I watched a video just yesterday from someone (middle class) who explained that, by not having a passport, it took him weeks to get the necessary documentation together to prove his right to work in the UK. As a UK citizen.
> None of this says anything about whether I am privileged or not.
Oh boy, let's see:
> It merely means that they may cost a relatively small amount of money.
> What you are showing is simply a "bigotry of low expectations".
> What you are describing now I would imagine is discriminatory and thus illegal.
Out of this comment alone.
> I read it fine the first time thank you.
Except you completely misunderstood what I said, so you didn't "read it fine."
> However IANAL.
I can tell.
> the problem is with the potential employer in this circumstance.
Which primarily hurts the person who needs to work. What do you propose they do?
> TBH. It really feels as if you are inventing reasons why right to work checks should be considered "excessive" to shoehorn in your own personal politics.
I'm just pointing out how a mandatory Digital ID system, designed to prove right to work as a way of tackling illegal immigration (and thus illegal employment), could also benefit groups who aren't well-served by the current system.