Revealed Supermarket Staff Hired To Make Life And Death Asylum Decisions Home Office

Recruits, recruited through online advertising and recruitment agencies, have no previous experience or knowledge of the asylum system. Many are placed on rolling, temporary contracts, usually for three months. Despite being promised comprehensive training, decision-makers report being “left to fend for themselves” after two days and having to conduct complex interviews and make “life or death” decisions. Despite this responsibility, sources say staff refer to Lonely Planet guides for “potted histories” of candidates’ countries of origin, prioritize certain nationalities and preside over a “quantity over quality” approach. A whistleblower with nearly two decades of experience in asylum decision-making, who is currently training new staff to conduct interviews, told the Observer: “They’re getting too many inexperienced people, with no understanding of the asylum system, and they just don’t have the support that they need, so they leave.” They added: “It’s a total disaster. They don’t know what they’re doing.” The news comes as a new poll for the Observer reveals that the vast majority of the public – 73% – believe that Britain has not “regained control” of its borders after Brexit. According to the latest Opinium poll, only 12% believe Britain is in control of its borders, while almost half say Brexit has made Britain’s ability to manage its borders worse. The Observer’s investigation into asylum decision-makers comes after Rishi Sunak admitted in parliament last week that “not enough” asylum applications are being processed and said the government had increased the number of “processing officers” by 80%, with a further 500 are appointed. until March. Currently, 1,090 decision makers are working to clear the backlog, which now stands at more than 117,000 cases. The delays are blamed on the significant number of asylum seekers housed in hotels costing more than £5m a day and severe overcrowding at the Manston asylum processing center in Kent. Home Office officials recently admitted that of the 28,526 people who crossed the Channel in small boats last year, only 1,141 – just 4% – have been processed. A new Home Office target to triple the number of decisions made by each employee from 1.3 a week to four has led some to report a hectic working environment, with increased pressure to meet targets. The whistleblower acknowledged that claims are prioritized by nationality, particularly Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans, rather than the length of time a person has spent in the UK waiting for a decision. “It’s not a first-come, first-served system,” he said. “Some nationalities, you see them, and you say, ‘That’s a documented Syrian: that’ll be easy.’ He added: “If a journalist inquires about a person’s case, it will go into the inbox of the senior case officer and we will say, ‘This is high profile’, so the case is dealt with more quickly. “I’ve also had people sit there and look up Lonely Planet for a country history because the guidance isn’t clear enough. Some have a deep awareness of world affairs, but most do not.” Many long-serving staff the Observer has spoken to over the past six months say the quality of interviews was higher before 2012, when asylum decision-makers were downgraded from senior to senior. A Home Office official said: “It is a very highly skilled job but it has not been given the respect it deserves. Quantity counts more than quality.” The informant added that the quality of the interviews should be addressed as a priority. “You can’t just dismiss without evidence – if you haven’t asked the questions, you have no basis to say no” The number of cases that are overturned in court speaks volumes for the quality of the interviews. Government figures show that more than half of rejections are overturned on appeal. The substantive interviews are arguably the most critical part of the asylum process – a lengthy questioning by decision-makers, usually lasting four to eight hours – who then give their ‘review’ on whether someone is granted permission to stay, of refugee status or refusal of protection. Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Although the training should include a two-week interview course, the recruits say they conduct meaningful interviews after shadowing a senior case officer for just two days. One current employee told the Observer: “The training is literally you’ll go and sit with another member of staff and watch them do it and then they’ll test you to do a case while they watch you. Once you show them a few times, you’re a bit left to your own devices.” A former senior case officer added: “If we want a fair asylum system, the onus must be on the Home Office to prepare people to make life and death decisions. Caseworkers need to understand that a refusal could result in someone being removed from the UK and being murdered in their own country or taking their own life. “Was I, in fact, prepared that the decisions I was making could lead to someone’s death? Or are you prepared to see someone seriously injure themselves… or a child kill themselves? No, I don’t think so – and that’s the thing that really keeps me up at night.’ They added that turnover in asylum decision-making is one of the highest in any front-line business at the Home Office with a lifespan of around two years because people become “very cynical or jaded” after that. Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Civil and Commercial Services Union, said: “Our members are doing everything they can to treat asylum seekers humanely in a highly politicized environment. It’s a very stressful job, made more difficult by a lack of training and investment.” Rob McNeil, deputy director of the Migration Observatory at Oxford University, said it was one of the most difficult jobs in immigration. “Case workers must apply hundreds of pages of guidance to the complex human stories they encounter, under significant time pressure,” he said. “These are life and death decisions that require skill, training and experience to make. Making the wrong decisions has a human cost to applicants and a financial cost to the government.” A Home Office spokesman said: “The allegations made here are unfounded. We have increased our recruitment of asylum workers by 80% since 2019… All recruits must meet minimum civil service recruitment standards and be supported with extensive training and support from senior trainers and technical experts. “Our processes are underpinned by a strong framework of safeguards and quality controls, which ensure that claims are properly examined, decisions are made and that protection is provided to those who really need it.”

