more pay and a less skilled team.
As for non-EU techies, judging from one of our co-workers, getting a UK visa is horribly complicated. Don't think they'll make up the numbers fast.
So those projects being delivered from UK either need to move into a EU country or start ramping up EU compliant data agreements.
Hmmm. Only if the jobs stay in the UK. We continue to use the EU techies - but at offices elsewhere within the EU.
The result is £925 a day for me, which in east midlands UK is a very tasty morsel.
In summary I'm a SaaS guy, being used to replace 3 Europeans who aren't likely to be there long-term to continue to build the product beyond its initial launch. My (albeit extortionate) day rate is less than their 3 combined, so it made sense for the company. Right place right time for me.
For colour, from your perspective: if you can get £500 a day in London that's not bad at all, up here in the East Midlands (I'm near Nottingham) I can get £350 to £400 a day, though I would normally trade some back for work flexibility (I prefer to work less than 8 hours a day).
Then wait a couple of days for the Recruiters' automated search systems to index your CV. You'll start getting phone calls about positions soon after.
the view amongst the UK electorate is not and has never been "all immigration is bad", surveys reveal that a majority of the UK electorate actually support an increase in migration of highly skilled workers
they simply perceive unskilled migration to be a problem, and within the EU there is no ability to control it
as a result: for the highly skilled from other parts of the world it will likely become easier and cheaper to migrate to the UK (and the government has been making noises to this effect)
So why the fascination with net migration figures and the desire by some elements to have "one in one out"?
Edit: I do tend to worry that post Brexit there will be no reduction in net migration figures and there will be a resurgence of support for the far right who want to deliver on no immigration at all.
Not sure how you can argue that there is no "actual public interest" in the topic.
See: "All Out War" by Tim Shipman for more on this - a really excellent book.
Remember that about 20% of the leavers are 'liberal leavers' - they are pro-migration. Once you add this group to the remainers it's clear that a minority of anti-immigration voters shouldn't decide politics for everybody else.
[0] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-people...
http://www.unhcr.org/uk/protection/operations/56bb369c9/pres...
> Overall, the Swedish press was the most positive towards refugees and migrants, while coverage in the United Kingdom was the most negative, and the most polarised. Amongst those countries surveyed, Britain’s right-wing media was uniquely aggressively in its campaigns against refugees and migrants
[...]
> The discussion of refugees and migrants as a cultural threat or a threat to community cohesion was most prevalent in the British press (10.8%), followed by Swedish (8.2%), Italian (8.1%), Spanish (7.4%) and German (5.3%) newspapers. Another noticeable finding was the high incidence of threats to welfare/health systems in the UK press (18.3%) which was much higher than the other countries in the sample (Sweden 11.4%, 7.9% Germany, 7.3% Italy, 6.7% Spain). The prevalence of negative refugee frames could also be seen in the greater tendency for the British press to link refugees and migrants to crime (8.2%) than in other countries (Italy 4.3%, Germany 3.7%, Italy 2.6%, Spain 1.7%)
[...]
> In contrast, coverage in the United Kingdom was the most negative. Despite the presence of newspapers such as the Guardian and Daily Mirror, both of which were sympathetic to refugees, the right-wing press in the United Kingdom expressed a hostility towards refugees and migrants which was unique. Whilst newspapers in all countries featured anti-refugee and anti-migrant perspectives, what distinguished the right of centre press in the UK was the degree to which that section of the press campaigned aggressively against refugees and migrants. This could be seen in the preponderance of negative frames and the editorialising in favour of Fortress Europe approaches.
Blame societies ills on the poor and weak - one of the oldest political tricks in the book and something that makes me physically ill to contemplate.
The government has been making 'noises to the effect' that it is concerned about the net migration number and bringing this down to the 'tens of thousands' [1]. This doesn't seem to distinguish between skilled and unskilled, it's just about reducing the headline number.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/08/conservativ...
So where do you live now? I'd be interested to hear about this magical country which does not restrict immigration.
They're not being judged by officialdom on whether they get to live in the UK and freely move around it. They're only being "judged" in the sense of having the negative opinion of someone on the internet. Big difference.
Maybe we should be questioning migration control on a more local scale? 200k people move to London every year. If London decided to end UK free movement, only allowing skilled professionals in, it could solve the London housing crisis! /s
(That sounds absurd, but was in fact done to the Ugandan Asians who had their UK citizenship removed by act of Parliament)
A bigger difference is that these are two entirely different things. I mean "judge" entirely in the sense of negative personal judgement, not immigration status. And since I'm addressing you here, and your own comment, I'm not sure why that matters.
> If London decided to end UK free movement, only allowing skilled professionals in, it could solve the London housing crisis!
London already has defacto movement control with high rent and living costs.
Will the free movement work both ways (No southerners migrating to the North without permit)? Will tax and governmental control be localised too? How will that work given historical investment in any area common property to the country?
Why do you consider a comparison within a country is valid as with other countries? If that's your angle - why is it fair non-EU countries excluded from free moment?
If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
Also per https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/08/conservativ... - even if the UK were to accept "more skilled" immigrants, the overall number would be extremely limited.
(As it stands, they propose to limit it to "tens of thousands" including students, which means either the collapse of UK education exports or a virtual end to worker immigration)
Oh and see also http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-ministers-mis... : cabinet ministers will simply say whatever lie they need for the particular audience.
It's still easier to hire someone in close vicinity than pick someone from anywhere
If nothing else changes, it has been leveled at the worst level for companies seeking talent. Not a kind of leveling they can be happy of.
Mehul Patel ( who wrote this post), was COO at Kaggle ( i must admit, this is a unbelievable coincidence)
I think that someone who worked at Kaggle can get pretty accurate results from datasets. I think referring this as "just a blog post" severly ignores the effort that has been put into it.
