International social workers in England: Factors influencing supply and demand

Abstract

Recent years have seen considerable increases in the number of internationally-qualified social workers in England. This article presents trends in the international labour mobility of social workers migrating to work in England alongside information on the supply of UK-trained social workers. It concludes that demographic changes and policy imperatives have accentuated structural issues making it difficult to ensure an adequate supply in the number of domestically-trained social workers. We suggest that more cross-national research is needed to achieve a better understanding of the factors influencing social workers’ decisions to work in international settings and the extent to which this reflects permanent or temporary migration between countries.

Keywords

international migration migration policy social work social work education

Introduction

The regulation of labour immigration has become one of the most important and controversial public policy issues in high-income countries (Antecol et al., 2003; Guiraudon, 2003; Ruhs and Anderson, 2010). It has stimulated increasing policy and research interest into patterns of skilled migration (e.g. Iredale, 2001; Koser and Salt, 1997), and the consequences for less-developed countries of losing individuals who may be needed to maintain fragile health and welfare infrastructures (Batty, 2003; Welbourne et al., 2007; White, 2006), the so-called ‘brain drain’. There is now an emerging literature looking at international mobility among social workers (Evans et al., 2006; Lyons and Littlechild, 2006; Lyons et al., 2006; Welbourne et al., 2007) which has the potential to contribute to these debates and – together with studies of other professions in which women predominate, such as nursing (Buchan and Aiken, 2008) – to ensure that greater attention is paid to issues of gender in studies of skilled migration (Kofman, 2000, 2004; Yeates, 2009).

This article reflects on recent trends in social worker ‘sending countries’ within the context of current immigration policy in the United Kingdom (UK). We argue that these trends need to be considered alongside information on the supply of, and demand for, domestically-trained social workers. We conclude that demographic changes and policy imperatives have accentuated structural issues making it difficult to ensure an adequate supply in the number of domestically-trained social workers. We suggest that more cross-national research is needed to achieve a better understanding of the factors influencing social workers’ decisions to work in international settings and the extent to which this reflects permanent or temporary migration between countries.

Background

There has always been movement of social workers between different countries but the scale of international migration to the UK has increased substantially over the past 20 years, with one report suggesting a quadrupling in the number of international social workers from 227 in 1990–1 to 1,175 in 2001–2 (Batty, 2003). This expansion occurred at a time when there were shortages of UK-trained social workers, accentuated by steep declines in the number of entrants into social work education (Moriarty and Murray, 2007; Perry and Cree, 2003).

UK immigration policy since 1945

Following the Second World War there was substantial immigration from the countries making up the Commonwealth. Although this is popularly viewed as mainly consisting of people from the Caribbean and India, later to be followed by people from Pakistan and Bangladesh (countries from the so-called New Commonwealth), their numbers also included people from Canada, New Zealand and Australia (the so-called Old Commonwealth) and the Irish Republic (Clayton, 2008; Spencer, 1997). From the 1960s onwards, successive UK governments imposed a series of immigration controls aimed at reducing the number of primary immigrants (the term used for those moving from one country to another mainly for economic reasons). However, the introduction of rules based on parentage meant that it was easier for people from ‘Old’ than from ‘New’ Commonwealth countries to apply to work in the UK. This led commentators (Clayton, 2008; Finney and Simpson, 2009; Spencer, 1997) to express concerns that race and ethnicity played a greater role in shaping immigration policy than the conviction that there was now an adequate labour supply.

The entry of the UK into the European Union (EU) opened up a new source of immigration to the UK. One of the EU’s founding principles was the ‘free movement of goods, persons, services, and capital’ across EU countries. As a result, EU citizens have the right to live and work in other member states. Reciprocal arrangements also exist with Norway, Liechtenstein, Iceland, and Switzerland, the member countries of the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). Together, the 27 EU member states and the four EFTA countries comprise the European Economic Area (EEA).

After EU expansion in 2004, the UK, Irish Republic and Sweden were initially the only EU states to allow workers from the A8 accession states (Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Slovenia, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic) to enter their countries and seek employment freely, although all EU members were compelled to remove these restrictions from 1 May 2011. When Bulgaria and Romania (A2 accession states) joined the EU in 2007, the UK decided to place restrictions on their citizens’ employment, meaning that outside certain occupations – such as seasonal agricultural workers or au pairs – most A2 nationals still need to apply for an accession worker card and work permit. These restrictions will continue until December 2011, and possibly until 2013 (Hansard, 2010).

