Ahead of Anti-Slavery Day 2019, Kalayaan has produced new research which examines the impact of the denial of work on migrant domestic workers with outstanding trafficking or modern slavery claims before the Home Office.

Migrant domestic workers are issued a visa for a maximum of six months. Many workers who register with Kalayaan tell us they are trapped or prevented from leaving their employers in the UK and suffer severe labour rights violations amounting to modern slavery.

When workers escape, they often speak with strangers to avoid becoming homeless and destitute. Through word of mouth, many come to Kalayaan to seek advice and assistance about their rights in the UK.

Only those workers identified as potential victims of trafficking or slavery, who enter the National Referral Mechanism and receive a positive reasonable grounds decision whilst their original six month visa is still valid have their leave extended and have permission to work. This is crucial for workers as their focus is to find alternative employment, a decent employer and to send remittances home to their families.

Those workers who enter the NRM and receive a positive reasonable grounds decision after their visa has expired do not have permission to work in the UK. They must wait until the second and final decision is made by the Home Office, known as the conclusive grounds decision.

On average, migrant domestic workers who are in the NRM face a wait of 24 months to receive conclusive grounds decisions. In 2018, the longest wait for a worker was 37 months. This can be a time of confusion, uncertainty and hopelessness.

Kalayaan’s research, Dignity, not destitution, looks at the impact the denial of work has on victims of trafficking and slavery pending their conclusive grounds decision. It reveals that without work, workers are drawn into destitution and pressurised into entering informal and exploitative work.

For Anti-Slavery Day 2019, Kalayaan and 20+ individuals and organisations have written an open letter to the Immigration Minister asking that she review this policy and the effect it has on this vulnerable workforce. We call on her to allow all migrant domestic workers in the NRM permission to work.

Our research Dignity, not destitution can be found here.

Our open letter can be found here.

A list of the co-signatories to our letter are:

1. Jess Phillips, Member of Parliament for Birmingham, Yardley
2. Vernon Coaker, Member of Parliament for Gedling (1997 – 2019) and trustee of the Human Trafficking Foundation
3. Diana Holland, Assistant General Secretary, Unite the Union
4. Jasmine O’Connor OBE, Chief Executive, Anti-Slavery International
5. Clare Collier, Advocacy Director, Liberty (National Council for Civil Liberties)
6. Nicole Francis, Chief Executive, Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association
7. James Ewins QC, Barrister and Author of the Independent Review of the Overseas Domestic Worker Visa in 2015
8. Patrick Stoakes, Policy and Programmes Manager, British Institute of Human Rights
9. Fizza Qureshi and Jilna Shah, Chief Executive Officers, Migrant Rights Network
10. Chai Patel, Legal Policy Director, Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants
11. Kate Roberts, Chair, Anti-Trafficking Monitoring Group
12. Joanna Ewart-James, Executive Director, Freedom United
13. Phoebe Dimacali, Founder, Filipino Domestic Workers Association
14. Gisela Valle, Chair of the Labour Exploitation Advisory Group and Director of the Latin American Women’s Rights Service
15. Lucila Granada, Chief Executive, Focus on Labour Exploitation
16. Professor Bridget Anderson, Director of Migration Mobilities Bristol, University of Bristol
17. Marissa Begonia, Founder, The Voice of Domestic Workers
18. Amuerfina R. Reyes, Labor Attache, Philippine Overseas Labor Office (POLO), Embassy of the Philippines in London
19. Wilson Solicitors LLP, Tottenham, London
20. Minh Dang, Director, Survivor Alliance
21. Professor Zoe Trodd, Director of the Rights Lab, University of Nottingham
22. Jean Demars, Development Lead, Public Interest Law Centre
23. Victoria Marks, Director, Anti Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit
24. Professor Gary Craig, Professor of Social Justice, Visiting Professor , University of Newcastle upon Tyne
25. Professor Louise Waite, Professor of Human Geography, School of Geography, University of Leeds
26. Ian Kane, Legal Services Manager, Consonant
27. Anna Fisher, Chair, Nordic Model Now!
28. Sally Daghlian OBE, Chief Executive, Praxis Community Projects
29. Phillipa Roberts, Director of Legal Policy, Hope for Justice
30. Dr Ella Cockbain, Associate Professor in Security and Crime Science, UCL
31. Urmila Bhoola, UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences (2014 – 2020)
32. Maya Esslemont, Director, After Exploitation
33. Claire Waxman, London’s Victims Commissioner, Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime
34. Colm O’Cinneide, Professor of Law, UCL Faculty of Laws
35. Professor Hugh Collins, Department of Law, LSE
36. Daniel Trilling, Journalist and Author
37. Simon Cox, Open Society Justice Initiative
38. Professor Rosie Cox, Professor of Geography, Birkbeck University of London
39. Professor Lizzie Barmes, Professor of Labour Law & Co-Director QMUL School of Law Centre for Research on Law Equality and Diversity
40. Maya Goodfellow, Author and Academic
41. Professor Lydia Hayes, Kent Law School, University of Kent
42. Andrew Smith, Coordinator of the Humber Modern Slavery Partnership
43. Catherine Briddick, Oxford Department of International Development, University of Oxford
44. Dipti Pardeshi, Chief of Mission, International Organization for Migration, UK
45. Professor Valerio De Stefano, Institute for Labour Law, KU Leuven, Belgium
46. Dr Alicia Kidd, Postdoctoral Researcher, The Wilberforce Institute
47. Nadine El-Enany, Senior Lecturer in Law and Co-Director of the Centre for Research on Race and Law, Birkbeck College
48. Dr Ruth Van Dyke, Visiting Fellow, Centre for the Study of Modern Slavery, St Mary’s University
49. Kate Green, Member of Parliament for Stretford and Urmston
50. The Rt Rev. the Lord Bishop of Bristol, Vivienne Frances Faull
51. Guilene Marco, Policy Committee, Women’s Equality Party
52. Dr Inga Thiemann, Lecturer in Law, University of Exeter Law School
53. Zlakha Ahmed MBE, CEO, Apna Haq
54. Baroness Royall of Blaisdon
55. Katharine Bryant, Lead of European Engagement, Minderoo Foundation, Walk Free
56. Marley Morris, Associate Director for Immigration, Trade and EU Relations, Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR)
57. Caroline Lucas, Member of Parliament for Brighton, Pavilion
58. Veronica Deutsch, Executive Director, Nanny Solidarity Network
59. Simpson Millar Solicitors
60. Daniel Sohege, Director of Stand For All

