Tier 5 for Americans

Well, and to just point out, Japan is included in the YMS.  Obviously it has far more to do with the reciprocal agreements from countries that Britian wouldn't mind providing an opportunity to.  Notice that South Africa, which likely has stronger cultural ties with the UK then the US and has more expatriates in the UK then I suspect Japan does, is not included.

Also, India, Pakistan, Palistine, Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, etc etc etc are all ex-British territories who are not part of the Commonwealth of Nations and don't participate in the YMS.

We assume there are strong ties between the US and the UK, but I think this is hold over from the Cold War era and in part the fading WWII generation.  Culturally, the US has a lot more in Common with Canada and Australia then with the UK and economically probablly stronger ties with Japan.  The UK outside of the EU has stronger cultural ties to South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, India, Pakistan and the Carribean before you ever get to the US and economically, I would say it would be a simliar mix.

I agree.

India, Pakistan, Palistine, Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, etc etc etc are all ex-British territories who are not part of the Commonwealth of Nations

India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are members of the Commonwealth. Palestine doesn't technically exist

India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are members of the Commonwealth. Palestine doesn't technically exist

Well, I knew Palestine was stretching it a bit, but I should have reviewed the list.  It is a long one.

As a side note, how would you like to be a nation in Arrears.  Sometimes we worry about paying our bills, but man, that has to suck.  "Hello, is the nation of Nauru in, we would like to talk about making a payment on their Commonwealth Membership."

Goodness, you mean there's a membership fee, too. 

Interesting conversations going on with respect to this. I'd love to see America part of this, not least of all because I myself was lucky enough to participate on the BUNAC scheme myself for four summers running. I think many couples used it as a test of living together under "normal" conditions before making a bigger decision - presumably this cut down the number of failed marriages as a result of too hasty decisions (even though this wasn't the intent of the scheme). So it saddens me that currently young Americans have no route to do the same.


Allow me to explain further:
The statement of intent that was published on Tier 5 YMS, published here http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/managingourborders/pbsdocs/statementofintent/temporaryworkersunderpbs.pdf?view=Binary  and specifically Paragraph 49 states the criteria that must be met in order for a country to be part of this scheme. Let's look at them one by one

To be eligible to join the Scheme a country will need to:

a) have effective arrangements operating with the UK for the return of its nationals. The UK Government will need to be satisfied that there is an effective means of enforced
return for the particular country’s nationals, and that the government of the country will cooperate in that process by:
i) accepting EU letters for the purposes of returns, and/or
ii) re-documenting its nationals swiftly, at a level commensurate with demand, and
iii) receiving its nationals in a timely and appropriate manner.

Let's revisit this one at the end.

b) constitute a low risk in terms of abuse of the UK immigration controls by its nationals. This means that a country must:
i) not be subject to a mandatory United Kingdom visa regime; and
ii) have a risk value under the YMS risk formula that is no higher than the maximum permitted YMS risk level set by the UK Government.

Presumably the US passes this test, as it is not subject to a Visa regime.

c. provide, by the date it joins the Scheme, reciprocal youth mobility arrangements for UK nationals that allow:
i) a minimum stay of 12 months;
ii) a minimum period of 12 months work;
iii) participants to choose their employment (with some minor restrictions), without them or their prospective employers having to obtain official approval for the jobs concerned; and
iv) an annual minimum entry of 1000 UK nationals under those arrangements (if a country chooses to limit the total annual number of UK nationals permitted under
its reciprocal arrangements).

The reciprocal scheme offered by a country that wishes to participate in Tier 5 (Youth Mobility) must also offer one or both of the following:
v) participation by UK nationals aged from 18 to at least 30 years with no requirement that such nationals must be graduates or undergraduates; AND/OR
vi) participation by UK nationals who are required to have undergraduate or graduate status, including those aged 18 to 30 years.:

OK, so people on here are speculating that the US will never allow young Brits a one year working visa allowing them to work wherever they want. However, let's not forget that the USA offers a "Working Holiday" program to young Australians here: http://www.iep.org.au/workusa/workusa.asp. It's unclear from that website whether you're only allowed to take particular jobs (there's a heavy emphasis on resort jobs, but they also mention "mixing drinks in trendy bars in Manhattan"), nor is it clear exactly how limited the numbers are (let's assume it's at least 1000), but it's valid for a year's work, so that means that the US offer a program to Aussies of the standard required by p49 C i,ii,iii, and we'll assume iv.
The eligibility requirements are that you must be a full time student or a recent graduate, so that means that the US offer a program to Aussies of the standard required by p49 C vi (the UK program must meet the requirements of v OR vi remember).