Further changes to immigration policy occurred in 2008 when the UK adopted an Australian-style points system for workers coming from outside the EEA, with points being awarded for educational qualifications and earning power. This was accompanied by the establishment of the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) ‘a small independent body of economists tasked to advise the government on where in the UK economy there are skilled labour shortages that can be “sensibly” addressed by immigration from outside the EEA’ (Ruhs and Anderson, 2010: 3).

Initially, the MAC suggested that there was no evidence of a UK-wide shortage of social workers, meaning that employers wishing to recruit social workers from outside the EEA had to meet the ‘resident labour market test’ by showing that no worker with the right to live and work in the UK was suitably qualified for the job on offer and a genuine vacancy existed. After extensive lobbying by the sector, the MAC placed social workers who work with children and families on the shortage occupation list (UK Border Agency, 2011). Workers in these occupations will normally acquire enough points to work in the UK provided they can earn enough to maintain themselves and they are sufficiently skilled in English.

In April 2011, the coalition government sought to reduce net migration by placing an annual limit on the number of non-EEA citizens who will be allowed to work in the UK. At the time of writing (summer 2011), it is not yet clear what effect this will have.

Methods

The findings presented in this article utilize two main sources of data. The first comes from a study that collected information on over 25,000 students enrolling on social work qualifying programmes in England between 2001 and 2006 (Evaluation of Social Work Degree Qualification in England Team, 2008). The second uses registration data provided by the General Social Care Council (GSCC; Hussein et al., 2010a). The GSCC is currently the regulatory body for social work in England and maintains two separate registers, the first comprising those who qualified in the UK and work in England, the second those who were trained outside the UK but who meet the GSCC criteria to work as a social worker in England. The other three UK countries (Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland) have their own registers. Those wishing to work in a UK country other than the one in which they were originally registered must apply for a registration transfer or an additional country registration.

In October 2008, registration data on 7,200 international social workers working in England were provided to the research team. This recorded information on the country in which registrants undertook social work qualifying education, their age, ethnicity, and whether they considered they had a disability. In just over two-thirds of cases, it also recorded their date of first employment in England but not their date of arrival. Full analysis of the profile and characteristics of this group of workers is provided elsewhere (Hussein, Stevens et al., 2010).

In the context of immigration policy in the UK, it is important to emphasize that registration data are not synonymous with citizenship status. For example, some internationally-qualified social workers on the international register may have acquired UK citizenship or may have been granted ‘leave to remain’. Alternatively, some international students who train and qualify in the UK will join the GSCC UK-trained register. Notwithstanding these limitations, the dataset represents the total ‘stock’ of registered internationally-qualified social workers in England. As such, it provides robust and generalizable data from which to study the size and nature of the internationally-qualified social work workforce in England.

Findings

Enrolments on social work programmes in England

Figure 1 presents the number of students enrolling on social work programmes from 1993–2010 (Evaluation of Social Work Degree Qualification in England Team, 2008; General Social Care Council, 2010b). It shows that during the mid-1990s fewer numbers of students chose to study social work (Moriarty and Murray, 2007). Explanations for this include the abolition of the maintenance grant which was thought to particularly disadvantage social work students who tend to be older than the average undergraduate. It has also been suggested that the popularity of other degree courses, such as psychology and criminology, may have attracted applicants who, in the past, might have chosen to study social work (Wallis-Jones and Lyons, 2003).

Figure 1.

Enrolments on social work qualifying programmes in England 1993–2010

Responding to the decline in student numbers and other concerns about social work education, the government embarked on a series of initiatives in 2001 aimed at encouraging recruitment to social work and introducing a new social work degree. This was followed by the introduction of a bursary scheme designed to help students meet their everyday living costs. The first new degree programmes began in the 2003–4 academic year. Figure 1 shows a steep rise in the number of enrolments on social work qualifying programmes since 2001, suggesting that the impact of these changes on recruitment numbers has been positive. The spike in 2003–4 is explained by the fact that this was the only year in which degree programmes and the predecessor qualification the Diploma in Social Work (DipSW) ran in tandem. The dip in 2004–5 occurred because the Open University (the largest single provider of social work qualifying education) did not have an intake that year.

