Do You Want To Be An Eco

[VisasPlus]

The British Embassy is currently advertising for an ECO ( locally engaged). I guess, from the posts I have seen, that many who use ThaiVisa think they could do a lot better than the ECOs in Bangkok. Well, now's your chance. Check the Embassy website, send off your application, and you could be The Man ( or Woman, of course ). Good luck !

[theoldgit]

That's quite interesting, I wonder how many TV members will apply?

I also found the salary quite interesting, say a person entered at the top of the scale of 65,000 Baht, which they wont, worked the 36 hour week and only processed two apps an hour, and I'm sure it would be many more, that equates to about 250 Baht per application.

I know that's not very scientific, there are various on costs such as leave, training and salaries for the ECM's and other UKBA staff to be factored in, but it is indicitive of the profit that can be made from this service.

[Eff1n2ret]

"...some flexibility is required." (re working hours) = "you write appeal statements in your own time."

[7by7]

Topic title edited to show applicable country.

Will members please remember that not everyone here is British and kindly include the country in the topic title.

OG, agree with you on the profit to be made, but should point out that this profit goes into the exchequer, not to the embassy.

Back in 2000 I asked the embassy why the cost of a settlement visa was so much more than a visit visa. They said it was because the settlement visa fee included the cost of later in UK applications; FLR if required and ILR.

Then Labour introduced fees for FLR and ILR, but did not reduce the cost of the initial visa! Thanks, Tony and Gordon!

Unfortunately, despite their vociferous opposition at the time, it seems that the new government intends to continue with these fees and the regular, above inflation increases.

[Theo007]

Pardon my ignorance but what is an ECO???

[VisasPlus]

Pardon my ignorance but what is an ECO???

An Entry Clearance Officer. It means the same as Visa Officer, or Migration Officer, Immigration Liaison Officer. basically, it's the person who considers visa applications at an Embassy.

[bangkockney]

The main purpose of the job is to apply the Immigration rules in order to provide a high quality, efficient and non-discriminatory entry clearance service which meets published service standards Tasks include:

• To make decisions which are fully evidenced as being in accordance with the Immigration Rules, Entry Clearance guidance and other global or local instructions
• To process applications within local and global productivity and customer service targets
• To draft refusal notices in plain English, they should be in accordance with the immigration rules, applicant-specific, show good judgement and contain the correct appeal rights and/or immigration rules paragraphs

Ensuring all current ECOs fulfil the above job criteria would be better. I'd like to see the money spent on training rather than a new member of staff.

[VisasPlus]

The main purpose of the job is to apply the Immigration rules in order to provide a high quality, efficient and non-discriminatory entry clearance service which meets published service standards Tasks include:

• To make decisions which are fully evidenced as being in accordance with the Immigration Rules, Entry Clearance guidance and other global or local instructions
• To process applications within local and global productivity and customer service targets
• To draft refusal notices in plain English, they should be in accordance with the immigration rules, applicant-specific, show good judgement and contain the correct appeal rights and/or immigration rules paragraphs

Ensuring all current ECOs fulfil the above job criteria would be better. I'd like to see the money spent on training rather than a new member of staff.

I doubt whether spending the money on training will actually replace the member of staff who is leaving, or fill a new ECO slot if that's what it is. Re-training certainly won't cut down processing times, whereas a new ECO will either maintain current processing times or help reduce them.

[bangkockney]

The main purpose of the job is to apply the Immigration rules in order to provide a high quality, efficient and non-discriminatory entry clearance service which meets published service standards Tasks include:

• To make decisions which are fully evidenced as being in accordance with the Immigration Rules, Entry Clearance guidance and other global or local instructions
• To process applications within local and global productivity and customer service targets
• To draft refusal notices in plain English, they should be in accordance with the immigration rules, applicant-specific, show good judgement and contain the correct appeal rights and/or immigration rules paragraphs

Ensuring all current ECOs fulfil the above job criteria would be better. I'd like to see the money spent on training rather than a new member of staff.

I doubt whether spending the money on training will actually replace the member of staff who is leaving, or fill a new ECO slot if that's what it is. Re-training certainly won't cut down processing times, whereas a new ECO will either maintain current processing times or help reduce them.

Agreed.

But quick turnarounds should not be sought over accurate decisions. When certain cut-offs approach (e.g.CAS replaces visa letters, no TOEIC for courses with work placement etc), the number of questionable decisions increases.

