Genuine Vacancy and Sponsor Licences: How UKVI Assesses Sponsored Roles

A job does not become suitable for sponsorship simply because it has the right salary and appears under an eligible occupation code.

The Home Office is also entitled to ask whether the role genuinely exists, whether the worker will actually perform it and whether the position makes sense within the organisation offering it.

This is often described as the genuine vacancy requirement.

The terminology has changed slightly.

Since March 2026, the main sponsor guidance has increasingly used the defined term eligible role. An eligible role must exist, require the worker to perform the duties stated on the Certificate of Sponsorship, satisfy the relevant immigration requirements and be appropriate to the organisation in light of its business model, business plan and scale.

The Skilled Worker Immigration Rules still contain a separate and very direct test. The decision-maker must not have reasonable grounds to believe that the sponsored job does not exist, is a sham, or has been created mainly so the worker can obtain immigration permission.

The language differs.

The underlying concern is straightforward.

Is this a real job, in a real organisation, which this worker will genuinely perform on the terms the sponsor has described?

For many employers, that question causes no difficulty.

For others, particularly smaller companies, newly created roles, unusual senior appointments and third-party working arrangements, it deserves careful consideration before a Certificate of Sponsorship is assigned.

“Genuine vacancy” and “eligible role” are related, but not identical

Older sponsor guidance and many immigration websites use the expression “genuine vacancy”.

It remains useful shorthand and is still used in Home Office caseworking and compliance material.

But the current sponsor guidance now defines an eligible role more broadly.

An eligible role must, among other things:

• exist when the relevant Certificate of Sponsorship is assigned, or be reasonably expected to exist by then
• require the worker to perform the duties and responsibilities stated in the sponsorship information
• meet the requirements of the particular sponsored route
• comply with relevant minimum wage and working time requirements
• be appropriate to the organisation’s business model, business plan and scale

That last point is particularly significant.

The Home Office is not confined to asking whether somebody could theoretically perform a job with the title stated on the CoS.

It can look at whether that job makes sense in this particular business.

A genuine Finance Director role may be entirely appropriate in one company and difficult to explain in another.

Context matters.

A genuine role does not need to be an old role

There is no rule that a business must have employed somebody in the same position previously.

Companies grow.

New departments are created.

Founders delegate responsibilities.

Businesses win contracts that require capabilities they did not previously need.

A genuinely new role can therefore be sponsored.

The question is why the role exists now.

Suppose a technology company with five employees has secured investment and intends to build a product team.

Its first senior engineering appointment may be entirely consistent with the next stage of the business.

Likewise, a small professional practice may reach the point where it needs its first Operations Manager because the founders can no longer manage the operational workload themselves.

The fact that the role did not exist last year is not the problem.

The business should simply be able to explain what has changed and why the appointment is now commercially credible.

“A new role does not concern me simply because it is new. I would want to understand what created the need for it. Growth, investment, a new contract or the founders reaching capacity can all provide a perfectly coherent explanation. The difficulty comes when the job appears on the organisation chart only because sponsorship is required.”

Abdul Jabbar, Principal Immigration Adviser

The Home Office can ask whether the role makes sense for the size of the business

This is one area where the current sponsor guidance is unusually direct.

It gives examples of situations where UKVI may not be satisfied that a business can offer appropriate Skilled Worker employment.

One example involves a small business saying it needs full-time senior managerial roles where there is no credible need for those positions.

Another concerns proposed salaries that appear inconsistent with the turnover or financial position of the business and cannot be satisfactorily explained.

These are examples, not automatic refusal rules.

A small company can employ senior people.

A business with low current turnover may have funding that allows it to make significant hires.

A new company may deliberately recruit capability before revenue grows.

The point is that sponsorship is assessed in context.

If something appears unusual, the business should be capable of explaining it with evidence rather than assuming that meeting the occupation code and salary threshold ends the enquiry.

The job title is rarely the decisive issue

Job titles are flexible.

Different companies use the same title for very different roles.

“Operations Manager” could describe someone running a substantial operational function or someone undertaking largely administrative work.