The increase in enrolments has been accompanied by some changes in the characteristics of social work students. Most notably in the context of this article, the proportion of Black African students rose from 5 percent in 2001–2 to 16 percent in 2005–6. As just 5 percent of students accepted for degree programmes in England in 2005 were Black African (Universities and Colleges Admissions Service [UCAS], no date), they are over-represented on social work qualifying programmes. Interviews with admissions staff suggested that, as well as UK-born citizens from a Black African background or international students, many Black African students had been born overseas and had applied for permanent settlement in the UK through non-labour entry routes, including refugees, students, and for family reunification (Evaluation of the New Social Work Degree Team, 2008). This demonstrates how the UK-trained social work population may also include people who have been born elsewhere.

The degree also appears to have resulted in increases in the number of younger students. For example, the proportion of students aged under 25 increased from 18 percent in 2001–2 to 35 percent in 2005–6. Theoretically, this means that the costs of social work education to the taxpayer can be potentially offset over a longer working life. However, as we shall discuss later, this depends upon people remaining within the profession.

The decline in the number of men choosing to study social work observed before the degree was implemented (Moriarty and Murray, 2007; Perry and Cree, 2003) has continued. In 2001–2, men made up 19 percent of new enrolments (Evaluation of Social Work Degree Qualification in England Team, 2008) but they comprised just 14 percent in 2008–9 (General Social Care Council, 2010a). This is a source of ongoing concern in terms of creating a balanced workforce (Christie, 1998; Perry and Cree, 2003).

‘Sending’ countries for social workers

Turning to the evidence on internationally-qualified social workers, Table 1 summarizes information on the countries in which they were trained. It shows that, as noted elsewhere (Lyons and Littlechild, 2006), Commonwealth countries are the major source of internationally-qualified social workers in England, in addition to other major sources such as the United States (US), Zimbabwe and the Philippines. The preponderance of social workers from South Africa, Nigeria and the Philippines is similar to the picture reported by Buchan and colleagues (2006) in their study of internationally-recruited nurses working in London. At the same time, the comparatively large numbers of social workers from Australia (n = 1,107), New Zealand (n = 302), and Canada (n = 372) resembles the patterns found among internationally-recruited teachers (Morgan et al., 2005). As can be seen, comparatively few social workers have been recruited from within the EEA – with the exception of Germany (n = 370). This may partly be explained by comparatively high levels of unemployment among German social workers and well-established links between UK-based recruitment agencies and their counterparts in Germany (Franck Düvell, personal communication). Finally, it is worth noting that the total of 7,200 internationally-qualified social workers represents around 8 percent of the total number of registrants in England (Hussein et al., 2010a).

Table 1.

Distribution of international social care workers in England by country in which qualification was obtained

Country of qualification	Number of internationally-qualified social workers	Percent
Commonwealth countries	3,893	57.5
European Economic Area (subtotal)	(1,278)	(18.9)
EU 15 states	822	12.2
EU A8 states	184	2.7
EU A2 states	272	4
European Economic Area outside EU	21	0.3
Other major sending countries (subtotal)	(1,411)	(20.9)
United States	882	13
Zimbabwe	262	3.9
Philippines	162	2.4
Nigeria	105	1.6
All other countries	119	1.9
Number of internationally-qualified social workers in England=	6,765	100

Source: Extract from Hussein, Stevens et al. (2010); = excluding those with information on country of training missing.

These results are consistent with data from interviews with agency owners and managers that were also undertaken as part of this study (Hussein et al., 2010b; Manthorpe et al., 2010). These informants preferred recruiting from countries where social work education and practice were perceived to be similar to that in England because they felt they were more likely to be able to place these social workers with an employer. An additional advantage was that these recruits were also more likely to be native-speakers of English or to live in a country where English was the lingua franca. The continuation of links with Commonwealth countries suggests that employers’ preferences for social workers from countries with similar legislation and policies to the UK operates as a ‘pull’ factor in international labour mobility. At the same time, the existence of current and historical family ties with the UK is a ‘push’ factor for working in the UK among international workers from the Commonwealth countries (Lyons and Littlechild, 2006).

