You have held a sponsored work visa for several years. Your employer is preparing an extension, or another business has offered you a job. Someone mentions the current £41,700 salary threshold, while someone else says that you are protected by the old rules.
Both statements need to be examined against your circumstances.
Qualifying workers with earlier sponsored permission can use transitional salary provisions. The ordinary starting point within that framework is currently £31,300 or the applicable lower going rate, whichever is higher, with other salary options available where their conditions are met.
The protection does not freeze the salary requirement at the figure accepted for your first visa. It preserves access to a particular salary framework, whose thresholds and occupation rates can still change.
Our view is that an existing worker’s salary assessment should begin with their immigration history. Establishing which provisions remain available gives the worker and employer a sounder basis for discussing an extension, a new role or a move to another sponsor.
Who can use the transitional salary provisions?
The main protection concerns applicants who were granted Skilled Worker permission under the Immigration Rules in force before 4 April 2024 and have maintained continuous Skilled Worker permission since then. The relevant application must be made before 4 April 2030.
The proposed job must also be eligible under the relevant occupation provisions. Having the necessary immigration history does not make every position suitable for sponsorship.
Earlier Tier 2 (General) permission can be relevant. The definition of Skilled Worker in the Immigration Rules includes permission under that predecessor route. Someone who originally arrived as a Tier 2 (General) migrant should therefore have that history examined rather than assume the protection only concerns visas bearing the Skilled Worker name.
The distinction between Tier 2 categories matters. A general recollection that someone held a “Tier 2 visa” is not enough to identify their position. The actual route and sequence of grants should be established from the records.
Likewise, having lived in the UK before April 2024 does not itself establish eligibility. A person who was studying or holding dependant permission at that time may have entered the Skilled Worker route later.
The first visa decision date may not tell the whole story
GOV.UK describes the protection by reference to the Certificate of Sponsorship for the worker’s first relevant visa being issued before 4 April 2024. The Rules refer to permission granted under the rules in force before that date.
Those descriptions need to be read together. The implementation provisions for the April 2024 changes allowed applications using a Certificate of Sponsorship issued before 4 April 2024 to be decided under the relevant rules in force on 3 April 2024. A later decision date therefore does not necessarily exclude someone from the protected group.
Consider a hypothetical worker whose Certificate of Sponsorship was assigned in March 2024 and whose successful application was decided in May 2024 under the earlier rules. Looking only at the May decision could lead to the wrong conclusion about transitional eligibility.
The assessment should establish the certificate assignment date, the application it supported and the basis on which permission was granted. An old certificate that was never used successfully does not establish the same history.
This is one reason to retain sponsorship records alongside visa decisions. A single date taken from an eVisa or decision email may not explain which legal provisions governed the application.
Continuous permission needs to be checked properly
The requirement is continuous permission in the relevant route. It is not simply continuous employment, continuous residence at the same address or an uninterrupted relationship with one employer.
Where a valid application is made before existing permission expires, section 3C can extend that permission while the application remains pending, provided its conditions are met. A period between the printed expiry date of one grant and the date of the next decision is therefore not automatically a gap in lawful permission.
Conversely, continuing to work or remaining in the UK does not establish that permission continued. The application history, validity of applications and relevant Home Office decisions need to be examined.
The transitional provisions also recognise certain periods of overstaying that are disregarded under the applicable exceptions. That requires a specific assessment; the duration of a gap alone does not settle whether it can be disregarded.
A period on another immigration route raises a different issue. Someone may have remained lawfully in the UK while no longer holding continuous Skilled Worker permission. Returning to sponsorship later should not be assumed to restore the earlier protection.
The useful exercise is to build a chronology showing what permission existed at each stage and how any apparent gap or route change was treated.
April 2024 and July 2025 protect different things
Several changes to the Skilled Worker route have created different transitional provisions. Describing someone as being “under the old rules” can conceal which protection is actually relevant.
The April 2024 provisions concern access to the lower salary framework. The July 2025 provisions address, among other matters, whether certain occupations below the usual graduate skill level remain available to qualifying existing workers.
The main dates should therefore be recorded separately:
| Date or period | What needs checking |
|---|---|
| Rules in force before 4 April 2024 | Whether the worker’s earlier grant and subsequent permission support transitional salary treatment. |
| Rules in force before 22 July 2025 | Whether separate transitional occupation provisions allow the proposed role to remain eligible. |
| Application before 1 December 2026 | Whether a narrower Tier 2 provision concerning allowances or specified occupation rates applies. |
| Application before 4 April 2030 | Whether the application falls within the current deadline for the main pre-April 2024 salary protection. |
These dates belong to different provisions and should not be used interchangeably.