If you would like to join Kalayaan and our supporters to ask for a change in policy, please email Avril Sharp, Policy Officer at avril@kalayaan.org.uk. Your name will then be added to the above list.

Last updated: 3 March 2021

Long term care and support for victims of trafficking is inadequate in the UK but our government could do more. The lack of any safeguarding and protective measures means victims can fall back into exploitation once formally identified by the authorities. How can this be right when the Prime Minister wants the UK to lead the world in tackling this crime? Victims suffer physical and psychological scars which can take years to heal. That’s why Kalayaan offers support tailored to individual need and provides assistance for so long as is needed to enable victims to go on to lead independent and fulfilling lives.

Kalayaan is a member of the Free For Good campaign along with a number of leading anti-trafficking charities and businesses. The campaign backs draft legislation which would enshrine in law the support victims need to move on with their lives and be free for good. The bill – called the Modern Slavery (Victim Support) Bill – started its journey in the House of Lords in 2017. It passed through without challenge. It offers victims who have entered the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) and who have been accepted as trafficked or enslaved time to rebuild their lives. It offers them time to seek counselling, to obtain compensation, to pursue criminal charges and to seek justice against their perpetrators.

The bill calls for leave to remain for 12 months for recognised victims.

The government is concerned that an automatic policy granting leave will incentivise some individuals to make fraudulent claims but this does not take into account the fact potential victims can only be referred by an authorised body (including the Home Office and police) who have been trained to spot signs of exploitation. Unlike other immigration applications or asylum applicants, victims of trafficking have to be referred by a designated first responder to the NRM. There is no risk to the system being abused as any fraudulent claims will be filtered out and ultimately issued a negative decision. There is also provision in the bill for those convicted of sexual or violent crimes to be excluded from being granted leave in the UK.

Some might conflate this as an immigration issue but 12 months is the minimum time that recognised victims of trafficking need to recover and start to move on. Without this time and the guaranteed support the bill offers, victims remain at risk. Kalayaan sees and speaks with victims every day. We see this risk first hand. Currently victims are left destitute and homeless when they exit the NRM and some enter back into exploitation as a means to survive. It’s a systemic issue which affects women, men and children, UK nationals, EEA nationals and third country nationals. The cycle has to be broken.

And it can be, but not without government support. The bill has its second reading in the House of Commons on 23 November 2018 but is currently the 22nd bill to be debated that day. This listing means it will not be reached and will be unlikely to make any further progress. 

The time for action is now. The government can no longer say they are providing adequate support when victims are recognised as trafficked but provided with no recognition, support or protection.