Impact of EU enlargement

Figure 2 shows the source of internationally-qualified social workers from within and outside the EEA according to the year of their first employment in the UK. It shows that there was a rise in the number of EEA-qualified social workers after EU enlargement in 2004 but that non-EEA qualified social workers continue to be in the majority. The decline in the number of internationally-qualified social workers overall seems to mirror the increase in the number of enrolments on social work programmes in England, allowing for the time lag between enrolment and qualification.

Figure 2.

Immigration status by year of first employment as a social worker in England

Demographic characteristics of internationally qualified social workers

Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of workers recruited from within and outside the EEA to suggest that there are differences between the two groups of workers, which may have implications for workforce development policies. Non-EEA countries are responsible for statistically significantly more men (φ = 0.043, p < 0.001) than the EEA, where the proportion of men is similar to that found among recent cohorts of social work students.

Table 2.

Demographic comparisons between internationally qualified social workers trained within and outside the EEA

Characteristics by type of worker	EEA		Non EEA		Total*
Characteristics by type of worker	N	%	N	%	N
Gender
Men	250	19	1,269	23	1,519
Women	1,063	81	4,181	77	5,244
Ethnicity
White	1,017	92	2,121	49	3,129
Mixed	15	1	122	3	137
Asian	19	2	927	22	946
Black	35	3	954	22	989
Other	21	2	226	5	247
Age group
Under 35	792	61	2,868	53	3,660
35 and over	516	39	2,571	47	3,087

Totals exclude missing data.

EEA recruits are younger (φ = 0.062, p < 0.001) than their non EEA counterparts. This is particularly true among social workers from A8 countries (Hussein, Stevens et al., 2010) and is consistent with earlier work (Evans et al., 2006) suggesting differences between younger internationally-recruited social workers who migrate temporarily and those for whom labour migration is the starting point for permanent resettlement.

To a large extent, the finding that proportionally fewer non-EEA migrants are white (Cramer’s V = 0.262, p < 0.001) reflects the differing ethnic compositions of the countries providing the majority of internationally-qualified social workers. However, it conceals some interesting variations. For example, almost half of UK-registered social workers trained in South Africa are white and 43 percent are under 35. This suggests they may resemble social workers from New Zealand and Australia who use their social work qualification as a means of funding their travel within Europe before returning home. By contrast, 80 percent of Zimbabwean-trained social workers are aged 35 and over, suggesting that ultimately they may be more inclined to seek permanent settlement in the UK.

Supply factors in social work

Although Figure 1 showed that enrolments on social work qualifying programmes have risen by almost a third, shortages still exist and the penultimate section of this article draws together some of the evidence suggesting why this is the case. The chief reason for the shortage relates to increased demand and the expansion of social work posts, primarily in local councils which, taken as a whole, still remain the largest employer of social workers. In September 2007, the number of whole time equivalent (WTE) social work staff was 45,200, 25 percent higher than in 1998 (Information Centre for Health and Social Care, 2008). At 38 percent, the increase in children’s social work posts was even greater (Local Government Association, 2009). This demand has been accentuated by a series of policy initiatives (for example, Secretary of State for Education and Skills, 2007) aimed at improving services for children and young people. Strikingly, despite the cutbacks to local authority grants as a result of the 2011 budget, the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (the association for statutory directors of children’s services in England and other children’s services professionals in leadership roles) expressed its concern about the ‘cap’ on non-EEA migrants and considered that internationally-qualified social workers would continue to comprise an important part of their workforce (Association of Directors of Children’s Services Ltd, 2010).

A second factor is the regional mismatch between demand for social workers and the provision of qualifying programmes providing fresh supplies of recruits. The highest vacancy rates for social work posts occur in inner London (Commission for Social Care Inspection, 2009). Social work training is not centrally commissioned and there is considerable variation in the number of places available on social work programmes in different regions. Because high proportions of social work students choose to study and seek employment locally (Wallis-Jones and Lyons, 2003), employers sometimes have difficulties in attracting recruits from outside their area. London faces particular challenges in recruitment because it has higher living costs when compared with other parts of the UK and local councils cannot afford to offer levels of pay commensurate with the increased costs of living.

