SKILLED WORKER
JUSTICE ALLIANCE
Support Our Work

Home / Publications / Core Papers / Who Stays, Who Relies

Who Stays, Who Relies: Skilled Worker Retention and Transitional Protection

Evidence analysis of what MAC administrative records show about Skilled Worker retention, and what they cannot justify for existing five-year settlement pathways.

CategoryCore Papers
IdentifierSWJACP05
Published4 June 2026
AuthorSkilled Worker Justice Alliance

Summary

Issue

Whether MAC administrative evidence on Skilled Worker retention can justify changing settlement conditions for people already progressing under an existing five-year settlement pathway.

Evidence

The paper analyses the MAC report Who stays, who leaves?, especially valid immigration status, retention patterns, salary, sector, in-country switching and dependants, while noting that the report does not model transitional impact.

Findings

It finds that higher retention among lower-paid, health and care, and in-country switching cohorts indicates deeper labour-market embedding and reliance, not lower vulnerability to settlement change.

Implication

The implication is that MAC retention evidence is useful for prospective route design and workforce planning, but cannot substitute for transitional-impact assessment or justify mid-pathway alteration of existing settlement pathways.

Key Proposition

High retention is evidence of reliance, not evidence that transitional protection is unnecessary.

Key Observations

  • The MAC report measures valid immigration status and retention outcomes, not transitional fairness, reliance interests or the legal effect of changing settlement conditions for people already in the route.
  • The most policy-significant regression evidence concerns 2014-2019 Tier 2 entrants, so the paper cautions against treating it as a direct behavioural model for post-2020 Skilled Worker and Health and Care Worker cohorts.
  • High retention is evidence of deeper reliance, not evidence of lower vulnerability; the paper uses retention among lower-paid, health and care, and in-country switching cohorts as evidence of labour-market embedding.
  • The analysis links retention to administrative burden, licensing friction, public-sector job security and sectoral demand, showing why staying may reflect constrained dependence rather than simple preference.
  • The policy significance is that retention data supports prospective calibration, salary policy and workforce planning, while existing cohorts still require cut-off dates, savings provisions or equivalent grandfathering.

Materials Considered

This section preserves the source materials referenced in this publication for cross-verification and archive continuity.

  1. M1
  2. M2
  3. M3
  4. M4
  5. M5
  6. M6
  7. M7
  8. M8
  9. M9
  10. M10
  11. M11
  12. M12
  13. M13

Access

The PDF is treated as the authoritative publication version. This HTML page provides a stable archive record for discovery, citation and internal linking.

Read HTML version Download PDF Back to the Publications Archive

Suggested Citation

Skilled Worker Justice Alliance (SWJA) (2026).
Who Stays, Who Relies: Skilled Worker Retention and Transitional Protection.
SWJACP05. London: Skilled Worker Justice Alliance.
Available at: https://swja.uk/publications/who-stays-who-relies-skilled-worker-retention-transitional-protection/ (Accessed: [insert date accessed]).

Prepared by Zonglin Lyu

Core Papers Legislative Scrutiny Memorandum 01: Earned Settlement and the Public-Law Boundary of Settlement Reform Core Papers Framework Note 01: Structural Integrity and Transitional Consistency in the Skilled Worker Settlement Framework: Application to Existing Pathways Notes & Evidence Evidence Note 03: Financial Commitments on the Skilled Worker Route: Path-Dependent Costs and Implications of Extending Settlement Requirements