Modern slavery victims on the Skilled Worker visa to receive ‘game-changing’ relief from new Immigration Rules Change
On 3 September 2026, the Home Office announced a key relief for migrant workers on the Skilled Worker visa: a broad right to work for recognised victims of modern slavery.
The recent Statement of Changes amends the Immigration Rules, allowing Skilled Workers who have been referred into the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) and received a Positive Conclusive Grounds (CG) decision the right to work without prior restrictions.
Effective from 08 October, the measure is a major step forward and a hard-earned win for migrants’ rights advocates. Ultimately, however, the impact of this policy change depends on the accessibility of the NRM and the extent to which officials are willing to recognise, and support, victims of the full spectrum of labour and financial exploitation enabled by the sponsorship system.
This post sets out what we know about the changes, the practical details that still require clarification, and the steps we would like officials to take next.
What do these changes mean?
The changes will amend the existing Appendix Skilled Worker to add section SW18.3:
“SW 18.3. A Skilled Worker who has been referred into the National Referral Mechanism and is in receipt of a positive Conclusive Grounds decision, where that decision was made during their most recent permission, may have the conditions in SW 18.2(b) to (e) amended, such that any work (including self-employment and voluntary work) is permitted, except for work as a professional sportsperson (including as a sports coach).”
This section is added after SW 18.2, which at points (b) to (e) lists that “work is permitted only in the job the applicant is being sponsored” with some limited exceptions for volunteering, study and working through notice periods / supplementary employment.
In short, this change means any worker currently on a valid Skilled Worker visa who receives a Positive CG decision may have a new right to work for the remainder of their visa. This lifts the restriction of only being allowed to work for the sponsor: so there would no longer be any requirements on working hours, salary thresholds, ties to specific roles - and crucially, no tie to a specific employer.
The change for Skilled Workers will come into effect on 8 October 2026. We should receive policy guidance about the implementation of the rules around this time. The No Recourse to Public Fund condition stays in place.
What we don't know yet
By agreeing, at last, to grant modern slavery victims a less restricted right to work for the remainder of their visas, the Home Office is finally giving workers an incentive to report law-breaking sponsors, and enabling authorities to uncover the true scale of labour and financial exploitation enabled by the sponsorship system. However, important practical details are still outstanding.
-
The Statement of Changes does not include implementation details. There is no suggestion whether this change will apply automatically, or if workers will need to apply to confirm the changes to their leave. We await further guidance on this process.
-
The new SW 18.3 states that workers may have existing visa conditions amended, not that they will. So even if workers are eligible, a cautious interpretation would suggest this change is not an automatic grant. It is not yet clear whether the Home Office will vary conditions for all Skilled Workers with a Positive CG, or whether this change will only apply to some of them and if so, on what basis.
-
Currently, SW 18.3 only applies to migrants with a Positive CG, and a valid Skilled Worker visa. It is not clear if the Home Office is willing to exercise any discretion, if at all, in the cases of people who have had their visas curtailed through no fault of their own - notably, as a result of the huge recent increase in sponsor revocations. We believe this discretion is crucial.
What else needs to be done?
The ultimate impact of these changes depends on the accessibility of the NRM, the extent to which the Home Office recognises the reality of people who have had their visas curtailed, through no fault of their own, and ultimately ministers’ willingness to achieve restitution.
Increasing access to the NRM
While the NRM offers an important support mechanism for victims of modern slavery, many barriers stand in the way. First, workers must be able to self-identify their experience as exploitation. Then, once referred into the NRM, adults need to give informed consent to be referred. Fear of immigration repercussions, fear of repercussions from exploiters, or inconsistent descriptions of the NRM by officials, are just some of the factors that have been found to lead victims of exploitation to refuse consent. Our previous submission urges the Home Office to improve the identification of modern slavery victims.
Next, survivors referred into the NRM must be accurately recognised as victims of modern slavery. Labour rights breaches, even severe ones, do not map neatly onto officials’ definition of modern slavery. Notably, authorities have often rejected victims of financial fraud, who paid extortionate recruitment fees for jobs that never materialised, so that many survivors are barred from accessing support via the NRM. We are supporting the CELC to challenge these rejections, and are collecting evidence from affected migrant workers.
Even for cases that undoubtedly fit officials’ definition of modern slavery, resourcing in the NRM is another issue. Many victims have received the initial Positive RG decision, but not the final CG decision. The Home Office has committed to clearing the backlog (5,758 cases still await a CG decision as of the end of 2025, down from 17,168 in 2024), but there are concerns with decision making quality. Recent research found many initial decisions are subsequently reversed: where a high rate of Negative RG and CG decisions are followed by reconsiderations which have ‘a very high likelihood of being given a positive decision’.
We support recommendations to further scrutinise the NRM to improve accuracy and access.
Mitigating the impact of visa curtailment
Because this change to work restrictions only applies to Skilled Workers who received a Positive CG and are on a valid Skilled Worker visa, its impact also depends on how the Home Office responds to the reality of visa curtailment, which can happen through no fault of the workers.
Recently, ministers have hyper-charged sponsor revocations. While the Home Office does not publish data on the number of workers affected, thousands of people could have had their visas curtailed as a result, officially leaving them with just 60 days to find another sponsor before their visas become invalid.
Extending this grace period from 60 days to six months would match systems in Australia and Ireland, codify the unofficial discretion already applied by the Home Office to not curtail visas in some cases, and enable more migrants to report exploitation.
Crucially, exercising some discretion to include victims who had their visas curtailed in scope of these changes could increase reports, and go some way to address the injustice that in the three years it took Ministers to implement these safeguards, many people were harmed.
Compensating victims
While the changes announced in September add a precious new incentive for workers to report labour exploitation, this is just half the battle. Victims deserve actual restitution, and ministers are still miles off from this.
Over the years it took officials to introduce this safeguard, countless workers were driven into severe poverty and forced to sleep in cars, simply because the law forbade them from taking other work. They deserve compensation.
We recommend that the Home Office introduce a Victims Compensation Scheme funded by penalties levied against employers who abuse sponsorship. Introducing new penalties against rogue sponsors would not just go some way to benefit the workers who suffered at the hands of government-approved employers. It would also raise the stakes of non-compliance, and act as a deterrent.
Authorities have often rejected victims of financial fraud, who paid extortionate recruitment fees for jobs that never materialised, from the NRM. We are supporting the CELC to challenge these rejections, and are collecting evidence from affected migrant workers.