Applicants pay good money and should expect nothing but integrity in the decision making process. Yes errors can happen (there is laziness too) yet it is not acceptable, in my opinion, to expect someone for whom English is a second language, to construct a rational argument based in law when the ECOs should know the rules themselves.

Why should someone who isn't an ECO have to explain the rules to an ECO?!

Errors made by ECOs if they were in the private sector would get them the sack. Personally, I feel there is not enough accountability in the system.

[the scouser]

Also, if the prospective ECO is to be locally engaged, s/he won't be accredited to (or should that be approved by? ) the British embassy as a diplomat, so will have to qualify for a work permit in his/her own right.

Bearing in mind that the British embassy is not going to support a work permit application, it seems the job is only open to either Thai or those Brits/Commonwealth citizens who have PR.

"Integrity" in the decision-making process has long ceased to exist. The ECOs are generally of the mindset that if an application is erroneously refused, then the applicant can appeal and an immigration judge will set the record straight; i.e. all responsibility is abdicated. If the application does not attract the right of appeal, then apply again.

Scouse.

[7by7]

it seems the job is only open to either Thai or those Brits/Commonwealth citizens who have PR.

Not Thais, from the vacancy announcement

The nature of the work requires the jobholder to possess UK government security clearance. Therefore, only nationals of the UK, EU/EEA, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US are eligible to apply

"Integrity" in the decision-making process has long ceased to exist. The ECOs are generally of the mindset that if an application is erroneously refused, then the applicant can appeal and an immigration judge will set the record straight; i.e. all responsibility is abdicated. If the application does not attract the right of appeal, then apply again.

An extremely serious accusation! Do you have any evidence to back it up? The entry clearance statistics show that the success rate for all posts remains consistent; and for many over 90%. Are you suggesting that those figures are false? On what do you base the above accusation?

The false rumours and scaremongering which surrounds the visa application process already drive many into the arms of unscrupulous 'agents' without unsubstantiated scare stories coming from a respected source adding to people's fears.

[Eff1n2ret]

"Integrity" in the decision-making process has long ceased to exist. .

An extremely serious accusation! Do you have any evidence to back it up?

Those who know would say that the decision-making process lacks integrity because there is no serious accountability at the Entry Clearance Office level for mistakes or abitrary decisions. A bad decision may be rectified by an appeal judge, who may even express criticism of the conduct of the case, but there is no come-back on the people involved. Almost the only disincentive to an ECO to refuse a lot of cases is that he/she wouldn't want to spend his life writing appeal statements (see my earlier post). This can of course result not only in the refusal of worthy applications, but issuing to iffy ones as well, which hardly speaks of integrity either. And of course, the main pressure always, whether at a border control or in an Entry Clearance Office or at the casework factories in the UK, is to shift the queue, regardless of results.

There is someone from the Great and Good appointed to swan round the world checking on the standard of work in Entry Clearance Offices (I forget his/her title), but as long as the statistics conform to the sort of "norm" quoted by 7/7 their criticisms and recommendations tend to be fairly anodyne.

[7by7]

I have never worked as an ECO or in any capacity for the Home Office or what is now the UKBA, but I have worked for and with other government departments dealing with applications from the general public.

As you say, Eff1n2ret, the biggest pressure was to process as many applications as possible in as short a time as possible. As a refusal causes the individual ECO more work, and so takes more time, than an acceptance, I cannot see how this pressure leads to the refusal of worthy applicants; surely it would be the opposite, and one doesn't see many complaints from people who got a visa when they shouldn't have!

Whether this compromises the 'integrity' of the process is, I suppose, open to debate.

There is much that is wrong with the UK entry clearance process, no one would deny that. But to suggest that ECOs are minded to refuse because the applicant can always appeal is, I feel, a dangerous misconception to broadcast because it can, as I said before, make people believe that they wont succeed without professional assistance; and all too often that assistance is anything but professional!

I am well aware that some members here have worked as ECOs in the past; perhaps one of them would care to say whether or not they regularly refused applicants because it was quicker to pass the buck to appeal than to process the application properly themselves. Scouse, one for you to answer, methinks.

Members can read this report from the Chief Inspector and decide for themselves whether or not it is anodyne. They may also be interested in the UKBA's response.

[VisasPlus]

I have never worked as an ECO or in any capacity for the Home Office or what is now the UKBA, but I have worked for and with other government departments dealing with applications from the general public.

