However, given that employers’ demand for supervisors and managers is mostly year-round and not seasonal, and the other conditions of the route, the temporary offer for Seasonal Workers may not be the appropriate mechanism to meet this need. We suggest that, as source countries for the SWS stabilise, employers may be able to use a combination of returnee workers to fill eligible positions, combined with increased recruitment efforts with domestic and migrant populations suited to filling permanent roles. The creation of a progression route on the SWS would also extend the visa length considerably, changing the short-term nature of the route. We discuss employers’ views on visa length, and the practical impacts of extending the visa, in more detail later in this chapter. The evidence we have received suggests at the prevailing pay rates, domestic workers are unwilling to undertake seasonal work on farms, and it is unlikely that farms will be able to meet their seasonal labour demands using the domestic workforce. Many users of the scheme say that without the scheme they would not be able to continue to operate.
OUR SERVICES
Guidance states that there should be “a clear employer transfer pathway” and transfers should not normally be refused. Workers are able to request a transfer from scheme operators, and employers are unable to deny this if it is granted. Workers may be paid more than basic pay if they have supervisory responsibilities, night shifts, or enhanced picking/performance bonuses for exceeding targets. In the event that the relevant agricultural wage in one of the Devolved Nations exceeds the Seasonal Worker minimum wage as set out in sponsor guidance, employers must pay the higher wage. Workers sponsored to work in the horticulture sector or in poultry production roles must be paid National Living Wage (NLW) (currently £11.44 per hour).
ACCREDITED AND CERTIFIED BY
We thank the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for their support in providing data for this review (as well as their efforts to improve the usefulness of the information they share) and feel these changes would make effective monitoring of the scheme easier. Since its introduction in April 2023, the 32-hour per week minimum has been an important improvement to employee welfare. In April 2024, there was clarification on this rule – workers are to be paid for 32 hours a week for every week they are in the UK, and not (as previously interpreted by scheme operators) just the weeks they are employed by a farmer. Since this clarification was issued, scheme operators have suggested that there may be unintended welfare consequences, for example workers being sent to their home country before the end of their visa if there is no immediate work available to move onto. As well as offering employees a guaranteed level of pay, some employers we spoke to indicated that the 32-hour requirement had made them think more carefully about the number of workers to request.
- These might be expected to translate into higher prices further along the supply chain, or a restriction in supply of British horticultural produce, meaning higher prices for consumers.
- The Seasonal Worker Visa that seasonal workers apply for when wanting to participate in the SWS.
- The position for employers in 2024 was also clearer as numbers were confirmed by the previous government in May 2023 at the Food to Fork summit.
It is important to note, the median wage data presented for Horticultural Trades and Farm workers is for the whole occupation not seasonal workers specifically, who may be paid at a different rate. However, in practice, the inclusion of ornamental horticulture supports the edible sector by providing alternative and complementary workstreams. For example, the daffodil season occurs at the beginning of the year before the main edible crops need workers, the inclusion of ornamentals encourages seasonal workers into the country earlier and provides a ready migrant labour supply at the start of the edible season.
Similarly, employers said that a previous operator licence removal was sudden and that communication was lacking leading up to removal. Many were unsure of why it had happened or what to do without sponsors for their workers, and wanted clarification on employees’ and their businesses rights under UK labour law if licence removal occurs again. We share these concerns and suggest government should facilitate the rapid transfer of these contracts to another scheme operator.
On some of these inspections UKVI staff are accompanied by GLAA staff who check safeguarding, complaints and information provisions. From interviews with scheme providers, employers, and Seasonal Workers, it appears that there are a number of reasons why requested transfers might not happen in practice. For example, there may not be any vacancies at the target farm; or the worker may be close enough to the end of their visa for training and starting on a new type of work not to be viable (employees typically take a few weeks to get up to speed, as discussed further in Chapter 4). Scheme providers we spoke to said that welfare cases (for example in cases of relationship breakdown, domestic violence or abuse) would be prioritised for transfers even if a transfer would not normally be possible. As referenced in ULS RusTrans ’s food strategy, being part of a global food system improves our food security by diversifying our supply sources, giving us access to products that cannot be produced domestically and allowing comparative advantage to provide us with cheaper products. When dealing with formalities in business or personal life, such as applying for a visa or home mortgage, official translations of important documents are often required.
Employers said a high proportion of their seasonal staff under FoM had been annual returnees, and that this had been highly beneficial. Both employers and employees said that the ability to return reduced risk to both parties and maximised both productivity and earnings as several employers demonstrated through the earnings of experienced workers. Returning also increases the chance that the employee will develop language skills, knowledge of their rights, and awareness of standards to be met in accommodation etc, which may help protect against exploitation (see Chapter 5). The table below compares pay in the main occupations seasonal workers work in (horticultural trades and farm workers) with competing occupations.
An employment rights organisation responding to our CfE indicated confusion from workers around picking/performance bonuses and sick/holiday pay. 2 of the 125 UK visas and Immigration (UKVI) reports found similar confusion regarding sick and holiday entitlement despite proof that the farms provided guidance. Whilst we believe that employee protection on the SWS is currently imperfect, the existing scheme operator system does provide important separation between the day-to-day employer and an individual’s source of permission to stay in the UK. Direct recruitment also risks removing access to employer transfers as is currently in place.
This is an improvement from 2021, where 22% of respondents had become sick or injured; 51% of whom said that managers had not ensured they received adequate treatment. According to a large scale recent survey of workers, 8% of workers reported regularly or sometimes being expected to go without treatment for an accident or illness that required treatment. Between 1% and less than 1% of all visa holders (who gave a reason) said they had left early due to illness or injury over the last three years (see Table 5.5).
We discuss this later in this chapter when discussing enforcement as a whole on the scheme. Both theaccommodation standards and how these are to be monitored and enforced should be clarified. This included being threatened with deportation, and behaviours reported included criminal offences such as racial abuse, physical assault, and sexual harassment.g