The Trade in Human Beings: Human Trafficking in the UK - Home Affairs Committee Contents


Supplementary memorandum submitted by Kalayaan

ISSUING OF ENTRY CLEARANCE TO THE UK AS A DOMESTIC WORKER IN A PRIVATE HOUSEHOLD.

  Entry clearance to enter the UK as a domestic worker in a private household is issued by the British embassy or consulate in the country from which the worker is travelling. One of the requirements for entry clearance is that the worker has to have been previously employed by the family for a minimum period of twelve months before applying to come to the UK. The worker is then supposed to be given information as to their rights as a worker in the UK and interviewed in person, separately to the employer, in order to give them an opportunity to disclose any concerns they may have.

  According to migrant domestic workers (MDWs) registering at Kalayaan, the above procedures are often not followed.

Case Study:

  Ravi (not his real name) entered the UK in the employ of a wealthy and influential family from the Middle East. His wages were so low that despite the very long hours he worked he was not able to send any money home to his family. This drove him to run away despite his employers having confiscated his passport.

  When Kalayaan secured proof of Ravi's visa we discovered he had been issued a visit visa despite having clearly entered the UK to work in his employers' private household. Using the Data Protection Act we eventually secured Ravi's visa application form. The embassy confirmed that they were not able to provide interview notes as Ravi was not interviewed at the post. Ravi told us he had never seen the application form for his visa before and the signature on the form was clearly not his. Together with the form was a letter from Ravi's employers requesting he be issued "a visit visa" in order to travel to the UK as a "member of their service staff".

  Having entered the UK on a visit visa Ravi was working in breach of the immigration rules. He has no employment rights or recourse against his employer.

  The 89 new MDWs who registered at Kalayaan between 3rd January 2008 and 31st March 2008 when asked by Kalayaan about their visa application process reported the following:

Interviews when applying for visa:

  52 were interviewed at an overseas British embassy

  32 were not interviewed (but were issued a visa)

  5 did not supply any data

Of those interviewed how many MDWs had their employer present during the interview?

  41 told Kalayaan that their employer or a member of their employer's household was present during their interview

  11 told us that they were interviewed alone

At which British posts overseas were these 89 visas issued and how many interviewed the MDWs to whom they issued visas?


British embassy
Total MDW visas
issued by this post
How many of these
workers were
interviewed?

Didn't name embassy
8
5
India
30
19
Singapore
2
0
Jordan
1
1
Oman
3
2
Kuwait
6
3
Hong Kong
4
2
Brunei
4
1
UAE
8
3
Qatar
2
2
Saudi Arabia
5
1
Bahrain
3
3
Morocco
1
1
Russia
3
3
Cyprus
1
1
Israel
1
0
Nairobi, Kenya
1
0
Colombo, Sri Lanka
2
2
Lagos, Nigeria
2
1
Indonesia
1
1
Philippines
1
1
Total visas issued
89
52


Information given at overseas posts:

  In the past the Home Office has produced an information booklet entitled "Information about domestic workers". This was designed to be translated and given to (MDWs) as they applied for entry clearance[52]. Kalayaan distributes these booklets to workers that register at Kalayaan. We find these leaflets particularly useful as they provide written evidence to the MDWs who receive them of the rights they had been told they did not have (such as the right to change employers). These leaflets have also proved useful in persuading authorities of the rights and entitlements of MDWs.

When Kalayaan attempted to reorder supplies of the booklet last year we were told they were no longer being printed.

  Also of concern are discrepancies in information being given to both workers and employers about the National Minimum Wage (NMW). As workers MDWs are covered by the NMW legislation, however the Immigration Directorates' Instructions clearly state that non-payment of the NMW by an employer is not a reason to refuse a visa[53]. This clearly facilitates confusion and encourages abuse. An employer can declare that they intend to pay a worker well below the NMW, in breach of UK employment law, and still be issued a visa to bring them to the UK.

Importance of maintaining the domestic worker visa and associated rights and protections.

  Despite the shortcomings of the domestic worker visa it is important to remember how much worse conditions were for migrant domestic workers who were brought to the UK by employers before 1998. At that point there existed no specific route of entry for the domestic workers of families coming or returning to the UK. The lack of a specific immigration route via which to bring domestic workers did not prevent employers from bringing them. Instead they were brought as family members, visitors or simply had "to work with|" stamped in their passports. We still hear many instances of these types of visa being issued to domestic workers today. Removing the Migrant Domestic Worker visa will not stop employers bringing workers to this country it will only serve to make the workers less visible and thus more vulnerable.

  This meant that domestic workers were not formally recognised as workers in the UK, they were working in breach of their immigration status and when they fled employers escaping sometimes horrific abuses they had no legal options or recourse to justice, and lived in fear of the authorities rather than approaching them for supportThe government have acknowledged that conditions of MDWs in the UK have improved since the introduction of the visa in 1998[54] and Kalayaan works hard to support MDWs to access their existing rights. In order to ensure that individuals trafficking MDWs to the UK for the purpose of labour exploitation are punished, MDWs need to know that they can approach authorities without fear of detention and deportation.