Other commentators have suggested that a key reason for the shortage of UK-trained social workers lies not so much in recruitment as in retention. The demanding nature of much statutory social work is thought to contribute to high levels of stress (e.g. Collins, 2008; Coyle et al., 2005; Evans et al., 2005) and ultimately to problems with retention (e.g. Gupta and Blewett, 2007; Tham, 2007). Studies such as these tend to use respondents’ intention to leave their current job as a proxy for job retention and there is a shortage of longitudinal studies designed to explore any causal links between work-related stress and job retention. However, a study using actuarial modelling (Curtis et al., 2010) suggested that the rate of exit from social work in England appears to be higher than in other professions. This means that more social workers need to be trained or recruited from abroad in order to keep up with demand.

The final reason for shortages lies in the age profile of the social work workforce (McLenachan, 2006; Manthorpe and Moriarty, 2009). Around one-third of social workers who work for local councils are aged 50 or over (Local Authority Workforce Intelligence Group, 2007a, 2007b). Although data on the number of social workers retiring each year are not available, it seems likely that the number of social workers retiring each year exceeds the number of new graduates.

Discussion

This article has shown that the number of internationally-recruited social workers in England has increased substantially within the past 20 years, largely as a result of shortages in the supply of UK-trained social workers but also in response to changes in global labour mobility. In the context of data on gender and migration, this article confirms the importance of social work as a means of facilitating women’s skilled migration (Kofman and Raghuram, 2005). At the same time, given the high degree of gender and ethnic segregation in the UK labour force (Blackwell and Guinea-Martin, 2005), the study shows how migration can make some adjustments to the overall composition of the domestic workforce. To a certain extent, the number of internationally-qualified men in social work helps counterbalance the shortage in the number of male recruits (General Social Care Council, 2010a; Moriarty and Murray, 2007; Perry and Cree, 2003) but also raises the need for further research identifying whether some countries are more successful than others at attracting men into the profession or whether male social workers are differentially more likely to migrate than women.

Although the preponderance of women in social work is well known, less attention has been paid to ethnicity and the over-representation of Black African and Black Caribbean UK-students compared to those from Asian backgrounds (General Social Care Council, 2010a) The number of internationally-qualified social workers from countries such as the Philippines and India suggests that there is a need for more cross-national research examining the interplay between gender, ethnicity and status in shaping motivations to become a social worker.

UK government policies to control labour migration from outside the EEA and the wider research literature on skilled labour migration have tended to assume that skilled migrants will work temporarily in another country and will eventually return to their country of birth. This article has suggested that immigration policies need to take account of non-labour factors influencing international mobility; for example, the existence of family ties, and profession-specific factors, such as similarities in qualifying education. These factors influence which countries are likely to ‘send’ workers and which countries employers will prefer to recruit from. While the data reported here were not designed to answer questions such as these, the article suggests that there is a need for more cross-national studies in this area.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the GSCC for supplying the data used in this article and to our colleagues on the Evaluation of the New Social Work Degree Qualification in England team (Joan Orme, Beth R. Crisp, Endellion Sharpe, Pam Green Lister and Gillian MacIntyre). The Social Care Workforce Research Unit receives funding from the Department of Health. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not the Department of Health. We should also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier versions of this article.

This research was funded under the Department of Heath Social Care Workforce Research Initiative.

References

Antecol

Cobb-Clark

D.A.

Trejo

S.J.

(2003) ‘Immigration Policy and the Skills of Immigrants to Australia, Canada, and the United States’, Journal of Human Resources XXXVIII(1): 192–218.

Association of Directors of Children’s Services Ltd (2010) Submission from the Association of Directors of Children’s Services Ltd (ADCS) in Response to the Consultation by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) on the Level of an Annual Limit on Economic Migration to the UK. Manchester: Association of Directors of Children’s Services Ltd (ADCS).

Batty

. (2003) ‘UK Draining Zimbabwe of Social Workers’, The Guardian, 19 February.

Blackwell

Guinea-Martin

(2005) ‘Occupational Segregation by Sex and Ethnicity in England and Wales, 1991 to 2001’, Labour Market Trends 113(December): 501–16.

