The full-scale invasion of Ukraine led to unprecedented levels of demand for our services. This came from Ukrainians looking to access the government’s Ukraine schemes, but also from those who sought status under other immigration routes, including undocumented Ukrainians who were desperately trying to regularise their stay in the UK. As more Ukrainians regularised their status in the UK and obtained protection from the ongoing war, the nature of employment and immigration enquiries we received from clients from Ukraine diverged.
In terms of employment rights cases, many of the 34 Ukrainian nationals came to us with issues we observe across precarious jobs more generally - non-payment of wages, non-payment for self-employed services provided, and dismissal. A majority (62%) of these clients held permission to stay under the Ukraine Scheme, had limited to no knowledge of English and, understandably, expressed unfamiliarity with their employment rights.
In terms of immigration cases, 1 in 8 (13%) of our Ukrainian clients were undocumented and had no available route to regularisation of their status. While the Ukraine Schemes were relatively generous, their disapplication to undocumented Ukrainians, even in the context of a humanitarian crisis, underlined the impact of the Hostile Environment. Consequently, our immigration casework with Ukrainian nationals became more complex, assisting with applications for status such as on grounds of Private Life.
While the deadline for EUSS applications was 30th June 2021, our team continued to support late applicants and joining family members in 2023. Late applicants tended to be EU nationals with limited to no knowledge of English, limited IT literacy, individuals with big gaps in their continuous residence and those without a strong support network. In light of changes to the Immigration Rules that came into force on 7 August 2023, which increased evidential requirements for valid applications and led to more rejections (see Home Office EUSS statistics), demand for our EUSS support services increased.
Whereas last year 16% of our EUSS cases primarily concerned rejections or refusals on EUSS applications, this year that figure jumped to 30%, with most of these enquiries received after 7 August 2023. A further 42% of EUSS cases in 2023 related to joining family members. We anticipate that demand for EUSS support will continue to be high, for both late applicants and joining family members, as legislative changes appear to be unlikely.
The more precarious a worker’s employment arrangements are, the easier it is for employers or contractors to exploit them. When we talk about precarious work, we are referring to arrangements characterised by a high level of uncertainty, and often informality, where workers are less able to produce evidence of work and tax records, to support a potential claim in the courts.
Unfortunately, three indicators show that a significant minority of our clients faced precarious work arrangements. First, 12% of employment clients were identified as being in the black market. This means that their work was not visible to the state (e.g. employer didn’t pay taxes), and they could not use official records to demonstrate evidence of work done. More than 1 in 4 (26%) clients also did not have a written contract. This figure is to a large extent driven up by self-employed clients, who accounted for roughly half of clients without a contract, but also includes people with worker or employee status. Employers who fail to provide a written statement of main terms are not only breaking the law, but also reduce the contract to a less clear, verbal one, making it harder for workers to challenge exploitation. Finally, 13% of our clients did not have any confirmation of payment, once again, reducing their ability to protect themselves from non-payment and other forms of exploitation.
1 in 8 (13%) of our clients worked more than the ‘48 hours per week’ limit stipulated by the Working Time Regulations. While this does not constitute an illegality as long as workers’ consent is obtained, and some workers actively choose this schedule, working overtime can have a negative effect upon workers’ physical and mental health, family life, as well as the ability to socialise, relax, or learn new skills.
The average gross monthly pay among our clients was approximately £1,946 for men, and £1,648 for women. As in previous years, there was a significant gender discrepancy, although it is unclear to what extent this is because women generally work different hours and in different sectors to men. While this data doesn’t enable us to make any definitive conclusions about gender discrimination, it matters in the sense that lower pay, for whatever reason, makes women less socially mobile.
In the last couple of years, we have also developed our expertise in issues experienced by seasonal agricultural workers. Agriculture is now the fourth most common sector within our employment cases. Nearly 70% of Seasonal Worker visas were issued to Central Asian nationals in 2023, making the Work Rights Centre's Russian-speaking service providers well-placed to address employment issues raised by workers.
Unfortunately, we observed worrying trends in this sector. Notably, workers reported their inability to secure transfers between employers, leaving them stuck in exploitative situations. Furthermore, we heard several reports of non-payment of wages, with workers too scared of immigration repercussions to raise a claim in the Employment Tribunal (see also our Systemic Drivers of Migrant Labour Exploitation report). We expect to see a further increase in seasonal worker cases next year, and we aim to use our expertise to both resolve individual issues and inform workers in this sector about their rights.
30% of our clients did not know how to write a CV at all, and a further 16% did not know how to write a CV in English.
Similarly, only 3 in 10 clients (30%) knew how to write a cover letter in English. Both issues constitute an important barrier to professional mobility, which we seek to address in person through employability support, as well as through a series of digital tools (see our CV builder).
By contrast, levels of IT literacy were generally good. A slight majority of clients could use a computer and also owned one. However, a significant minority among them (9%) could not use a computer at all. This is an important impediment before clients can navigate the increasingly digital nature of employment opportunities and the means to employment justice, as well as a real barrier to proving right to work. Notably, 5% of the issues brought to the attention of immigration advisers pertained to proving right to work.
As with levels of education, our clients’ levels of English were polarised. While 41% of clients reported being able to speak, understand, and write in English, one-third spoke very basic or no English at all.