title: “Revealed Supermarket Staff Hired To Make Life And Death Asylum Decisions Home Office " ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-04” author: “Thomas Ramirez”

Recruits, recruited through online advertising and recruitment agencies, have no previous experience or knowledge of the asylum system. Many are placed on rolling, temporary contracts, usually for three months. Despite being promised comprehensive training, decision-makers report being “left to fend for themselves” after two days and having to conduct complex interviews and make “life or death” decisions. Despite this responsibility, sources say staff refer to Lonely Planet guides for “potted histories” of candidates’ countries of origin, prioritize certain nationalities and preside over a “quantity over quality” approach. A whistleblower with nearly two decades of experience in asylum decision-making, who is currently training new staff to conduct interviews, told the Observer: “They’re getting too many inexperienced people, with no understanding of the asylum system, and they just don’t have the support that they need, so they leave.” They added: “It’s a total disaster. They don’t know what they’re doing.” The news comes as a new poll for the Observer reveals that the vast majority of the public – 73% – believe that Britain has not “regained control” of its borders after Brexit. According to the latest Opinium poll, only 12% believe Britain is in control of its borders, while almost half say Brexit has made Britain’s ability to manage its borders worse. The Observer’s investigation into asylum decision-makers comes after Rishi Sunak admitted in parliament last week that “not enough” asylum applications are being processed and said the government had increased the number of “processing officers” by 80%, with a further 500 are appointed. until March. Currently, 1,090 decision makers are working to clear the backlog, which now stands at more than 117,000 cases. The delays are blamed on the significant number of asylum seekers housed in hotels costing more than £5m a day and severe overcrowding at the Manston asylum processing center in Kent. Home Office officials recently admitted that of the 28,526 people who crossed the Channel in small boats last year, only 1,141 – just 4% – have been processed. A new Home Office target to triple the number of decisions made by each employee from 1.3 a week to four has led some to report a hectic working environment, with increased pressure to meet targets. The whistleblower acknowledged that claims are prioritized by nationality, particularly Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans, rather than the length of time a person has spent in the UK waiting for a decision. “It’s not a first-come, first-served system,” he said. “Some nationalities, you see them, and you say, ‘That’s a documented Syrian: that’ll be easy.’ He added: “If a journalist inquires about a person’s case, it will go into the inbox of the senior case officer and we will say, ‘This is high profile’, so the case is dealt with more quickly. “I’ve also had people sit there and look up Lonely Planet for a country history because the guidance isn’t clear enough. Some have a deep awareness of world affairs, but most do not.” Many long-serving staff the Observer has spoken to over the past six months say the quality of interviews was higher before 2012, when asylum decision-makers were downgraded from senior to senior. A Home Office official said: “It is a very highly skilled job but it has not been given the respect it deserves. Quantity counts more than quality.” The informant added that the quality of the interviews should be addressed as a priority. “You can’t just dismiss without evidence – if you haven’t asked the questions, you have no basis to say no” The number of cases that are overturned in court speaks volumes for the quality of the interviews. Government figures show that more than half of rejections are overturned on appeal. The substantive interviews are arguably the most critical part of the asylum process – a lengthy questioning by decision-makers, usually lasting four to eight hours – who then give their ‘review’ on whether someone is granted permission to stay, of refugee status or refusal of protection. Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Although the training should include a two-week interview course, the recruits say they conduct meaningful interviews after shadowing a senior case officer for just two days. One current employee told the Observer: “The training is literally you’ll go and sit with another member of staff and watch them do it and then they’ll test you to do a case while they watch you. Once you show them a few times, you’re a bit left to your own devices.” A former senior case officer added: “If we want a fair asylum system, the onus must be on the Home Office to prepare people to make life and death decisions. Caseworkers need to understand that a refusal could result in someone being removed from the UK and being murdered in their own country or taking their own life. “Was I, in fact, prepared that the decisions I was making could lead to someone’s death? Or are you prepared to see someone seriously injure themselves… or a child kill themselves? No, I don’t think so – and that’s the thing that really keeps me up at night.’ They added that turnover in asylum decision-making is one of the highest in any front-line business at the Home Office with a lifespan of around two years because people become “very cynical or jaded” after that. Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Civil and Commercial Services Union, said: “Our members are doing everything they can to treat asylum seekers humanely in a highly politicized environment. It’s a very stressful job, made more difficult by a lack of training and investment.” Rob McNeil, deputy director of the Migration Observatory at Oxford University, said it was one of the most difficult jobs in immigration. “Case workers must apply hundreds of pages of guidance to the complex human stories they encounter, under significant time pressure,” he said. “These are life and death decisions that require skill, training and experience to make. Making the wrong decisions has a human cost to applicants and a financial cost to the government.” A Home Office spokesman said: “The allegations made here are unfounded. We have increased our recruitment of asylum workers by 80% since 2019… All recruits must meet minimum civil service recruitment standards and be supported with extensive training and support from senior trainers and technical experts. “Our processes are underpinned by a strong framework of safeguards and quality controls, which ensure that claims are properly examined, decisions are made and that protection is provided to those who really need it.”