New contract after Tier 2 renewal

[vdo86]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to get my tier 2 visa renewed. My company doesn't want to pay the salary increase so they're choosing an option where they would switch SOC code and either keep me in the same salary or give me a very slight one to meet the tier 2 requirements. (I'd prefer the raise but I don't really have much recourse).

They said that once they pay all the costs for the Tier 2 visa, that they want to put in my contract that I would have to stay with the company 6 months and can't accept any other job offers. Is this allowed? If I broke this, would I face any repercussions?

To be honest, I'm in the middle of looking as I'm not completely happy with my current company.

Thanks to anyone that has any thoughts on this.

[CR001]

They said that once they pay all the costs for the Tier 2 visa, that they want to put in my contract that I would have to stay with the company 6 months and can't accept any other job offers. Is this allowed? If I broke this, would I face any repercussions?

This is not an immigration issue though is it. Many employers do the same for visa (if they cover costs) and costs of studying for example.

You don't work for an umbrella company do you??

If you change SOC code, they have to do RLMT process I think.

[vdo86]

(Sorry wasn't sure where to have put this. Is there a better place where I can delete it move it?)

The company recently was bought by another major corporation. They appear to want to go through the RLMT. Is there anything that I should be worried about if they're using this option?

[CR001]

No, not in immigration terms. It is an agreement or term of your employment. What it means is that you leave before the six months, you become liable to repay them the full cost of covering your visa fees.

[Frontier Mole]

There could be a number of things to consider:
Undertaking the RLMT for a "new" role could be a nice way of reducing their salary costs as they don't want to pay the experienced rate for the job. But if your job has and does not change to that of the SOC then that is a breach of their duties. That puts them in the firing line from UKVI.
The bleak side of the equation is that the RLMT might find some else so you don't get a job offer at all.
Even if they appoint you there is the issue / perception the RLMT was jerrymandered so that gets them into the licence revocation zone.
The other downside is they don't have to give you a COS at all and no doubt there is a clause in your contract that states your employment is linked to your immigration status... so by default you can be terminated because they choose not to issue a COS

I know I am painting a pretty poor scenario but unfortunately there is a body of evidence that a good number of Sponsors are less than keen to raise salaries just to meet the experienced rate for further visa extension.

Just make sure whatever your Sponsor proposes does not leave you vulnerable given the adverse points above.

[vdo86]

There could be a number of things to consider:
Undertaking the RLMT for a "new" role could be a nice way of reducing their salary costs as they don't want to pay the experienced rate for the job. But if your job has and does not change to that of the SOC then that is a breach of their duties. That puts them in the firing line from UKVI.
The bleak side of the equation is that the RLMT might find some else so you don't get a job offer at all.
Even if they appoint you there is the issue / perception the RLMT was jerrymandered so that gets them into the licence revocation zone.
The other downside is they don't have to give you a COS at all and no doubt there is a clause in your contract that states your employment is linked to your immigration status... so by default you can be terminated because they choose not to issue a COS

I know I am painting a pretty poor scenario but unfortunately there is a body of evidence that a good number of Sponsors are less than keen to raise salaries just to meet the experienced rate for further visa extension.

Just make sure whatever your Sponsor proposes does not leave you vulnerable given the adverse points above.

Thanks a lot for laying out these considerations! It's good to know what could happen. Based on what you wrote, I have 2 questions.

1 What would be the repercussions for the company if they're in the UKVI's "firing line"? Would this be due to the possible jerrymandering? I don't believe they're planning on changing my role at all. Their sort of argument on changing the code is that I shouldn't have been put on my current one, the new lower level one fits my description more. (although at the time, the lawyers that they were consulting with had recommended my current SOC).

2 When you say that they don't have to give me a COS, does that basically mean that they're pretty much saying they don't want to sponsor me and would just be using the COS denial as a way of terminating my contract?

Thanks for your thoughts on all this