By Adis Sehic - 09 July 2024
We’ve submitted evidence to the Low Pay Commission (LPC) demonstrating how, despite increases to National Living Wage (NLW) rates in recent years, migrant workers arriving in the UK continue to be excluded from the benefit of minimum wage rates. The reasons for this are diverse and include an inability of migrant workers to enforce employment rights generally, the varying experiences of migrant workers under the UK’s immigration system and regulatory gaps.
Download the full submission, or read on for a summary of our arguments. And if you can, please donate. Your support is what keeps our advice free and accessible to the workers who need it most.
What is the Low Pay Commission, and what is the consultation about?
The LPC is the independent body which advises the government on the levels of the National Minimum Wage, including the NLW. Each year, the LPC seeks input from a broad range of stakeholders to inform its recommendations to the government about minimum wage rates set in the following year.
The LPC’s specific remit for the 2024 consultation includes suggesting a NLW rate for April 2025 “to maintain the bite at two-thirds of median earnings and protect progress made to end low hourly pay for this group, without recommending any further revisions to the age threshold”.
Our consultation response has focused specifically on the impact of NLW rates on migrant workers. Migrant workers are often a hard to reach and underrepresented group in the labour market. As a migrant-run organisation, the Work Rights Centre is well placed to contribute evidence in this area as migrant workers have made up the majority of the over 6,000 clients we have advised to date, including on issues that often intersect between employment and immigration law.
How are migrant workers affected by National Living Wage rates?
Though NLW rates are meant to benefit all workers, the extent to which migrant workers can practically access these rates is varied. In recent times, migrant workers arriving under the UK’s system of sponsorship or ‘tied’ visas (where both employment and immigration status is conditional upon the employer) have been severely limited in their ability to assert their rights.
Perhaps most notably, this has included seasonal agricultural workers arriving under the Seasonal Worker visa scheme and care workers arriving under the Health and Care Worker visa. This is in great contrast to migrant workers who, prior to Brexit, came to the UK from predominantly EU member states and were as a result free to work without restriction and assert their rights.
Sponsored workers find it harder to enjoy the benefits of higher minimum wage, because they face significant barriers to accessing their employment rights overall. Systemic difficulties with securing continuous lawful employment for the duration of their visa, coupled with high costs of recruitment to the UK and exclusion from public funds generate pressure on migrants to survive by taking on cash-in-hand jobs, where underpayment is endemic and exploitation is rife. Sector-specific dynamics also apply, for instance, the use of piece rates under the Seasonal Worker visa, and recruitment clauses used in the social care sector.
The cost of living crisis has undoubtedly compounded the situation for all migrant workers, not just those under the sponsorship system. In the last 12 months, 89% of our clients reported only having 0-2 months of savings available to them, with the top nationalities excluding the UK being Romania, Ukraine, Poland, and Bulgaria.
Similarly, wages have been suppressed. When comparing our figures over the last year with the annual living wage (£23,400) as noted by the Living Wage Foundation, we found that migrant men were on average earning just above the annual living wage (£23,796), while migrant women were earning significantly below this (£18,396). This suggests that the gendered aspects of work are just as alive among communities of migrant workers, aligning with the Commission’s previous findings on the broader impact of gender in the workplace.
Compliance and enforcement are also presenting an issue. The current penalties regime for minimum wage encroachments is too generous for employers, has little deterrent effects and does little but to reinforce a culture of self-correction where non-compliance is not taken seriously. Both a lack of regulatory oversight of employers and the lack of safe reporting channels for migrant workers means that some organisations can act with impunity, with little chance of redress for migrant workers. In this context, the lack of proactive and intelligence-led engagement from enforcement agencies with civil society stakeholders about the drivers of abuse affecting migrant workers means that the true scale of exploitation has remained hidden.
What needs to change for migrant workers to have practical access to living wage rates?
It is not possible for migrant workers to have improved access to NLW rates without considering their circumstances in the round. As a result, reform across the areas of immigration, employment and labour market enforcement will be necessary to ensure workers have the full benefit of NLW rates. As examples, this would include:
These changes, along with a broader acknowledgement that migrant workers’ experience in the labour market differs substantially to that of British workers, would go some way to equalising the entitlement and access to NLW rates in practice.
Read our evidence submission to the Low Pay Commission
← News