The Home Office targets rogue sponsors, but workers also need safeguarding

Quarterly immigration statistics for Q2 2024 show a small 4% drop in the number of Skilled Worker visas issued, compared with the previous quarter. This was mostly driven by a reduction in visas issued to care workers who, from 11 March 2024, were no longer able to bring partners and children.

The big story however, is the sharp increase in enforcement actions against sponsors. Revoking licences punishes rogue employers, but it does nothing to safeguard migrant workers whose immigration status is tied to them. Based on international practice, we suggest three policies that could.

Skilled Worker visas issued fell to 2022 levels

Skilled Worker visas, which include Health and Care Worker visas, peaked in Q3 2023, when 63,000 visas were issued to main applicants (see Figure 1). Since then, this number has been shrinking each quarter. The latest data show that in Q2 2024, the Home Office issued just 26,000 Skilled Worker visas. This is close to levels at the start of 2022.

Figure 1. Skilled Worker visas issued to main applicants, 2021-2024

The continued decline is largely explained by policies affecting care workers, previously the most common occupation amongst sponsored migrants. In December 2023, then Home Secretary James Cleverly announced several policies aimed at reducing net migration. This included removing the right of care workers and senior care workers to bring dependants, which we argued was a cruel policy. As predicted by ex-Minister for Victims and Safeguarding Laura Farris, data now shows that this has also likely made the UK a less attractive destination for care workers.

The Home Office has ramped up enforcement action

There are now over 100,000 businesses in the UK with a Home Office licence to employ migrant workers on a Skilled Worker visa. This is a substantial regulatory responsibility for the Home Office, which effectively entrusts businesses with the welfare of migrant workers.

Since the launch of the New Points Based System in January 2021, enforcement actions have lagged far behind the burgeoning number of licenced sponsors. In 2023, for instance, 906 actions were taken. This is just half the actions taken in 2015 (1,810), when the number of sponsors (27,000) was a fraction of what it was in 2023 (85,000). In summary, it is likely that for a long time bad sponsors were not being monitored and punished accordingly.

Latest sponsorship data shows a change to enforcement levels. In the first six months of 2024 1,542 actions were taken, of which two thirds (1,023) were in the last quarter. In fact, Q2 2024 had by far the highest number of sponsor licence suspensions and revocations than in any other quarter, since records started in 2012 (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Enforcement actions against Skilled Worker sponsors, 2012-2024

Action against sponsors must come with worker safeguards

The Home Office is right to punish businesses that abuse their power. After all, extensive research by the Work Rights Centre, other charities, unions, academics, and notably the ICIBI, found that tying migrant workers to employers carries serious risks of labour exploitation. However, without adequate safeguarding mechanisms, enforcement activities against sponsors leave workers hanging out to dry.

Currently, because sponsored workers’ visas are tied to their employer, if the business loses its licence following enforcement action by the Home Office, all sponsored workers employed by that business have their visas curtailed. Through no fault of their own, workers are left with up to just 60 days to find another licensed sponsor and apply for a new visa, before they become overstayers. In that time they cannot normally claim public funds and can only work up to 20 hours per week in a limited number of occupations.

Lessons from how other countries tackle exploitation

Policymakers must address the power imbalance inherent in sponsorship. Firstly, workers need time to escape exploitative employment. The 60 days workers have to find a new sponsor, if their employment ends, are insufficient in practice. The strict time limit leaves many workers trapped in exploitative conditions, struggling to resign and aware that reporting could result in the sponsor losing its licence. A simple, yet effective change would be to extend that time limit. This would follow in the footsteps of some of the UK’s international partners, such as Australia and Ireland, that have implemented a similar change to tackle labour exploitation.

Secondly, workers need immigration status security to find another sponsor. Currently, if migrant workers fail to find a new sponsor within 60 days, they become undocumented, unable to work legally, and at risk of immigration enforcement. Without valid leave and often financially vulnerable, they are unable to access legal remedies and are at risk of re-exploitation in the black market. The National Referral Mechanism alone is insufficient to resolve these issues. A new form of leave that grants exploited workers unrestricted right to work could be life-changing by allowing people to rebuild their lives and defend their employment rights through the justice system. A pilot of this very system has just been launched in Australia, while similar mechanisms exist in Finland and Ireland.

Finally, exploited workers should not bear the costs of obtaining another immigration status when sponsors lose their licence. The UK already operates one of the most expensive immigration systems in the world, imposing higher costs than Canada, Germany, France and the United States. Visa fees for sponsored workers, particularly for applications where workers are changing employment, should be capped at no more than the Home Office’s administrative processing cost. This will better enable workers to switch sponsors and escape bad employers without risking destitution.

Urgent reforms are needed

Though there are other visa and sector-specific changes that are required to mitigate exploitation risks, the main change must address migrant workers’ immobility. Work visas should give migrant workers the freedom to change employers in practice, which would improve their ability to report exploitation and access remedies.

A failure to implement this has led to a two-tier system where migrant workers are now far more likely to experience coercion and forced labour than British workers. If the new Government is serious about its agenda to prioritise all workers’ rights, it can start by implementing the three urgently needed reforms we outline, in line with international best practice.