The Court of Appeal in England & Wales (COA) in R (Badmus) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ. 657, upheld the decision in Morita & Ors v. Secretary of State for The Home Department [2019] EWHC 758, that a £1 an hour wage for detainees within UK Immigration Detention Centres is lawful. The court reasoned that the choice to work is voluntary since “detainees are not forced to” and the main reason for providing work opportunities is to “alleviate boredom” rather than provide an earning. However, the choice migrants face when caught in the web of immigration law and held in detention centres to either not work or work under exploitative conditions is deceitfully oversimplified.

WHAT DOES £1/HR WAGE MEAN FOR DETAINEES?

Immigration detainees are employed to perform the essential tasks of migrant detention centres such as cooking and cleaning. In return, the court upheld it lawful that detainees make no more than £1.25 an hour, which is approx. 85% lower than the national minimum wage (NMW). The law makes clear that employing workers under the NMW is a crime, yet the legislation strategically exempts detained persons from this legal protection.

Detainees face the choice to work among a complex set of circumstances. The reality is that the state detains migrants for an indeterminate period and bars them from obtaining outside work or government benefits. Yet, the majority of migrants are the primary support of others; often they pay remittances to their country of origin to provide for their family, furthering the incentive to work. As such, justifying such a wage for detainees is callous as migrants have no other option than to accept a detention job in a near impossible attempt to support their living and family.

The UK Home Office states that detainees have a choice to not work as they receive "a weekly allowance of £5 regardless". The Home Office argues offering jobs a good faith policy since detainees have “no right to demand paid work”; reasoning which matches the COA decision in the case. Allowing work at such a wage is more about “alleviating boredom” than income generation, say both the COA and the Home Office. Yet, this reasoning allows the state and private companies to profit off the cheap labour of vulnerable migrants.

HOW DOES CAPITAL GAIN PERPETUATE DETAINEE EXPLOITATION?

The practice of grossly underpaying migrant detainees is in direct contradiction to the Modern Slavery Act 2015 which aims to pull victims out of modern slavery. Instead, the law allows undocumented migrants to work in exploitative conditions under the state’s control. Effectively authorising migrant exploitation for capital. 

This paradox is further problematised because the majority of immigration removal centres are run by private companies. Reports show private companies operating UK immigration facilities save up to £1.5 million annually by using £1 per hour detainee labour rather than hiring from the community. A Guardian investigation reported that G4S, one of the private contractors, made more than £4.5 million in profits from two detention centres that pay such wages. Detaining undocumented migrants is highly profitable, incentivising immigration officials to increase detentions at the risk of hasty and haphazard investigations. In 2019, 78% of those detained were released; most of whom were raising legal issues such as seeking asylum, rights-based claims or appeals.

RECONCILING MIGRANT RIGHTS AND DETAINEE LABOUR LAWS

By profiting from detainees, the legal framework commodifies detainees as objects in economic transactions, stripping their dignity and facilitating modern slavery. Judicial decisions such as the case of Badmus allow labour exploitation to pass through the law, to the benefit of the state and private actors. The law has a long way to go to uphold and defend people’s rights, including migrants who are at risk to an endless cycle of exploitation.

Saamiya is an aspiring international human rights lawyer, focused on community impact and upholding people's rights. Saamiya holds a Bachelors in Law from the University of Bristol and is currently supporting refugees and asylum seekers at the UN Refugee Agency.

Linkedin