 So, do you see where I'm going here? Why would the US not be happy to offer something similar to Brits? This would therefore indicate that the sticking point is with part a), i.e. the handling of returns. My guess is that the US is not willing to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the UK to the effect of Paragraph 49a.

So, if that is the case (and it shouldn't be too difficult to find out if it is) there is absolutely no reason not to bombard your congressmen/representatives at the US Embassy in London with requests that they do so. It is after all their job to represent you to your Government (unlike, say, contacting your congressman because the British Consulate have had the package containing your student visa application for two whole days and you've not heard anything yet, and despite having had the whole summer to prepare your application you've waited until the last possible moment to apply).

I agree, and have said it before: people need to push T5 from stateside resources, congressment and lobbyists.  It's not going to happen otherwise.

So, do you see where I'm going here? Why would the US not be happy to offer something similar to Brits?

Two words: Tube bombings. I don't know that the U.S. would admit it, but I think they feel there are too many British Muslim radicals running around for them to be happy letting them in for an 'easy' visa lasting 1-2 years.

I will gladly back off my former naysaying about it.  Write your congress people.

I posted these before, but here you go again.  To write your senator go here.  You have two Senators from the State you live in (or used to live in).

To write your Representative go here.  You will have one Representative based on where you live within your State.

Attempting to Write the Foreign Relationship Committee in the Senate might help as well:

    Senate Foreign Relations Committee
    United States Senate
    Washington, D.C. 20510

And of course there is the "Open for Questions" which was mentioned before, which can be found here, though it is better to target specific individuals with a specific request.

If you need some inspiration, feel free to steal from the following:

Dear [Insert Name]:

I am writing you in regards to youth mobility between the United Kingdom and the United States.  Historically, the United Kingdom particpated in a program called BUNAC (British Universities North America Club), but recent changes to their immigration policies closed this program and instead started a program called the Youth Mobility Scheme (YMS).  Currently Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan are participating in the schema, allowing young people to work for a limited period of time in the UK.  At this point in time, the United States is not participating in the program.

My understanding that the main reason for why the United States is not being included is due to restrictions that the United States Immigrations and Customs Enforcement want to put on those coming from the UK who might potentially want to participate in a similar scheme in the US.  My understanding is that the United Kingdom feels strongly that in order to participate, the agreements need to be reciprocal.  In the case of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, they all offer similar reciprocal agreements for youth mobility and therefore participate in the program.

I would like to encourage you, as my representative in Congress, to look into what might be done to enable a reciprocal agreement.  My understanding is that the UK Government would very much like the participation of the United States in the program.  The US and the UK have shared a long history and friendship and share a unique close relationship.  Many Americans have strong cultural and family ties with the United Kingdom and the ability for our youth in the United States to gain experience in the United Kingdom in invaluable.  Also, allowing UK youth to experience the American way is one of the best way to help promote global awareness of the United States and work to better establish global relationships between the United States and the rest of the world.  I think we would all agree that better understanding of different people and different cultures help counter act the effects of terrorism and violence that we are challenged with these days.

I would expect in this difficult global economic climate that supporting a plan that allows youth from the United Kingdom to work in the US with minimal restrictions on what type of work they can perform might not be popular.  This is understandable, but the agreement would be reciprocal, so just as many Americans would be able to gain experience in the UK as those in the UK wanting to work in the US.  Because of this concern, the UK has required in their program to include a requirement that the person can support themselves for a period of time while in the UK by requiring maintenance funds that are verified prior to allowing entry to the UK.  Because of the limited nature of the visa, participants often take short term jobs that allow them to decide to potentially go to a University or gain other experiences that allow them to play a larger contributor to American society.  It is very much a program and a concept that both countries and societies end up with a positive benefit from.

We now live in a global society.  Computer have made social contact between countries far easier, but the world has not kept up with that.  Because the US and the UK share a common culture, many young people meet on the internet and forge bonds.  The BUNAC and now the YMS are ways to help young people safely explore the world and these social arrangements.  My fear is that the lack of such a program forces people into considerations of early marriages which end up cross-border broken families, which makes things more difficult for everyone.  These type of schemes allow young people to experience a society, potentially spend time with someone they met on-line, but continue to lead an independent life without having to commit to a marriage they are not ready for.

