Read Our Monthly Magazine
And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system
Fuelled by the pandemic, and the post-Brexit NHS and care sector crises, the last Conservative Government created a five-year pathway, back in 2022, for migrant care workers to settle in the UK.
But four years on, as migrant workers fill a third of all care worker roles, a trail of modern slavery, exploitation, job loss and limbo-induced distress has emerged.
There were hopes that these issues might be addressed by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s immigration announcement this week, as she set out government plans for migrants to earn indefinite leave to remain (ILR), which allows them to live and work in the UK indefinitely.
Under proposals announced last year, migrant care workers were going to have to wait 15 years – three times as long – for ILR. This sparked a lot of criticism from the Labour Party, trade unions, and charities supporting migrants.
Under the new plans – watered down in response to this backlash – care workers who entered the Skilled Worker route before May 2025 (which is most of them) will still be able to qualify for settlement after five years.
At first glance, this is a welcome backpedalling. But when you look closer, it reveals a different picture. To apply for ILR, migrant care workers still must earn £25,000. Those who don’t can apply for a second five-year visa – meaning a ten year wait.
Many workers are at risk of not being able to meet the criteria – either because they’re not being paid as much as they’re entitled to, or because they don’t have a sponsorship after the Home Office revoking their sponsor’s licence.
While many migrant care workers will be relieved at the Government’s climbdown, some are concerned that many still face uncertainty, says a coordinator for the campaign group Justice for Carers (JFC) who wishes to remain anonymous.
“We’re concerned that workers who have already suffered exploitation or sponsorship failures could now face another five years before obtaining settlement. They shouldn’t be punished for circumstances beyond their control,” they say.
The Government hasn’t clarified what will happen to those who’ve lost their sponsor at the end of the five years, or the conditions to obtain the second five-year visa, says Luke Piper, head of immigration at the Work Rights Centre.
ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE
Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.
We’re not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.
A Systemic Failure
The Home Office has acknowledged that the care worker route has been abused, and has so far stripped 1,800 exploitative employers of their right to sponsor migrants.
This has led to around 39,000 care workers losing their sponsorship and being at risk of losing their visa if they don’t find a new employer. At the moment, the 60-day deadline for this has been waived, but from February 2027, the Home Office will start curtailing people’s status after 180 days.
“The Home Office is turning off sponsor licences at significant speed, so a lot of people won’t be able to meet the criteria under transitional arrangements,” Piper says.
The other risk is that migrant care workers aren’t earning enough to meet the £25,000 threshold, and will potentially be forced into a ten year limbo.
Ono Okeregha, director of the Immigration Advice Service, says: “Migrant care workers who earn less than £25,000 a year – or came to the UK recently – will be looking at the new framework with concern.
“Such workers may now face ten years of visa renewals and fees, while care providers already struggling to retain staff will have to sponsor them for far longer.”
Sponsors paying under £25,000 is one of the main reasons the Home Office is revoking licences, Piper says.
“They’re not paying people correctly because the hours people are working don’t align with what’s on their Certificate of Sponsorship – the nature of the sector means working irregular hours or zero hour contracts.”
JFC has raised concerns about the 11p difference between the National Living Wage of £12.71 per hour and the £12.82 hourly rate required for ILR.
“This discrepancy between employment law and immigration requirements needs urgent attention. Workers shouldn’t face disproportionate consequences because of inconsistencies between the two systems,” the coordinator says.
Shabana Mahmood Accused of Treating Asylum Seekers Like ‘Lab Rats’ as Home Office Moves Migrants Into Army Camps
Campaigners fear plans to warehouse migrants in army bases will increase community tensions and embolden the far-right
Living in Limbo
Extending the qualifying period means more years of uncertainty for workers who have already sacrificed so much, says Sameer, a migrant care worker whose employer recently had its sponsorship revoked.
“Many of us came here expecting that years of hard work would lead to stability. Moving that goal further away is devastating,” he says.
Until they receive ILR, migrant care workers must pay much higher international fees if they send their children to university. The uncertainty over settlement has already caused some migrant families to delay or reconsider plans for their children’s further education.
“After sixth form, they don’t know where their children will go,” says the JFC coordinator.
“If they start at a UK university, everything could be lost. We can’t plan for our children anymore. These children believe that the UK is their country. Their education will be completely disrupted.”
‘Government-Sponsored Modern Slavery’
Despite the Government acknowledging the exploitation and sponsorship failures, some of these workers could now be required to wait another five years because of their employers’ wrongdoing, the JFC coordinator says.
“That will prolong their dependence on sponsorship and potentially make them even more vulnerable to exploitation.”
They say workers are increasingly afraid to report exploitation because of their dependence on employer sponsorship.
“Previously, we were hearing in our network mainly about exploitation by employers and recruitment agents. Now, we’re increasingly hearing that workers are frightened to speak out because they fear losing their sponsorship,” they say.
They liken the sponsorship system to “Government-sponsored modern slavery”.
“Tying us to a single employer is keeping our mouths shut.”
Sameer has seen firsthand the effects of tying immigration status so closely to employers.
“At my care home, a female colleague tragically died by suicide. There were concerns about how staff were being treated,” he says. “I’m deeply worried about the pressure on my colleagues and the way management continues to treat us.”
Don’t miss a story
The Future for Migrant Care Workers
It doesn’t seem that Mahmood’s announcements come close to addressing the many complex underlying issues with the migrant care worker route.
The situation for migrant care workers is incredibly precarious, Piper says, and he doesn’t see the Government addressing this.
“Sponsors are still doing bad things, employers are still not paying people properly, and people still need to meet the requirements at the end of it,” he says.
“The Home Office is turning licences off at breakneck speed, and the market is closing its door to people.”
JFC welcomes the government’s recognition of migrant care workers’ contributions, but wants to see further safeguards to protect workers, and certainty for their families.
“These workers came to Britain when the country needed them,” they say.
“They’ve cared for vulnerable people, supported the social care system and built their families’ futures here. The Government has recognised the exploitation migrant care workers have suffered – It must now ensure that the immigration system does not punish them for it.”