The statistics quoted in Zoe Williams's article (Migration caps aren't about protecting British workers, 12 January) do not reflect my direct experience of employment as a truck driver. Haulage companies are encouraging migration in order to drive down wages and conditions. As they are going overseas to use recruitment agencies in eastern Europe to source trained drivers with experience, they are in effect outsourcing training to eastern Europe.
Many companies do not rely on their directly employed staff, they rely on agency staff. The recruitment agencies do not train new drivers and they now require drivers to have two years' experience, which makes it very difficult for young people to get started in this area of work. Instead of training young people, they are relying on drivers from eastern Europe to make good the gaps in recruitment. Wages are falling, in spite of a shortage of local drivers.
Similar problems are faced by young aspiring electricians and plumbers, who need to have five years' experience. It seems reasonable to assume that this strategy will spread to many other areas of work. It seems to be short-termist, as the local skills shortage will get worse. The availability of migrant labour makes it easier for agencies to impose "flexible labour" requirements. These requirements are often completely incompatible with family life. The weakness of trade unions has undermined effective communication about the conditions of workers. It is important to recognise how companies are very actively encouraging migration; the benefits are publicised, but not the undesirable consequences.
Luke Vosper
London