“Business Development Manager” can range from a senior strategic commercial position to routine sales activity.

“Project Manager” can mean almost anything without the underlying duties.

The Home Office therefore looks beyond the title.

For Skilled Worker sponsorship, the occupation code and job description must match the work the person will actually perform.

Current sponsor guidance places responsibility squarely on the sponsor to ensure that the occupation code and job description correspond with the real role.

That responsibility continues after the CoS is assigned.

The job the employee actually performs should remain consistent with the sponsored role.

Do not build the job description around the occupation code

This is where genuine role problems can become avoidable.

A business identifies the employee it wants.

It then looks for an occupation code that appears to work.

The actual duties are adjusted until they resemble that occupation.

The final job description looks more senior or more specialised than the position the business originally intended to offer.

That is the wrong order.

The role should exist first.

Its genuine duties should then be considered against the available occupation codes.

Sometimes the answer will be that the role fits an eligible Skilled Worker occupation.

Sometimes it will not.

Changing the written description does not change the underlying job.

The current compliance guidance specifically addresses exaggerated or incorrect job descriptions used to make a role appear eligible when it is not.

That is considerably more serious than an innocent disagreement about the most appropriate occupation code.

Choosing the wrong occupation code can raise a separate concern

The Skilled Worker Rules allow the Home Office to consider whether the occupation code chosen is genuinely the most appropriate one.

The decision-maker can look at whether the sponsor appears to have selected a less appropriate code because:

the correct code is not eligible,

the correct code has a higher going rate,

or another feature of the selected code makes the immigration application easier.

The Home Office can consider the sponsor’s genuine need for the job, the worker’s skills and experience, the sponsor’s immigration compliance history and additional information from the organisation.

This means the occupation code is not simply an administrative selection from a list.

It forms part of the Home Office’s assessment of the actual employment being offered.

The worker also needs to make sense for the role

The sponsorship assessment is not only about the employer.

Current sponsor duties require the organisation to be satisfied that the person it sponsors intends and is able to fill the role.

The Skilled Worker Rules also contain a separate genuineness requirement for the applicant. The worker must genuinely intend and be able to undertake the sponsored job.

That can bring the person’s experience, qualifications and knowledge of the role into the picture.

Imagine a company sponsoring somebody for a highly specialised technical position.

The candidate has no obvious experience in that field and cannot explain during a Home Office interview what the job involves.

That may create questions even if the employer has produced a polished job description.

This does not mean every sponsored worker must have followed a conventional career path.

People change careers.

Qualifications obtained overseas may differ from familiar UK routes.

A strong candidate may have gained expertise through experience rather than formal education.

The point is coherence.

The proposed employment, the worker’s background and the employer’s explanation should make sense together.

There is no general resident labour market test for Skilled Workers

This is another area where old Tier 2 practice still causes confusion.

An employer sponsoring a Skilled Worker does not generally have to prove that no suitable British or settled worker was available for the job.

The old general resident labour market test was removed when the Skilled Worker route replaced Tier 2 (General).

That does not mean recruitment has become irrelevant.

Current Appendix D requires sponsors to retain evidence of recruitment activity where recruitment took place.

If the role was advertised, the sponsor should retain appropriate evidence of that process.

If it was not advertised, the organisation should be able to explain how the worker was identified and why it considered them suitable.

The purpose is different from the old resident labour market test.

The employer is not proving that every resident candidate was unsuitable before it was allowed to employ an overseas worker.

The evidence can instead help the Home Office assess whether the role and recruitment are genuine.

A role does not have to be advertised simply to make it genuine

Some employers assume they must advertise every sponsored role because otherwise UKVI will regard the vacancy as suspicious.

That is not the general Skilled Worker rule.

There may be perfectly ordinary reasons why a role was not advertised externally.

The individual may already work for the company under another immigration route.

They may have been identified through a speculative application.

A senior recruit may have been approached directly.

A recruitment agency may have identified them.

A business may be moving an existing worker into a role they have effectively grown into.