As you say, Eff1n2ret, the biggest pressure was to process as many applications as possible in as short a time as possible. As a refusal causes the individual ECO more work, and so takes more time, than an acceptance, I cannot see how this pressure leads to the refusal of worthy applicants; surely it would be the opposite, and one doesn't see many complaints from people who got a visa when they shouldn't have!

Whether this compromises the 'integrity' of the process is, I suppose, open to debate.

There is much that is wrong with the UK entry clearance process, no one would deny that. But to suggest that ECOs are minded to refuse because the applicant can always appeal is, I feel, a dangerous misconception to broadcast because it can, as I said before, make people believe that they wont succeed without professional assistance; and all too often that assistance is anything but professional!

I am well aware that some members here have worked as ECOs in the past; perhaps one of them would care to say whether or not they regularly refused applicants because it was quicker to pass the buck to appeal than to process the application properly themselves. Scouse, one for you to answer, methinks.

Members can read this report from the Chief Inspector and decide for themselves whether or not it is anodyne. They may also be interested in the UKBA's response.

The reports make interesting reading. It would be even more interesting to know if the " trends" or statistics are global ( ie similar here in Thailand and elsewhere) or apply only to the Abu Dhabi hub.

Even more interseting, from my point of view, are Scouse's and bankokney's comments on accountability. It seems that the neither the Chief Inspector, nor the UKBA hold any individual(s) accountable for wrong decisions in their reports, nor is there any recommendation that they should be. Sadly, bankokney is right when he says that these people would be out of a job if they worked in private industry. From exerience I know that ECOs are very rarely penalised or sent home for making poor or wrong decisions. That said, the Regional Manager in Abu Dhabi was (coincidentally ? ) replaced shortly after the Chief Inspector's report came out, I believe. But, the RM was not the decision maker in any applications, of course.

So, all of you seem to think that you can do a better job. Who applied for it ? Scouse - in addition to those you say could apply for the job, Thai nationals and PR holders, dont forget the spouses of the Embassy UK-based staff. They are still first in line for a job under FCO policy, and don't need a work permit.

[bangkockney]

... I cannot see how this pressure leads to the refusal of worthy applicants; surely it would be the opposite, and one doesn't see many complaints from people who got a visa when they shouldn't have!

There are many examples where an ECO simply does not know the rules he is to uphold. Especially surrounding transitional arrangements and following policy changes from the Home Office and/or UKBA. Plus - and I'm happy for you to label me a cynic - I have a suspicion that the Visa Sections worldwide have been told to hold on to applications in certain categories for longer, refuse where further investigation is warranted etc as a back door way of capping numbers. I also get this impression from correspondence seen between various stakeholders.

Applying for an admin review or full appeal is not available to all applicants. Consider a student, whose course start date is fixed. His visa application is incorrectly refused, his start date has passed and he therefore has no chance of being issued a visa. The refusal remains on record. Further, he loses the application fee, plus loss against tuition fees paid. Unacceptable levels of loss, given the ECO should know the rules better than the applicant.

It would be very simple for the UKBA to remove speculation surrounding standards by publishing data on applications received, successful applications and a breakdown of refusals. Australia is the only country taking transparency of the visa process seriously, publishing detailed analysis of visa refusals, although to-date, this is limited to student visa applications only.

@VisaPlus

...bankokney's...(emphasis added)

Freudian slip? Lol.

I think you hit the nail on the head VP with your example of the AB Regional Manager being replaced. Someone had to be held accountable publicly, but unfortunately not the right person(s). Certainly open for debate.However, we know little of any training programmes implemented as a result, though again, I'm sceptical.

Edited October 17, 2010 by bangkockney

[RAZZELL]

I've only got a couple of days so come on guys...help me fill out the application form!

RAZZ

[Skypist]

I do wonder what type of applicant they are looking for. Is it substantiated that they won't aid in a work permit? This seriously rules out a great deal of legitimate candidates.

I wonder if being a foreigner with PR and a Thai family would also make them less desirable? Would love to know their selection criteria from the inside.

[Eff1n2ret]

I do wonder what type of applicant they are looking for. Is it substantiated that they won't aid in a work permit? This seriously rules out a great deal of legitimate candidates.

I wonder if being a foreigner with PR and a Thai family would also make them less desirable? Would love to know their selection criteria from the inside.

