Longer Reads

Illegal migrant worker crackdown – what do employers need to know?

Despite technology improving the quality of forged documents, innocent mistakes could prove ‘financially ruinous’ for firms that do not carry out proper checks.

2 minute read

Published 8 August 2023

Authors

Share

Key information

The minister for immigration, Robert Jenrick, revealed a crackdown on illegal migrant workers yesterday (7 August), which will see fines triple for employers.

The government release called the changes – which will also affect landlords – the “biggest shake up” of civil penalties in eight years. Employers face a fine of £45,000 per illegal worker (up from £15,000) for a first breach and £60,000 for a repeat (up from £20,000).

According to reporting by The Telegraph of an anonymous source, nail bars, car washes, construction, social care and hospitality sectors will be “targeted in the enforcement”, which will make it “financially ruinous” to employ workers illegally and “put people out of business”. However, advancements in technology have resulted in an improved quality of forged documents, says Yash Dubal, director and senior immigration associate at A Y and J Solicitors, who adds it is “not uncommon” for scrupulous businesses to get hoodwinked.

“[This makes] it challenging for employers, especially those without specific training, to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit documents. Some employers might inadvertently hire someone without the right to work because they were presented with what looked like genuine documents,” he says. “Moreover, in sectors where there’s a high demand for workers and rapid hiring is common, the chances of oversight can increase.” But Dubal caveats that innocent mistakes and deceptions aside, employers are “ultimately responsible” for ensuring their employees have the right to work in the UK.

Understanding the consequences

The first step for HR and employers is to understand why people may not have, or may cease to have, the right to work in the UK, explains Pam Loch, founder of Loch Associates Group. “For example, their leave has expired, they were prohibited from working in certain sectors, they presented incorrect or false papers or they did not have permission to stay or even enter the UK,” explains Loch.

She warns that under current legislation, a director could face five years in prison and an unlimited fine if they are found to have had “reasonable cause” to believe an employee did not have the right to work.

And turning a blind eye is not the right approach, says Martin Williams, partner and head of employment at Mayo Wynne Baxter, who argues that it is “relatively easy for the discerning employer” to check the status of someone’s documentation with the Home Office. “Not doing so indicates a willingness to turn a blind eye to such matters. This equates to a tacit approval of any attempted unlawful behaviour on the part of an insufficiently documented job applicant, as well as the actions of anyone who may have organised illegal entry to the UK,” says Williams.

Guarding against innocent errors

There is “good news” for companies that make genuine errors, says ​​Kelvin Tanner, partner in Charles Russell Speechlys’ immigration team, who explains that the civil penalty scheme for illegal working “affords an organisation a statutory defence against a civil penalty” where they have conducted a compliant right-to-work check. “Furthermore, the move towards online right-to-work checks should help prevent the issue of prospective employees presenting forged documents,” he says.

And Tanner explains that genuine errors do happen. “In many cases there is no intentional wrongdoing and an employer has simply failed to conduct a compliant right-to-work check,” he says.

Tanner outlines that, where an employer is liable, they could get a civil penalty reduction of £5,000 if they report a suspected legal worker, who they already have in employment, to the Home Office. Additionally, if the business can “demonstrate they have effective right-to-work checking practices” in place, along with other mitigating factors, then the Home Office may issue a warning notice.

Charles Avens, our Head of Immigration, explains that to establish a statutory excuse against a civil penalty, HR must do one of the following before the employee commences employment:

– A manual right-to-work check for everyone (the rule is obtain, check and copy the ID documents)
– A right-to-work check using digital identity document validation technology via the services of an identity service provider (British and Irish citizens only)
– A Home Office online right-to-work check (non-British and non-Irish citizens)

Meanwhile, Loch says HR should remember EDI during this process and take a “consistent approach” asking for right-to-work checks, not just “those who appear to be of non-British descent”.

Loch says this will reduce the risk of discrimination claims being brought by candidates and employees, plus a failure to observe the government’s code of practice of completing the correct checks “can be taken into account by an employment tribunal”, she warns.

This full article was first published by People Management on 8 August 2023.

For more information, visit our Immigration Lawyers page.

Related latest updates
PREV NEXT

Related content

Arrow Back to Insights

Longer Reads

Illegal migrant worker crackdown – what do employers need to know?

Despite technology improving the quality of forged documents, innocent mistakes could prove ‘financially ruinous’ for firms that do not carry out proper checks.

Published 8 August 2023

Associated sectors / services

  • Business Immigration
  • Employment law for employers
  • International
  • Manufacturing

Authors

The minister for immigration, Robert Jenrick, revealed a crackdown on illegal migrant workers yesterday (7 August), which will see fines triple for employers.

The government release called the changes – which will also affect landlords – the “biggest shake up” of civil penalties in eight years. Employers face a fine of £45,000 per illegal worker (up from £15,000) for a first breach and £60,000 for a repeat (up from £20,000).

According to reporting by The Telegraph of an anonymous source, nail bars, car washes, construction, social care and hospitality sectors will be “targeted in the enforcement”, which will make it “financially ruinous” to employ workers illegally and “put people out of business”. However, advancements in technology have resulted in an improved quality of forged documents, says Yash Dubal, director and senior immigration associate at A Y and J Solicitors, who adds it is “not uncommon” for scrupulous businesses to get hoodwinked.