70% said yes. I'm sure a lot of people, in all industries, and even before Brexit, have considered this, especially when it's been raining for a fortnight or there have been particularly annoying Tube strikes. But there's a big difference between considering doing something and actually doing it.
So Brexit in isolation might not be the sole reason many people move, but it will no doubt affect a few people who where already considering their options.
I'm going back to the US in two weeks for a new job. I'll be making roughly 66% more. Sure, part of that has to do with the fact that I have experience now. But dev salaries in London weren't great compared to the US even when the pound was strong.
Honestly, Europe's best hope for keeping tech talent from going to the US may be Donald Trump cracking down on visas.
When UK Techies leave the UK for California. They don't come back. They have golden handcuffs money wise.
Most tech jobs have good health insurance. At the moment 1 GBP ~ 1.3 USD. I think a (good?) salary for somebody out of uni is ~30k GBP, and ~120k USD. For a software dev with a few years of experience it's maybe ~45k GPB vs ~200k USD (total comp). And depending on where you are in the US, you might be paying less tax.
A few more hours and some soul-crushing meetings doesn't seem so bad considering you can do it for a few years, come back and buy a house - in cash. Of course, you might find you enjoy it and you stay... ironically that's how I ended up living in the UK for 7 years.
Of course it still doesn't compare to a Silicon Valley or New York dev salary.
I have lived in London for 10 years, had my own house. I have lived in the EU as well.
Having lived in the US for 3 years, and in various states. Here's what I found.
America Pros.
They get paid much more, and yes they work more hours. Which if done right, can lead to promotions and networking. Networking which leads to entrepreneurial-ship.
They have a much larger access to other entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ecosystem.
They have more readily available ways of earning money. Earning $100 a day with a laptop in star bucks is possible. Much more opportunity.
They enjoy a much lower cost of living. Electricity, petrol (gas), food, takeaways, alcohol is much lower. Lets not forget taxes as well!
They enjoy much larger living accommodations compared to europeans and for less money.
They have better cell phone plans, with free calls and texts.
They have better access to weather. You can enjoy a nice climate in San Diego, spend hot summers in Southern Florida, or you can snow board in Utah for the winter.
Finally, they have much better social mobility in the US. In 12-18 months you can go from being broke living in a car. To being a millionaire.
America Cons.
Yes, health-care is higher.
UK Pros.
Better access to Healthcare.
Internet is cheaper and faster.
4 Weeks paid vacation time.
---------
America is an awesome place. It offers so many opportunities than other countries. It's something that you really can't get from a posting. You truly have to experience it. Then you'll get it.
They have better access to weather. You can enjoy a nice climate in central Italy, spend hot summers in Southern Spain, or you can snow board in French Alps for the winter.
But it's not the same.
For the EU, each country has it's own marketplaces, own stores, own food cuisines, own ways of doing things. Why? Because they still have their own national identity.
In America it's one language, a Walmart in Utah is the same Walmart in Florida, same for Tacobell or Golden Corral. Why? Because it's just one country.
Until you start moving to the United States of Europe. Both experiences won't be the same.
The US has awful phone plans. You can get unlimited data in the UK for less than 25 a month. You can get 'enough' data for most people (2-3gb) for a tenner on pay as you go. Back when I was living in the US it was practically impossible to get away with paying less than 35-40$/month for anything with a reasonable amount of data and I haven't heard any news about this having changed recently.
Also do not underestimate vacation time. In my experience most companies in the UK give you around 5. I am on 6 weeks currently. It's great earning more money but if you have no time to actually use that money then that defeats the purpose a little bit in my opinion.
My company is providing health insurance. I will be working the same hours. The biggest difference benefit-wise is that I get ten days less paid vacation (15 vs 25)--but I mostly used my vacation to visit New York.
A dev job in Indianapolis (or anywhere else between the coasts except Chicago) would pay what I make in London and the cost of living would be halved.
Source: I live and work in London and have done so for the last 5 1/2 years
The opposite could happen. The spamable H-1B lottery where you're left in suspense for months to maybe get an H-1B sucks for you and the sponsoring company. But if e.g. the H-1B minimum salary is raised, you might actually see an increase in Europeans coming over. (I believe the DHS & TSA is doing far more to keep us out than Trump :P)
-Fastest growing EU country
-12.5% Corporation Tax, pro-enterprise government
-Large amount of the biggest tech and pharma multinationals already using it as European HQ
-English speaking
-Educated workforce
-Fair statutory holidays and employment rights
-Safe, low crime, politically stable
-Green, natural environment
-Decent schools, low cost university education, state healthcare
-Cheap flights to most parts of Europe. US immigration pre-clearance.
-Friendly people
-Gay marriage
-Tons of history, culture, music and sports
-Great beer and pubs
> politically stable
this is somewhat relative. It's perhaps no more corrupt that the US, let's say.
> low crime
relative to where?
Low crime => compared to most EU countries and of course the UK and US. Ditto terrorism risk.
It's the only way to get net migration down: persuade people to emigrate by depriving them of economic opportunity.
Edit: note that people who are married to EU nationals do not automatically get the right for their spouse to remain, so I expect a few hundred thousand people to be forced to emigrate for that reason.
“It's better to die free than live life in a cage.”
I'm a Scottish nationalist, and as such have learned that shouting "freedom!" out of context gets you ridiculed. It has to be freedom to/of some things specific and valuable.
So this is the effect of what people expect there to happen wrt. EU and UK in the future. Judging from the numbers the effect is quite strong but obviously also something that may change quickly once the arrangement between EU and UK after brexit is fully settled.
And yes, there's a possibility that a usable agreement comes out at some point in time, but by then companies might have decided not to wait, but move to the continent. Thus giving this a longer-term impact.