Buchan

Aiken

(2008) ‘Solving Nursing Shortages: A Common Priority’, Journal of Clinical Nursing 17(24): 3262–8.

Buchan

Jobanputra

Gough

Hutt

(2006) ‘Internationally Recruited Nurses in London: A Survey of Career Paths and Plans’, Human Resources for Health 4(14). Available at: https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1186/1478-4491-4-14 (accessed 19 July 2011).

Christie

(1998) ‘Is Social Work a “Non-Traditional” Occupation for Men?’, British Journal of Social Work 28(4): 491–510.

Clayton

(2008) Textbook on Immigration and Asylum Law, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Collins

(2008) ‘Statutory Social Workers: Stress, Job Satisfaction, Coping, Social Support and Individual Differences’, British Journal of Social Work 38(6): 1173–93.

10.

Commission for Social Care Inspection (2009) The State of Social Care in England 2007–2008. London: Commission for Social Care Inspection.

11.

Coyle

Edwards

Hannigan

Fothergill

Burnard

(2005) ‘A Systematic Review of Stress Among Mental Health Social Workers’, International Social Work 48(2): 201–11.

12.

Curtis

Moriarty

Netten

(2010) ‘The Expected Working Life of a Social Worker’, British Journal of Social Work 40(4): 1628–43.

13.

Evaluation of Social Work Degree Qualification in England Team (2008) Evaluation of the New Social Work Degree Qualification in England. Volume 1: Findings. London: King’s College London, Social Care Workforce Research Unit.

14.

Evans

Huxley

Munroe

(2006) ‘International Recruitment of Social Care Workers and Social Workers: Illustrations from the UK’, Hong Kong Journal of Social Work 40(1–2): 93–110.

15.

Evans

Huxley

Webber

Katona

Gately

Mears

Medina

Pajak

Kendall

(2005) ‘The Impact of “Statutory Duties” on Mental Health Social Workers in the UK’, Health and Social Care in the Community 13(2): 145–54.

16.

Finney

Simpson

(2009) ‘Sleepwalking to Segregation’: Challenging Myths About Race and Migration. Bristol: The Policy Press.

17.

General Social Care Council (2010a) Raising Standards: Social Work Education in England 2008–09. London: General Social Care Council.

18.

General Social Care Council (2010b) A Report on Social Work Education in England: Data Pack. London: General Social Care Council.

19.

Guiraudon

(2003) ‘The Constitution of a European Immigration Policy Domain: A Political Sociology Approach’, Journal of European Public Policy 10(2): 263–82.

20.

Gupta

Blewett

(2007) ‘Change for Children? The Challenges and Opportunities for the Children’s Social Work Workforce’, Child & Family Social Work 12(2): 172–81.

21.

Hansard (2010) House of Lords Written Answers, Worker Registration Scheme, 5 July 2010. Volume No. 720, Part No. 24. London: Hansard.

22.

Hussein

Manthorpe

Stevens

(2010b) ‘People in Places: A Qualitative Exploration of Recruitment Agencies’ Perspectives on the Employment of International Social Workers in the UK’, British Journal of Social Work 40(3): 1000–16.

23.

Hussein

Manthorpe

Stevens

Moriarty

(2010) ‘Change and Continuity: A Quantitative Investigation of Trends and Characteristics of International Social Workers in England’, British Journal of Social Work. Advance Access. Available at: https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1093/bjsw/bcr008 (accessed 19 July 2011).

24.

Hussein

Stevens

Manthorpe

(2010a) International Social Workers in England: Profile, Motivations, Experiences and Future Motivations. London: King’s College London, Social Care Workforce Research Unit.

25.

Information Centre for Health and Social Care (2008) Personal Social Services Staff of Social Services Departments at 30 September 2007, England. London: Information Centre for Health and Social Care.

26.

Iredale

(2001) ‘The Migration of Professionals: Theories and Typologies’, International Migration 39(5): 7–26.

27.

Kofman

(2000) ‘The Invisibility of Skilled Female Migrants and Gender Relations in Studies of Skilled Migration in Europe’, International Journal of Population Geography 6(1): 45–59.

28.

Kofman

(2004) ‘Gendered Global Migrations’, International Feminist Journal of Politics 6(4): 643–65.

