It will be interesting to see how this pans out for developers that stay in the UK, like myself. It's too hard a call it either way. In the current anti-immigration climate I can't see the UK tech industry competing as well as it has been.
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 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?
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...
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.
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.
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.
As long as there is work to do!