For example, a worker who first obtained Skilled Worker permission under the rules operating in late 2024 may have a relevant history for the July 2025 occupation provisions. That does not establish eligibility for the earlier April 2024 salary protection.
This matters when assessing a promotion or new vacancy. The job may remain eligible while requiring a salary calculation under a different framework from the one the employer expected.
The lower going rate still needs to be met
For someone relying on the ordinary transitional salary option, £31,300 is only one part of the calculation. The applicable lower going rate for the occupation must also be satisfied.
The relevant occupation tables contain annual rates based on a 37.5-hour week, with adjustment required for other working patterns. They also contain minimum-rate provisions. The correct occupation, salary option and hours therefore need to be established before comparing the offer with the published figures.
Suppose a hypothetical worker qualifies for transitional treatment and is offered £32,000. If the applicable lower going rate, already adjusted for the proposed hours, is £34,000, the offer would fall short under the ordinary transitional option despite exceeding £31,300.
This example illustrates the assessment rather than the rate for a particular occupation.
The word “lower” describes the applicable rate in comparison with the standard framework. It does not mean that any salary below the standard threshold will qualify.
For an employer, the practical requirement is to keep the calculation connected to the actual job. A figure accepted for another worker, or for the same worker several years earlier, cannot substitute for that assessment.
Additional salary reductions have their own conditions
Within the lower salary framework, further options exist for qualifying applicants.
A relevant non-STEM PhD can support a £28,200 general threshold and 90% of the applicable going rate. A relevant STEM PhD can support £25,000 and 80%. The Immigration Salary List option uses £25,000 and the full applicable going rate, while the new entrant option uses £25,000 and 70%, subject to the relevant conditions and published minimum rates.
Access to the transitional framework does not automatically establish eligibility for any of those options. The qualification, occupation or new entrant conditions must still be met.
This is particularly important where an earlier application relied on a temporary or personal characteristic. The worker may remain eligible for transitional salary treatment while no longer qualifying for the additional reduction used previously.
The assessment should therefore identify both the available framework and the particular salary option. Recording only that the person is “transitional” leaves an important part of the reasoning unresolved.
Can you keep transitional salary treatment when changing employer?
Changing employer does not automatically remove the main salary protection.
Home Office sponsor guidance confirms that qualifying workers sponsored in occupations listed in Table 2 or Table 2aa of Appendix Skilled Occupations can use the transitional provision with a new sponsor or their existing sponsor. There is an important restriction for occupations in Table 2a: that provision requires continued sponsorship by the sponsor from the worker’s most recent grant.
The occupation table therefore matters. A statement that the lower salary rules are either always transferable or never transferable would be too broad.
For the worker, this means a potential move should be assessed against the new role and its occupation code before salary negotiations are treated as settled. For the new employer, it means obtaining enough immigration history to understand the basis on which the proposed salary might qualify.
The new job still needs its own sponsorship and immigration assessment. GOV.UK also states that the worker should not begin the new job until confirmation of the new permission has been received.
A preserved salary framework can help make a move possible. It does not replace the steps needed to authorise the new employment.
A change of role can affect more than the salary figure
An existing employer may assume that retaining the same worker preserves the previous calculation. That assumption needs checking where duties, responsibilities or working hours change.
A promotion can place the role in a different occupation code. A reorganisation may alter the work substantially even if the job title remains familiar. The applicable going rate should follow the properly classified role.
The worker’s history may preserve access to transitional treatment, but the amount required for the proposed job can still be different. The question is what the new employment requires when assessed under the available provisions.
Our article on changing a sponsored worker’s job or occupation code examines the wider sponsorship consequences.
The practical benefit of reviewing the change early is that the employer can align the role, salary and immigration timetable. Discovering the issue after a promotion has taken effect can make an otherwise sensible staffing decision harder to implement.
An existing grant and the next application are different assessments
A later increase in published salary thresholds does not ordinarily alter the requirement for the remainder of a worker’s current permission. A subsequent application brings a fresh assessment under the rules and relevant transitional arrangements.
That distinction explains why a person may lawfully remain in their current sponsored employment at a salary that needs reviewing before an extension.