What matters is that the organisation can explain how the recruitment happened.

Inventing an advertising exercise solely to make the application appear stronger is not better evidence.

The records should reflect the recruitment that actually took place.

Recruitment evidence should tell the same story as the job

Where the position was advertised, compare the advert with the CoS.

Do the duties broadly match?

Is the salary consistent?

Is the seniority the same?

Would somebody reading both documents believe they relate to the same vacancy?

Differences can have innocent explanations.

A salary may have increased during negotiation.

The job may have developed during the recruitment process.

The business may have clarified responsibilities before making the offer.

But substantial unexplained differences can attract attention.

For example, an advertised administrative position becoming a senior management role only after the successful candidate needs sponsorship would naturally require explanation.

The point is not that employment terms can never change.

It is that the sponsor should understand why they changed.

Commercial need is often more persuasive than immigration language

When a role is unusual, businesses sometimes respond by producing increasingly technical immigration explanations.

That can miss the point.

Suppose a small manufacturer wants to recruit its first Head of International Sales.

A useful explanation might be:

The company currently sells almost entirely in the UK.

It has signed distribution arrangements in two overseas markets.

The founders have been handling international enquiries themselves.

The company now needs a dedicated person responsible for developing those markets, managing distributors and building the export function.

That is a commercial explanation.

It tells the Home Office why the position exists.

It is usually more useful than repeatedly stating that the role falls within an eligible occupation code.

Eligibility and commercial reality need to meet.

Financial capacity can form part of the picture

The Home Office can also consider whether the organisation appears capable of paying the salary it proposes.

There is no general rule requiring a particular turnover before a Skilled Worker role can be genuine.

But a salary that appears completely out of proportion to the business’s finances may invite questions.

Again, context can answer them.

A start-up may have recently raised substantial investment.

A company may have received funding from its parent.

A new contract may support the appointment.

The business may have considerable cash reserves despite modest historic turnover.

Where the proposed salary looks unusual from the accounts alone, the organisation should understand how it would explain the funding position if asked.

The purpose is not to prove that the business will remain profitable.

It is to show that the proposed employment is commercially real.

Third-party working is a separate risk

A genuine job can still fail the sponsorship rules because of the way the worker will be supplied to a third party.

The Skilled Worker Rules prohibit sponsorship where the arrangement amounts to hiring the worker to another organisation to fill a position with that organisation, whether temporary or permanent.

They also restrict arrangements where the sponsored person is effectively carrying out an ongoing routine role or service for a third party rather than working in a genuine sponsored role for their employer.

This does not prevent sponsored employees from working at client sites.

Professional services businesses, technology consultancies and contractors can legitimately deliver work at customer premises.

The question is who really employs, directs and controls the sponsored worker and what commercial service the sponsor is providing.

A consultancy delivering a defined project through its own employees is different from an organisation simply supplying an individual to fill a vacancy in the client’s workforce.

The contract may say one thing.

UKVI can look at how the arrangement actually works.

Ask who controls the work

For third-party arrangements, several questions become useful.

Who decides the worker’s day-to-day duties?

Who manages performance?

Who determines working hours?

Who can move the employee onto another assignment?

What is the sponsor contractually delivering to the client?

Is the sponsor responsible for an identifiable project or service?

Or is the worker simply filling an ordinary role within the client’s team?

No single answer is necessarily decisive.

Taken together, they show whether the sponsored employment genuinely belongs to the sponsor.

This is an area where reviewing the commercial contract before sponsorship can be considerably easier than trying to explain the relationship after UKVI has raised concerns.

What evidence can help demonstrate that a role is genuine?

There is no universal “genuine vacancy evidence pack”.

Nor should there be.

The right evidence depends on why the position might require explanation.

For a newly created role, useful material might include:

• an accurate organisational chart
• evidence of business growth
• contracts creating additional work
• investment or funding material
• internal planning documents
• evidence showing who currently performs the relevant functions
• an authentic job description

For a recruitment question, the business might rely on:

• the job advertisement
• recruitment records
• interview or selection information
• evidence of direct recruitment
• records explaining how an existing employee was selected

For a financial question, appropriate accounts, banking material, investment evidence or contracts may be relevant.