I would encourage you to investigate the US stance on the UK Youth Mobility Scheme and either introduce or support legislation that would allow a reciprocal program for UK citizens to come and experience the US.  Please feel free to contact me, as I would love to discuss further why this is important to me and while I feel it is important to America.

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Two words: Tube bombings. I don't know that the U.S. would admit it, but I think they feel there are too many British Muslim radicals running around for them to be happy letting them in for an 'easy' visa lasting 1-2 years.

I am sure they would admit it.  Why not?  The government has enough trouble getting people to leave the country already, why compound the problem? 

It is one thing to have a bunch of students, like BUNAC was, working at resort for a summer and another to have people in the other country for two years. 

In a few summer months, especially if you are living in resort housing/not having bills etc, you aren't likely to be able to build up resources/contacts that will allow you to disappear, two years is a different story.

Of course, some people will always plan on staying, but by restricting it to Uni students on breaks you minimise the risk.

You appear to be missing one of the points in my post: The Austrailians already get a year - so why not the brits.

And as far as "British Muslims" theory. British muslims already are able to visit the US without a visa for three months. If security is a concern, I'm sure they would rather have an application from someone have to go through the pre-scrutiny of a visa application, than have them just board a plane.

And also, don't forget that thousands of muslims, british or otherwise are still being granted visas to study in the US for longer than a year. SO I don't think that theory holds any water.

Yes, I don't think it American bigotry towards British Muslims.  I think it is more the perceived lack of control surrounding what jobs they could take up.  Like I always said when I was in the States, it isn't Mexicans that I worry about stealing my job, it was those damn Canadians.  They sound like Americans and they take all the jobs I would really want; Doctors, Comedians, Musicians, Newscasters, etc.

I agree with tannersarms in that it would be better to have people in the US under a programme that, like the UK one, requires the applicaint to prove they have funds, and go through a few more hoops then someone just hopping on a plane with filling out an ETSA form.

Obviously the UK is up for two years unfettered access to their job market for a similiar thing from the US, and on sure numbers, you would think it would be the UK that would be afraid.

Obviously the UK is up for two years unfettered access to their job market for a similiar thing from the US

The SoI states all we want is at least a year - reciprocity doesn't have top be absolutely the same terms as we offer - see also we'll accept a "graduates only" program, even though we don't require that of those coming to the UK.

You appear to be missing one of the points in my post: The Australians already get a year - so why not the brits.

Australia has a special relationship with the USA, which began during WWII, when the UK was not able to assist Australia when they were attacked by the Japanese due to the UK's difficulties defending themselves already against their own enemies. 

The USA came to the aid of Australia during WWII, and ever since then (according to my Australian husband who was very active in Australian politics for the first 36 years of his life that he spent in Australia) Australia's foreign policy has been to side automatically with the USA *no matter what the USA does*.  That is, the USA can count on Australia's support.  No. Matter. What.  How many other countries can the USA rely on to that extent? 

My opinion based on observation of young Australians' travel habits is that many of them do a gap year abroad because of their geographical isolation from the rest of the world.  I realise many people in the UK do gap years too, but Australians have different geographical circumstances.  It is a long and arduous flight (I've done the round trip between the UK and Australia twice myself) and many of them prefer to make that journey and spend 6-12 months travelling around a given area before going back home to get on with their lives.  Perhaps the USA recognises this pattern and wants to allow them the USA working experience without concern that a significant number of them are going to try and settle there and displace Americans from jobs for more than their allowed 12 months.

Just my two pence on the Aussie question.  Aussies rule by the way (my tip to any Americans on the dating scene out there is to try and find yourself an Aussie!!!!  )

Australia has a special relationship with the USA, which began during WWII, when the UK was not able to assist Australia when they were attacked by the Japanese due to the UK's difficulties defending themselves already against their own enemies. 

Well, the same could be said for Britain.  The USA came to their aid in WWII and sides with them automatically.  Look at what happened when they did regarding Iraq.  Also, the UK has nukes which Australia does not, so who do you really want on your side anyways?

The only big difference I can come up with between Australia and the UK is that Australia is largely Catholic (due to the Brits shipping them there) and somewhat more morally aligned to the US then the UK is.

I do agree with tannersarms that if Australia gets a pass, why doesn't the UK?