Thousands Of Migrant Health and Care Workers Could Be Forced to Leave the UK as Major Visa Settlement Change Sparks Warning

Here’s a rewritten and expanded version in simple human English, while keeping clear that the 15-year settlement period is a government proposal that UNISON is opposing.

UNISON has warned that the UK could lose migrant workers in health and social care if proposed changes to immigration rules go ahead.

The union says many overseas workers who came to Britain expecting to qualify for permanent settlement after five years could instead face a much longer wait. Under proposals considered by the Government, some workers in jobs below degree level, including care workers and senior care workers, could have to wait up to 15 years before qualifying for settlement in the UK.

UNISON says this could make it harder for the NHS and social care sector to keep experienced international staff, especially at a time when some services are already struggling with worker shortages.

Speaking at the Trades Union Congress in Brighton, UNISON senior vice president Debbie Rowden strongly criticised the proposals and called on the Government to reconsider them.

She said many migrant workers had made important life decisions based on the expectation that they could apply for settlement after five years. Extending that period to 15 years, she argued, could leave workers facing years of uncertainty about their future in Britain.

Rowden also criticised the way lower-paid jobs in health and social care are treated under the proposed settlement system.

She argued that being paid less does not mean a person’s job is less important to the country. Care workers, healthcare assistants, nursing auxiliaries, children’s residential care workers and other public service employees provide services that many people depend on every day.

UNISON says the issue is not only about migrant workers but also about how Britain values people doing essential but relatively low-paid jobs.

The union is particularly concerned that workers who arrived in the UK under rules offering a five-year path to settlement could be affected by a much longer qualifying period.

UNISON has been campaigning against the proposed changes through its Fair Visa Campaign. It wants the Government to keep a five-year route to settlement and argues that changes should not be applied retrospectively to workers who came to Britain under the previous expectations.

The union has also raised concerns about the sponsorship system used for migrant care workers. A worker’s immigration status can be closely connected to their sponsoring employer, which UNISON argues can make it more difficult for workers to leave a bad workplace without putting their right to remain in the country at risk.

The wider immigration system has also become tougher for some overseas workers in recent years. Changes have affected which jobs qualify for sponsorship, the recruitment of care workers directly from overseas and the ability of some care workers to bring family members with them.

UNISON fears that adding a much longer wait for permanent settlement could convince some international workers that remaining in Britain is no longer worthwhile.

Some may decide to leave the UK for another country where they believe they can get greater long-term security. Others who may have considered working in Britain could decide not to come at all.

That could create another challenge for health and social care employers that rely on international workers to help fill vacancies.

The Government has argued that its proposed “earned settlement” system should link the route to permanent residence more closely to a person’s contribution and circumstances. However, unions have challenged an approach that could result in some lower-paid essential workers waiting considerably longer than higher earners.

For UNISON, the central argument is that salary should not be the only way of measuring someone’s contribution to the country.

A care worker may not earn the salary of someone working in finance or another highly paid profession, but the union argues that their work remains essential to elderly people, disabled people, patients and families who depend on care services.

The Trades Union Congress has backed calls opposing the proposed settlement changes. Unions are pushing for migrant workers to retain a five-year route to settlement and for people already in Britain not to have their expected route changed retrospectively.

The debate is now about more than immigration numbers. It also raises questions about how Britain attracts and keeps overseas workers, how essential public service jobs are valued, and whether changing settlement rules could make existing staffing problems in health and social care more difficult.