The outcome of your own case as posted on your thread "Applied For Ile But Only Got Spouse Visa" appears to illustrate very neatly the point made on this one by scouser and myself.

"The Thai ECO knew what an ILE is, but said Bangkok does NOT ISSUE these visas, and that the Spouse is the only one and the correct one." - did she really say that? i.e. there are certain classes of visa which cannot be issued in BKK? - or perhaps and more likely you didn't get to speak to an ECO and have been fobbed off by someone with no understanding of the rules?

Of course, it won't show up in the refusal stats, because your missis has been issued with a settlement visa, but the episode hardly speaks for "integrity" in the system.

Edited October 18, 2010 by Eff1n2ret

[the scouser]

For the sake of clarification, I wasn't suggesting that ECOs lack "integrity" because they are indulging in corrupt practices, but that, nowadays, as a general thrust, they do not understand the fundamental legal basis of their job and that this gives rise to decisions (both to refuse and grant) that should not have been made.

I think it was a different matter when I, Eff1n2ret and Visa Plus were ECOs, as we did have an understanding of the legal basis of our job and had the nous to be able to think for ourselves within that framework.

Essentially, everything has now been dumbed down.

Scouse.

[Seekingasylum]

I also found the salary quite interesting, say a person entered at the top of the scale of 65,000 Baht, which they wont, worked the 36 hour week and only processed two apps an hour, and I'm sure it would be many more, that equates to about 250 Baht per application.

Profit has got nothing to do with it.

The aim is to be self financing and to defray the public purse i.e. the taxpayer ( of whom there seems to be precious fewer these days in the UK compared to the benefit addicted ).

All this whingeing about the cost of applications is really to miss the point. No one is forced to visit or settle in the UK. It's their choice. If the fees are too challenging simply don't apply. Nobody was forced to fetch up with a Thai so why bleat about the consequences?

For your information, most visa officers are required to process between 60 - 100 applications per day, depending upon the post., which approximates to, say, 4 minutes an application but of course some result in refusal which will take longer. The work must be drear in the extreme and not a treadmill I would choose although the posting allowances, not available to those locally engaged, will accommodate some nicely.

[asia_pilot]

All this whingeing about the cost of applications is really to miss the point. No one is forced to visit or settle in the UK. It's their choice. If the fees are too challenging simply don't apply. Nobody was forced to fetch up with a Thai so why bleat about the consequences?

Are you a frustrated ECO? Your statement is the dumbest I have read here for a long time. Ever thought of poeple who are getting transfered to the UK for job reason? Or British Citizen want to live in their home country with their families ???

[bobrussell]

I have never worked as an ECO or in any capacity for the Home Office or what is now the UKBA, but I have worked for and with other government departments dealing with applications from the general public.

As you say, Eff1n2ret, the biggest pressure was to process as many applications as possible in as short a time as possible. As a refusal causes the individual ECO more work, and so takes more time, than an acceptance, I cannot see how this pressure leads to the refusal of worthy applicants; surely it would be the opposite, and one doesn't see many complaints from people who got a visa when they shouldn't have!

Whether this compromises the 'integrity' of the process is, I suppose, open to debate.

There is much that is wrong with the UK entry clearance process, no one would deny that. But to suggest that ECOs are minded to refuse because the applicant can always appeal is, I feel, a dangerous misconception to broadcast because it can, as I said before, make people believe that they wont succeed without professional assistance; and all too often that assistance is anything but professional!

I am well aware that some members here have worked as ECOs in the past; perhaps one of them would care to say whether or not they regularly refused applicants because it was quicker to pass the buck to appeal than to process the application properly themselves. Scouse, one for you to answer, methinks.

Members can read this report from the Chief Inspector and decide for themselves whether or not it is anodyne. They may also be interested in the UKBA's response.

I consider most of the decisions made by ECO's actually seem to be reasonable if an application is properly prepared.

The real issues are that they take a crazy amount of time to make that decision (especially considering the cost of applications), the reasons given for rejection can appear to be gobbledegook and inconsistent almost as if they make up reasons as they go along which does not instil much confidence in the system!

Most visas, especially for settlement are granted as would be expected. Visit visas are more often rejected because of the risk of them being used as an entry to the UK and the applicant to disappear only to surface months or years after the visa has expired.

The majority of forum members are likely to be genuine - who else would take the trouble to post? This means when a few individuals suffer dubious decisions it appears on the TV board. They are frequently not particularly well handled from there until appeal in the UK.

