3 ms·
Why do you need that requirement be validated by people and at a level not connection to the place of work?
by eviks 6mo ago
Why do you need that requirement be validated by people and at a level not connection to the place of work?
- ryandrake 6mo agoPresumably 1. the "places of work" are not doing sufficient validation, and therefore 2. regulation is needed when the non-regulated path is failing.
- lo_zamoyski 6mo agoBecause the government is responsible for border control and immigration? The alternative is that the company must provide evidence, but I don't see how this is better.
- eviks 6mo agoThe first doesn't explain anything - the government was responsible before this new policy, so having no such policy doesn't go agasint that fact. Also other alternatives exist
- vidarh 6mo agoUnless the places of work are vetted, setting up a company to offer a job, and collect fees for offering said "jobs", would seem to be a simple way of committing fraud in that case. So either you vet the companies offering those jobs, or you vet the visa applicants.
- remarkEon 6mo agoCountries are not just places you work, first of all.
- Barrin92 6mo agoironically the first people who would disagree with you are the people who passed this piece of legislation slightly more seriously though work is one place where language acquisition happens organically, work is where culture emerges and despite the grievances I have with Anglosphere one great aspect of it is that they are never so frail to think that language can or must be imposed by a commissioner.
- remarkEon 6mo agoAre you kidding? One of the first things the Anglosphere did was enforce language customs. I think you should review a bit of the history here. Why do you think the standard language for flight is English? To the extent that language acquisition happens at the office, it comes at the expense of actually getting work done.
- dlcarrier 6mo agoTo prevent fraud. It's the same reason governments have driving tests and tax or grant audits. If the government deferred to applicants for everything, there'd be no point in the application process. Sure, there's a libertarian argument against limiting visas, imposing taxes, and issuing grants, but if you are going to, it requires some amount of enforcement to prevent rampant fraud.
- ranger_danger 6mo agoThis assumes the government itself isn't the one doing the fraud.