For a client-site arrangement, the commercial agreement and evidence of how the sponsor manages the worker may matter.

The objective is not to overwhelm the Home Office.

It is to answer the question that genuinely arises.

“If UKVI asks why a role exists, I would not respond with twenty documents chosen because they mention the company. I would identify the concern and answer it. Sometimes one contract, an organisation chart and a clear explanation of the commercial need tell the story better than a large bundle of unrelated evidence.”

Abdul Jabbar, Principal Immigration Adviser

What happens during a compliance visit?

The genuine role question often becomes particularly visible during a Home Office compliance visit.

UKVI may compare:

the Certificate of Sponsorship,

the job description,

the employment contract,

the organisation chart,

payroll information,

the worker’s explanation of their job,

and what the manager says the employee actually does.

The officer may also look at the employer’s business activity and whether the role appears appropriate to its scale and model.

This is why a role should not merely survive a document review.

It should survive a conversation.

If the worker can naturally explain their responsibilities, the manager describes the same broad role and the records support the arrangement, the position is considerably easier to understand.

Interviews should not require rehearsal

Employers sometimes become concerned that a sponsored worker might say the “wrong thing” if interviewed.

The better response is not to give the employee a script.

A worker should understand their own job.

Their description does not need to reproduce the occupation code wording.

In fact, a natural explanation is often more credible.

Someone employed as a specialist engineer should be able to explain the projects they work on, what responsibilities they have and who they report to.

The problem is not ordinary differences in language.

The problem is when the worker describes employment fundamentally different from what the sponsor told the Home Office.

Roles can become non-compliant after sponsorship begins

A role can be genuine on day one and later drift.

This is easy to overlook.

A business sponsors somebody for an eligible professional role.

Eighteen months later, the department has changed.

Several colleagues have left.

The sponsored worker now spends much of their time on lower-level duties that were never part of the original position.

Or the opposite occurs.

The employee is promoted into a substantially different occupation without the sponsorship position being considered.

The sponsor guidance makes the organisation responsible for ensuring that the worker’s actual role continues to correspond with the job for which the CoS was assigned.

A genuine role assessment therefore does not end when the visa is granted.

Role drift is a governance issue

The Level 1 User cannot monitor every employee’s daily work.

Nor should they.

The practical solution is to involve the sponsorship function when material employment changes are proposed.

If a sponsored employee is promoted, reorganised, transferred or given substantially different responsibilities, somebody should ask whether sponsorship is affected.

That allows the immigration position to be considered before the new arrangement becomes established.

The difficulty with role drift is that it often happens gradually.

No single decision appears significant.

Six small decisions later, the worker is doing a different job.

Periodic sponsor audits should therefore compare the actual role with the original CoS rather than merely checking that the employee remains on payroll.

What can happen if UKVI decides the role is not genuine?

The consequences can affect both worker and sponsor.

Under the Skilled Worker Rules, the worker will not receive the mandatory sponsorship points if the decision-maker has reasonable grounds to believe the job does not exist, is a sham or was created mainly so the applicant could obtain immigration permission.

That can lead to refusal of the worker’s application.

For the sponsor, assigning a CoS for a role that does not meet the relevant role requirements can lead to compliance action.

The current sponsor guidance expressly reserves the right to suspend or revoke a licence where a sponsor assigns a CoS for a role that is not eligible.

The route-specific Skilled Worker guidance is particularly firm about sponsorship of roles that are not genuine.

This is not therefore an issue to address after the CoS has been assigned if it can sensibly be resolved before.

The burden is not to prove the role beyond doubt

Employers can sometimes become unnecessarily anxious about the phrase “genuine vacancy”.

A normal commercial recruitment decision does not require the company to prepare a litigation bundle proving why it hired somebody.

The business should be able to show a coherent position.

The role exists.

The duties are real.

The occupation code reflects those duties.