We need more ECO's to allow prompt processing of applications. A lot of TV forum members are probably very well equipped to do the job with minimal extra training - been there done it, got the T shirt!!!!

[Seekingasylum]

No, I'm not an ECO nor frustrated but I can well understand a discordant note in this forum may not be that well received. Still, in response to your riposte I wouldn't have thought for one moment that an intra company transfer back to Blighty would particularly trouble an employee with a foreign spouse but I imagine we are probably talking about a different demographic to that represented by most posters here. British citizens wishing to take spouses back to the UK simply have to meet the requirements of the rules and pay what is really a quite modest fee given what the dividend is likely to be viz free education, free health care, unemployment benefits, tax relief, child care assistance, British citizenship and pensions. But again, nobody forced anyone to marry a foreign spouse against their will, well, mostly no - one if you ignore arranged marriages but that's another story.

[VisasPlus]

given what the dividend is likely to be viz free education, free health care, unemployment benefits, tax relief, child care assistance, British citizenship and pensions.

A bit like your name, then ?

[Seekingasylum]

Personally, I have no problem with asylum seekers since in the main they, akin to most immigrants legal or otherwise, generally adhere to a work ethic.

Incidentally, my nom de cyber reflects other issues and is by no means an attempt at irony.

[VisasPlus]

Personally, I have no problem with asylum seekers since in the main they, akin to most immigrants legal or otherwise, generally adhere to a work ethic.

Whew...................I would love to respond to that, but I think I must leave it for others to comment if they wish.

[Stanaris]

Personally, I have no problem with asylum seekers since in the main they, akin to most immigrants legal or otherwise, generally adhere to a work ethic.

Whew...................I would love to respond to that, but I think I must leave it for others to comment if they wish.

"British citizens wishing to take spouses back to the UK simply have to meet the requirements of the rules and pay what is really a quite modest fee given what the dividend is likely to be viz free education, free health care, unemployment benefits, tax relief, child care assistance, British citizenship and pensions"

and I suppose you have no problem with these immigrants being entitled to everything free as you quoted???

I know my thai wife will not be entitled to all these free benefits when she comes to the UK "no recourse to public funds"

ps I have no objection to paying a fee for the settlement visa, all I want is my wife to be living with me, and this has nothing to do with benefits (which we cannot claim anyway) ok

[Stanaris]

Personally, I have no problem with asylum seekers since in the main they, akin to most immigrants legal or otherwise, generally adhere to a work ethic.

Whew...................I would love to respond to that, but I think I must leave it for others to comment if they wish.

"British citizens wishing to take spouses back to the UK simply have to meet the requirements of the rules and pay what is really a quite modest fee given what the dividend is likely to be viz free education, free health care, unemployment benefits, tax relief, child care assistance, British citizenship and pensions"

and I suppose you have no problem with these immigrants being entitled to everything free as you quoted???

I know my thai wife will not be entitled to all these free benefits when she comes to the UK "no recourse to public funds"

ps I have no objection to paying a fee for the settlement visa, all I want is my wife to be living with me, and this has nothing to do with benefits (which we cannot claim anyway) ok

pps I think we are starting to move off topic now

so

Do You Want To Be An Eco???

Sounds like to much hassle for me so the answer is NO!!!

[VisasPlus]

Do You Want To Be An Eco???

Sounds like to much hassle for me so the answer is NO!!!

An honest answer. And on - topic too !

[Skypist]

Sorry I'm just in shock at seekingasylum's views that all asylum-seekers are beneficial to UK society and that visa fees are most acceptable.

No. Visa fees being hugely increased in recent years to cope with other governmental shortcomings is not acceptable, as again, it mostly hits the UK native taxpayers. Some things need to be questioned and admonished, unfairly high visa fees for what is basically some processing work is NOT acceptable for someone who wishes to marry a foreign national. There are other ways to recoup the money spent on public services. Namely the tax they are likely to pay throughout their time in the UK.

Rules are something else that don't have to be blindly followed and subscribed to: if mistakes and inconsistencies are made regularly, if unnecessary information is asked for and if there is little or no recourse to correction/debate for mistakes made...then the regulations shouldn't just be adhered to without question. Now also consider the outsourcing of passports to HK "to reduce costs" while the fees have risen disproportionately for child passports and renewals, and you get some idea of what the problem is for British nationals.