Work is underway to reform the NRM but 12 months since the reforms were announced we are left with more questions than answers and still to see any tangible improvements. The reforms do include extending the time given to victims to exit the NRM from 14 days to 45 but this will just postpone the cliff edge that victims face and as noted in a recent Westminster debate, is not a pathway to recovery. This reform is also not due to take effect until early next year.

The government also seeks to rely on the regulations for supporting victims which are still to be produced under section 50 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. These will not be made public and potentially not up to scrutiny unlike the bill which was drafted in consultation with experts and front line organisations who support victims.

Ultimately the reforms to the NRM do not guarantee the time and support victims need to recover which the bill does. The government must choose to protect victims of trafficking from further harm and abuse. Only then can weclaim to be world leaders in this field.

Kalayaan asks the Prime Minister to commit to debating the bill at second reading and not to let this opportunity pass. Let’s put victims first and give them the time they need to live free for good.

For further information on the bill and how it would address the issues faced by migrant domestic workers, see:

Free For Good briefing for Westminster debate on Modern Slavery

Kalayaan briefing to the House of Lords, Second Reading

As the latest Immigration Bill passed through parliament, the government acknowledged that Overseas Migrant Domestic Workers remain an especially vulnerable group in need of protection against unscrupulous and abusive employers. On 7 March 2016, the Minister for Immigration James Brokenshire responded to the independent report of James Ewins QC and his review of the tied visa in which he was asked by the government to assess how far the then existing arrangements for Overseas Domestic Workers were effective in protecting workers from abuse. On 12 May 2016 the Immigration Bill received Royal Assent and became the Immigration Act 2016.  Sadly, changes made to the Immigration Rules have fallen far short of the recommendations of the Ewins’ report and will keep domestic workers in the dark and at continued risk of abuse and exploitation.

Changing employer

The Ewins’ report recommended that Overseas Domestic Workers be allowed to change employer to give them a real and practical route out of exploitation without the then possibility of a precarious immigration status and risk to livelihood. The report states ‘the existence of a tie to a specific employer and the absence of a universal right to change employer and apply for extensions of the visa are incompatible with the reasonable protection of overseas domestic workers while in the UK’. It recommended that workers be allowed to apply for annual visa extensions of up to 2 years which was the minimum required to give effective protection to those who had been abused while in the UK. The review concluded that ‘informed, empowered and safe workers will be more likely to support or even initiate such enquiries [against their employers] than embattled, insecure and frightened workers’.

On 7 March the Minister accepted that Overseas Domestic Workers should be provided an immediate escape route from abuse and permitted that they be allowed to change employer and work during the term of their initial six month visa on which they were admitted to the UK. However, in reality abused workers who do leave their employer will have just a few months or weeks remaining on their visa in which to find work as a domestic worker and will likely be doing so without any references. This will not prove attractive to prospective employers. Overseas Domestic Workers will be left with a choice of remaining in an exploitative situation, risk entering into a new one or with no work and no recourse to public funds, becoming destitute. Kalayaan remains of the view that a right to change employer in the first six months will not lead to workers having greater confidence in reporting their employers to the authorities and will not enable them to safely enter into a new working relationship. It will strengthen the hand of the exploitative employer who will know it is unlikely domestic workers will change employers given the difficulties in finding work in such a short period.

Abolishing the visa tie

The government also refused to accept one of the independent report’s main recommendations and abolish the visa system in which Overseas Domestic Workers are tied to their employers.  Lord Hylton, a long time supporter of domestic workers rights and Labour Peer Lord Rosser tabled an amendment to the bill which gave effect to the main recommendations of the Ewins’ review which was passed in the House of Lords but later defeated in the Commons. The government believes that relaxing the visa tie may lead to a revolving door of abuse where employers remain unidentified and are free to recycle the abuse onto the next worker. They argue that the National Referral Mechanism (NRM) is the vehicle to report abuse and for victims to access support.

This concern was addressed in the Ewins’ review which suggested that any change of employer be registered with the Home Office who could pass the information to the police to consider commencing an investigation. This recommendation would have alleviated the evidential burden placed on victims by entering into the NRM.

The government’s position also fails to recognise that the NRM was and still is not designed to deal with the problems and abuse faced by domestic workers tied to their employers. The government has proffered that victims who are identified as having been trafficked and meeting the internationally defined requirement in the Council of Europe Convention will be allowed to apply for a 2 year visa, up from the 6 months provided for by the Modern Slavery Act 2015.  This will be of no use however to domestic workers who have been abused by their employer but who do not meet the definition of having been trafficked for the purposes of exploitation. Kalayaan envisages that domestic workers with no option but to be referred into the NRM will receive negative decisions on the grounds that they have fabricated allegations against employers to try and remain in the UK.