How many MDWs are trafficked?

  Kalayaan works with all MDWs whether or not they are trafficked. We firmly believe that if domestic workers are entering the UK with an employer for the purpose of work there must be sufficient legislation in place to prevent them being abused and put into forced labour. This is the only way to prevent the trafficking of MDWs. Migrant Domestic Workers are particularly vulnerable to exploitation and severe abuse due to their dependency on one employer for information about their rights in the UK, often for translation, for their immigration status, for their work and for their housing. It was in recognition of this vulnerability that the UK government introduced existing protections for MDWs in 1998.

  The 312 MDWs who registered at Kalayaan during 2006 reported the following abuse:

  Physical abuse 26%

  Psychological abuse 72%

  Sexual abuse 10%

  No room or private space within the house within which they lived and worked 61%

Lack of food 41%

No time off at all 70%

Not allowed to leave the house 62%

  Taboos and lack of trust upon first contact with Kalayaan mean that statistics such as sexual abuse are underreported.

  Experts in trafficking such as Klara Skrivankova from ASI identified all the MDWs she met during a research visit to Kalayaan as having been trafficked[55].

  Under the Palermo Protecol trafficking involves the movement of people across or within borders; threats or use of force, coercion and deception; and the abuse of power or a position of vulnerability for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation including at the minimum forced labour or services and slavery or practices similar to slavery or servitude. Looking at the reported abuse above it is clear that many of the domestic workers who register at Kalayaan have been trafficked. 32% of MDWs who registered at Kalayaan during the financial year 2006-2007 were not in possession of their passports as these had been taken from them by their employers. Interviews with workers demonstrate that passports are withheld in order to control workers.

Protection for MDWs under the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings

  As the statistics of abuse reported by MDWs to Kalayaan show, despite the progressive improvements made in 1998, many MDWs are still trafficked to the UK. Existing protections for MDWs need to be built on, for example by making MDWs and their employers aware of their rights and obligations when entry clearance is issued and again at the point of entry into the UK and ensuring that employers know that any abuse will result in prosecution.

  Kalayaan applauds the UK government's commitment to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (ECAT) but is concerned to point out that this should on no account be considered to be an alternative to the existing protections available to MDWs in the form of the existing visa with the provision to change employers and recognition as a worker in the UK.

  Not only does it make no sense to remove existing protections in order to implement others but it is also clear that such a move would greatly increase the power discrepancies between vulnerable workers and abusive employers and so increase the numbers of MDWs trafficked for labour exploitation. It would be an extremely negative indictment of Home Office policy and practice if they were to increase the vulnerability of migrant domestic workers to trafficking and reduce the escape routes from situations of trafficking for these workers at the same time as the Government ratifies ECAT.

  Kalayaan does not believe that ECAT will be able to adequately protect MDWs for the following reasons:

    —  Identification: MDWs who have been trafficked are not recognised as such by authorities, despite the often clear indicators including their employers being in possession of their passport, having received no wages and having no knowledge of their own immigration status. For instance a Kalayaan client who had been trafficked to the UK and experienced forced labour as well as extreme physical abuse had twice escaped to the police (separate stations) and tried to report the employer. In both cases she was returned the employer with no follow up or investigation.

    —  Approaching authorities: If MDWs lose the right to change employer without breaching the immigration rules, there will be some truth in the threats currently used by trafficker's of MDWs regarding workers treatment by authorities as immigration offenders, liability to deportation or removal by the authorities. Having escaped their trafficker, they will be terrified to approach authorities for fear of detention and deportation and instead will remain in the UK underground, undocumented and extremely vulnerable to retrafficking or further exploitation.

    —  Cost: There is currently no official accommodation provided under ECAT for anyone trafficked for labour exploitation. Under the current provision for MDWs most escape abuse, find better employment as a domestic worker in a private household and are able to apply to remain in the UK. This happens at no cost to the government and workers are only able to remain if there is a demand for their work. To remove existing protections for MDWs would increase numbers trafficked all of whom would have to be provided for under ECAT.

Kalayaan recommendations

    —  To maintain the existing protections for MDWs in the UK which were introduced in 1998 which include the right to change employers and protection for MDWs in the UK under UK employment law.

    —  To ensure that protections for MDWs as workers are consistent in the UK and in British embassies overseas and that both workers and employers are aware of duties and protections under UK law.

8 May 2008







52   Anderson, B. 1993 "Britain's Secret Slaves" p. 64 Back

53   Immigration Directorates' Instructions. Chapter 5, Section 12, Domestic Workers in Private Households. Dec 02. Paragraph 3.3 The National Minimum Wage Back

54   Baroness Scotland noted on 26 March 2007 that the Government is "conscious that the changes we brought in greatly benefited domestic workers". Back

55   Anti Slavery International, Trafficking for forced labour, UK Country Report 2006 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2009
Prepared 14 May 2009