The salary is credible.

The worker can do the job.

The position fits the organisation.

The recruitment can be explained.

That is normally the substance of the matter.

The more unusual the arrangement, the more consideration it may deserve.

A newly created senior role in a two-person company should probably be understood in greater depth than replacing the tenth software engineer in an established technology team.

Professional judgement lies in recognising that difference.

Questions worth asking before assigning the CoS

Before sponsoring a worker, a business should be comfortable with several points.

Does the job genuinely exist?

Why does the business need it?

Are the duties described accurately?

Does the occupation code reflect those duties?

Is the salary credible for the role and organisation?

Can the business sustain it?

Does the proposed worker have the background to perform the job?

How was the worker identified?

If they will work at a client site, what is the real commercial arrangement?

Would their manager describe the role consistently with the CoS?

Those questions are not another Home Office checklist.

They are a useful commercial test.

If the answers feel strained internally, they are unlikely to become stronger merely because the CoS is assigned.

Frequently asked questions

What is a genuine vacancy for sponsor licence purposes?

A genuine sponsored role must actually exist and be the job the worker will perform.

For Skilled Worker purposes, the Home Office must not have reasonable grounds to believe the job does not exist, is a sham or was created mainly to allow the worker to obtain immigration permission.

Current sponsor guidance also uses the wider defined term “eligible role”.

What is an eligible role?

Under current sponsor guidance, an eligible role must exist, match the duties and hours recorded in the sponsorship information, satisfy the relevant immigration requirements and be appropriate to the sponsor’s business model, business plan and scale.

Does a sponsored role have to be advertised?

There is no general requirement to advertise every Skilled Worker vacancy.

Where recruitment activity has taken place, the sponsor must retain appropriate evidence. If the role was not advertised, the organisation should be able to explain how it identified the worker.

Does the employer have to prove that no British worker could do the job?

No general resident labour market test applies to the Skilled Worker route.

The sponsor does not ordinarily have to establish that no suitable settled worker was available before sponsoring an overseas worker.

Can a small company sponsor a senior manager?

Potentially, yes.

The size of the business does not prevent a genuine senior appointment.

The Home Office can, however, consider whether the role is credible and appropriate to the organisation’s scale and business model.

Can UKVI question whether the business can afford the salary?

Yes.

Current sponsor guidance allows the Home Office to consider whether proposed salaries appear sustainable in the context of the organisation’s financial position.

Can a sponsored worker work at a client’s premises?

Potentially.

The issue is whether the sponsor remains the genuine employer providing an identifiable service or project, rather than simply supplying the worker to fill an ongoing routine position within the client’s business.

Can a sponsored employee’s job change after their visa is granted?

Yes, within limits.

Some changes may be reportable under the existing sponsorship. A more substantial change, particularly into a different occupation, can require a new Certificate of Sponsorship and immigration application.

The position should be considered before the new role begins.

The test is commercial reality

The phrase “genuine vacancy” can make this part of sponsorship sound abstract.

It is not.

The Home Office is asking whether the employment being presented through the sponsorship system corresponds with a real commercial arrangement.

The strongest cases usually do not need elaborate explanations.

The organisation has a genuine need.

The job has recognisable duties.

The worker is capable of performing them.

The salary makes sense.

The position fits the business.

The documents and the day-to-day employment tell broadly the same story.

Where something is less obvious, the answer is not to make the job description sound more impressive.

It is to understand the business reason and present it accurately.

That is the distinction between making a role appear sponsorable and establishing that a real role is suitable for sponsorship.

The latter is what the system requires.

Concerned about whether a role is suitable for sponsorship?

If your business is considering a role that is newly created, unusually senior, based at a client site or otherwise likely to require closer consideration, you can request a Free Case Assessment.

Tell us about the organisation, the proposed role and the worker you are considering sponsoring.

We can then consider the sponsorship position and whether Knightsbridge Immigration can assist.

Genuine Vacancy and Sponsor Licences: How UKVI Assesses Sponsored Roles

Free Case Assessment