In 2015, 353 adults were referred into the NRM to be identified as having been trafficked for the purposes of domestic servitude. There is no distinction made whether this number is solely for those who came to the UK on the Overseas Domestic Worker visa. Of those who did come on the Overseas Domestic Worker visa, there are no figures confirming how many of these received positive conclusive grounds decisions and how many of those applied and were successfully granted a domestic worker visa.[1]

Other changes

The government has agreed to implement the Ewins’ second key recommendation of mandatory information meetings for domestic workers who remain in the UK for more than 42 days. The provision of independent information, advice and support in a format and language domestic workers can understand is of fundamental importance so they are aware of and are able to enforce their rights while at work in the UK. Kalayaan looks forward to seeing how this recommendation will be implemented and monitored.

The government has also stated that they want to refocus their checks on employers to ensure that they can better prevent them bringing more domestic workers to the UK when they do not comply with requirements. The government has said they will introduce this by changes to the Immigration Rules later this year.[2]  It remains to be seen how the government will punish abusive employers and whether this will act as a sufficient deterrent.

Right to work

Domestic workers who are referred into the NRM during the duration of their initial 6 month visa will be permitted to continue working for so long as their case is being considered. Those who come to the attention of the authorities as a potential victim after 6 months and are then referred into the NRM will need to wait until a decision is made whether the government conclusively accepts they are a victim before they can then apply for a visa. In some cases, Kalayaan has had clients waiting for over a year before a decision is made at the conclusive grounds stage. This is a time of extreme worry and confusion for vulnerable domestic workers.

A victim’s ability to utilise this provision hinges on the delivery of information to overseas domestic workers when they apply for entry clearance to the UK and their attendance at information meetings. If domestic workers are not informed of their rights and entitlements in a language they can understand, they will not be able to enforce them and they may remain in situations of abuse.

If a victim is issued a conclusive grounds decision, they must apply for a visa within 28 days of receiving confirmation from the Home Office. There is no fee for this application. The Home Office website says that a victim of trafficking does not need to have a job when they apply for this visa[3] but victims must provide evidence of their finances and how they plan to maintain and accommodate themselves without recourse to public funds. This will prove nigh impossible for those who have been residing in safe house accommodation and have not had permission to work whilst a decision on their trafficking claim is being considered. Many will have been out of work for a long period of time and will be without references.

The current guidance to Competent Authorities states that ‘the expectation is that a Conclusive Grounds decision will be made as soon as possible following day 45 of the recovery and reflection period. There is no target to make a conclusive grounds decision within 45 days. The timescale for making a conclusive grounds decision will be based on all the circumstances of the case.’[4] Given that domestic workers will not know when a decision can be expected or what that decision will be, they will be unable to start searching for work and speaking with prospective employers. It is also unclear how long a domestic worker will have to find a job if the visa is issued on the basis that it allows individuals to remain in the UK so long as they are employed full time in a private household.

These changes will ultimately leave domestic workers without the security and safety they need in order to move forward and rebuild their lives.

For more information please contact Avril Sharp at Kalayaan: avril@kalayaan.org.uk.

[1] http://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/publications/national-referral-mechanism-statistics/676-national-referral-mechanism-statistics-end-of-year-summary-2015/file

[2] https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-04-25/debates/16042535000002/ImmigrationBill

[3] https://www.gov.uk/domestic-workers-in-a-private-household-visa/victim-slavery-human-trafficking

[4]https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/521763/Victims_of_modern_slavery_-_Competent_Authority_guidance_v3_0.pdf

In recognition of the importance of the struggle of migrant domestic workers to regain their basic rights Kalayaan has been nominated for a Liberty Human Rights Award in the category ‘Close to Home’. We are delighted to have our and others work recognised in this way and hope that the nomination will in some way contribute to the struggle to untie the binding of migrant domestic workers to their employers in the immigration rules.

The Modern Slavery Bill is currently going through the House of Lords. Committee Stage consideration of the Modern Slavery Bill has now finished. Amendment 94 in the names of Baroness Cox, Lord Alton of Liverpool, Baroness Royall of Blaisdon and Lord Hylton which would provide vital  protections for Overseas Domestic Workers was debated on the 12 December and received substantial cross party support. We are hopeful that the Government will now consider the effects of tying migrant domestic workers to their employers and how this both facilitates their abuse and undermines the Bill and reinstate the pre 2012 protections for migrant domestic workers in the immigration rules. If not we are confident that a similar amendment will continue to receive strong support at Report Stage early 2015.