29.

Kofman

Raghuram

(2005) ‘Gender and Skilled Migrants: Into and Beyond the Work Place’, Geoforum 36(2): 149–54.

30.

Koser

Salt

(1997) ‘The Geography of Highly Skilled International Migration’, International Journal of Population Geography 3(4): 285–303.

31.

Local Authority Workforce Intelligence Group (2007a) Adults’ Social Care Workforce Survey: Main Report 2006. London: Local Government Association.

32.

Local Authority Workforce Intelligence Group (2007b) Children’s, Young People’s and Families’ Social Care Workforce Survey: Main Report 2006. London: Local Government Association.

33.

Local Government Association (2009) Respect and Protect: Respect, Recruitment and Retention in Children’s Social Work. London: Local Government Association.

34.

Lyons

Littlechild

, eds (2006) International Labour Mobility in Social Work. Birmingham: Venture Press.

35.

Lyons

Manion

Carlsen

(2006) International Perspectives on Social Work: Global Conditions and Local Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

36.

McLenachan

(2006) ‘Facing Up to a Recruitment Crisis’, The Guardian, 27 November.

37.

Manthorpe

Moriarty

(2009) ‘Older Workers in Social Care: Undervalued and Overlooked?’, in Chiva

Manthorpe

(eds) Older Workers in Europe, pp. 69–93. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

38.

Manthorpe

Hussein

Charles

Rapaport

Stevens

Nagendran

(2010) ‘Social Care Stakeholders’ Perceptions of the Recruitment of International Practitioners in the United Kingdom: A Qualitative Study’, European Journal of Social Work 13(3): 393–408.

39.

Morgan

J.W.

Sives

Appleton

(2005) ‘Managing the International Recruitment of Health Workers and Teachers: Do the Commonwealth Agreements Provide an Answer?’, The Round Table 94(379): 225–38.

40.

Moriarty

Murray

(2007) ‘Who Wants to Be a Social Worker?: Using Routine Published Data to Identify Trends in the Numbers of People Applying for and Completing Social Work Programmes in England’, British Journal of Social Work 37(4): 715–33.

41.

Perry

R.W.

Cree

V.E.

(2003) ‘The Changing Gender Profile of Applicants to Qualifying Social Work Training in the UK’, Social Work Education: The International Journal 22(4): 375–83.

42.

Ruhs

Anderson

(2010) ‘Who Needs Migrant Workers? Introduction to the Analysis of Staff Shortages, Immigration and Public Policy’, in Ruhs

Anderson

(eds) Who Needs Migrant Workers? Labour Shortages, Immigration and Public Policy, pp. 1–20. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

43.

Secretary of State for Education and Skills (2007) Care Matters: Time for Change. Cm 7137. Norwich: The Stationery Office.

44.

Spencer

I.R.G.

(1997) British Immigration Policy Since 1939: The Making of Multi Racial Britain. London: Routledge.

45.

Tham

(2007) ‘Why Are They Leaving? Factors Affecting Intention to Leave Among Social Workers in Child Welfare’, British Journal of Social Work 37(7): 1225–46.

46.

UK Border Agency (2011) Government-approved Shortage Occupation List for Tier 2 of the Points Based System. 16 March 2011. London: Home Office.

47.

Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) (no date) UCAS Statistical Enquiry Service. Available at: http://www.ucas.ac.uk/about_us/stat_services/stats_online/ (accessed 28 January 2011).

48.

Wallis-Jones

Lyons

(2003) 2001 Employment Survey of Newly-qualified Social Workers. London: University of East London.

49.

Welbourne

Harrison

Ford

(2007) ‘Social Work in the UK and the Global Labour Market: Recruitment, Practice and Ethical Considerations’, International Social Work 50(1): 27–40.

50.

White

(2006) ‘Opportunities and Challenges for Social Workers Crossing Borders’, International Social Work 49(5): 629–40.

51.

Yeates

(2009) ‘Women’s Migration, Social Reproduction and Care’, in Razavi

(ed.) The Gendered Impacts of Liberalization: Towards ‘Embedded Liberalism’, pp. 219–43. Abingdon: Routledge/United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) Research in Gender and Development.