“[This makes] it challenging for employers, especially those without specific training, to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit documents. Some employers might inadvertently hire someone without the right to work because they were presented with what looked like genuine documents,” he says. “Moreover, in sectors where there’s a high demand for workers and rapid hiring is common, the chances of oversight can increase.” But Dubal caveats that innocent mistakes and deceptions aside, employers are “ultimately responsible” for ensuring their employees have the right to work in the UK.

Understanding the consequences

The first step for HR and employers is to understand why people may not have, or may cease to have, the right to work in the UK, explains Pam Loch, founder of Loch Associates Group. “For example, their leave has expired, they were prohibited from working in certain sectors, they presented incorrect or false papers or they did not have permission to stay or even enter the UK,” explains Loch.

She warns that under current legislation, a director could face five years in prison and an unlimited fine if they are found to have had “reasonable cause” to believe an employee did not have the right to work.

And turning a blind eye is not the right approach, says Martin Williams, partner and head of employment at Mayo Wynne Baxter, who argues that it is “relatively easy for the discerning employer” to check the status of someone’s documentation with the Home Office. “Not doing so indicates a willingness to turn a blind eye to such matters. This equates to a tacit approval of any attempted unlawful behaviour on the part of an insufficiently documented job applicant, as well as the actions of anyone who may have organised illegal entry to the UK,” says Williams.

Guarding against innocent errors

There is “good news” for companies that make genuine errors, says ​​Kelvin Tanner, partner in Charles Russell Speechlys’ immigration team, who explains that the civil penalty scheme for illegal working “affords an organisation a statutory defence against a civil penalty” where they have conducted a compliant right-to-work check. “Furthermore, the move towards online right-to-work checks should help prevent the issue of prospective employees presenting forged documents,” he says.

And Tanner explains that genuine errors do happen. “In many cases there is no intentional wrongdoing and an employer has simply failed to conduct a compliant right-to-work check,” he says.

Tanner outlines that, where an employer is liable, they could get a civil penalty reduction of £5,000 if they report a suspected legal worker, who they already have in employment, to the Home Office. Additionally, if the business can “demonstrate they have effective right-to-work checking practices” in place, along with other mitigating factors, then the Home Office may issue a warning notice.

Charles Avens, our Head of Immigration, explains that to establish a statutory excuse against a civil penalty, HR must do one of the following before the employee commences employment:

– A manual right-to-work check for everyone (the rule is obtain, check and copy the ID documents)
– A right-to-work check using digital identity document validation technology via the services of an identity service provider (British and Irish citizens only)
– A Home Office online right-to-work check (non-British and non-Irish citizens)

Meanwhile, Loch says HR should remember EDI during this process and take a “consistent approach” asking for right-to-work checks, not just “those who appear to be of non-British descent”.

Loch says this will reduce the risk of discrimination claims being brought by candidates and employees, plus a failure to observe the government’s code of practice of completing the correct checks “can be taken into account by an employment tribunal”, she warns.

This full article was first published by People Management on 8 August 2023.

For more information, visit our Immigration Lawyers page.

Associated sectors / services

  • Business Immigration
  • Employment law for employers
  • International
  • Manufacturing

Authors

Need some more information? Make an enquiry below.

    Subscribe

    Please add your details and your areas of interest below

    Specialist sectors:

    Legal services:

    Other information:

    Jurisdictions of interest to you (other than UK):



    Article contributor

    Enjoy reading our articles? why not subscribe to notifications so you’ll never miss one?

    Subscribe to our articles

    Message us on WhatsApp (calling not available)

    Please note that Collyer Bristow provides this service during office hours for general information and enquiries only and that no legal or other professional advice will be provided over the WhatsApp platform. Please also note that if you choose to use this platform your personal data is likely to be processed outside the UK and EEA, including in the US. Appropriate legal or other professional opinion should be taken before taking or omitting to take any action in respect of any specific problem. Collyer Bristow LLP accepts no liability for any loss or damage which may arise from reliance on information provided. All information will be deleted immediately upon completion of a conversation.

    I accept Close

    Close
    Scroll up

    Find out about Business

    Find out about Dispute Resolution

    Find out about Individuals & Families

    Find out about Real Estate

    We are Collyer Bristow - The law firm for those that
    value individuality, creativity and collaboration.

    Legal & Pricing info Regulatory InformationAccessibilitySitemapPricing and service information

    Listen to our latest podcast: BHS Judgment #2 – Trading Misfeasance

    Listen to our latest podcast: BHS Judgment #1 – Wrongful trading

    Read our latest article: Sexual Harassment & the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a claim

    Listen to our latest podcast: No notice, no claim? (Drax v Scottish Power)

    Read our latest article: Election 2024: Domicile, Inheritance Tax, and change promised by the new Labour government

    ExpandNeed some help?Toggle

    < Back to menu

    I have an issue and need your help

    Scroll to see our A-Z list of expertise

    Get in touch

    Get in touch using our form below.



      Business Close
      Private Wealth Close
      Hot Topics Close