It also explains why an employer should avoid treating the original approval as evidence that the same figure will support every later application. The previous decision concerned the requirements and circumstances applicable at that stage.
A salary reduction during existing permission raises another set of questions. The employer needs to consider the basis of the current grant and the permitted changes, rather than assume that access to a lower transitional threshold authorises the reduction.
Our guidance on salary changes for sponsored workers addresses that decision separately.
For an extension, the useful action is an early review of the proposed salary against the current requirements. That leaves time for a proper employment discussion if an increase is needed.
Some older Tier 2 provisions end before the main protection
The 4 April 2030 deadline does not govern every historic salary arrangement.
Separate provisions currently apply to certain former Tier 2 (General) migrants making applications before 1 December 2026. One concerns qualifying allowances where the applicant continues with the same sponsor and the required conditions are met. Another concerns special going rates for specified occupations where the necessary sponsorship history has been maintained.
These are narrower provisions than the general pre-April 2024 salary protection. A worker may qualify for the main transitional framework while also relying on one of these additional arrangements.
The end of the narrower provision can therefore change the calculation even though the main framework remains available.
For someone whose remuneration includes allowances, the assessment should identify what currently makes those payments count. For a worker in an affected occupation, it should establish which going-rate provision is being used.
The appropriate response is to examine the next intended application and the arrangements that support it. The December date should not be treated as an automatic instruction to apply early without considering eligibility, timing and the wider consequences.
What does the 4 April 2030 deadline mean?
Under the current rules, the main transitional salary provision applies to qualifying applications made before 4 April 2030. Assigning a Certificate of Sponsorship before that date is not, by itself, the same as making the worker’s application before the deadline.
The deadline concerns access to the provision for an application. It does not state that every visa granted using it ends on that date.
For a worker planning several years ahead, the sensible approach is to understand the current end point while recognising that future applications must be assessed against the rules then in force.
For an employer, the deadline belongs in workforce planning. If retaining a worker currently depends on transitional salary treatment, the business should understand when the next application is expected and what salary progression may be needed.
An assumption that the protection will be extended is not a reliable basis for a recruitment or retention commitment. Equally, a future deadline should not obscure the conditions that must already be satisfied for the application being prepared now.
Settlement requires its own salary check
Earlier sponsorship can also affect the salary assessment for indefinite leave to remain, but settlement should not be treated as another extension using an unchanged calculation.
GOV.UK identifies lower salary provisions for qualifying workers with pre-April 2024 sponsorship and continuous permission. The applicable settlement category and occupation rate still need to be established.
An employer and worker should therefore review settlement requirements separately from the basis on which the current visa was granted. A salary arrangement that supported limited permission is evidence of that earlier assessment, not a conclusion about settlement eligibility.
Our Indefinite Leave to Remain service considers the relevant route, residence, employment and evidence requirements.
Where settlement is approaching, an early review can help identify whether salary or supporting evidence needs attention before the application is prepared.
Build the assessment around the records
A reliable transitional salary assessment should begin with the first relevant Certificate of Sponsorship and the permission granted from it. Add subsequent visa decisions, application dates, sponsorship records and any period during which permission was extended by law.
Then bring in the proposed employment: duties, occupation code, weekly hours, salary and any additional remuneration. For a change of employer, establish the new sponsor and the occupation table being relied upon. For an extension, confirm whether the role and working pattern remain the same.
The conclusion should explain why the worker qualifies for a particular framework and how the proposed salary meets its requirements. Any uncertainty about continuity, an old grant or a narrower provision should remain visible until it is resolved.
This approach is useful because it gives the worker and employer something they can act on. They can see whether the offer works, whether pay needs adjusting and which facts must be established before the application proceeds.
Understand what the protection preserves
Transitional salary rules can make an important difference to an existing worker’s options. Their value depends on identifying precisely what remains available.
The relevant history may preserve access to lower salary rates, while updated occupation figures, changed duties or the end of a narrower provision alter the amount required. A sound assessment brings those matters together before the worker or employer relies on the result.
Knightsbridge’s Skilled Worker Visa service considers immigration history, the proposed role and the applicable salary requirements as part of planning an application.
If you are preparing an extension or considering a new sponsored job and need to establish whether transitional salary treatment applies, Request a Case Assessment. Include your current permission, earlier sponsorship details and proposed salary so the appropriate next step can be considered.
