By Jessica L. Decker Sparks 

Year-on-year, the number of migrant fishers crewing United Kingdom-flagged fishing vessels is seemingly increasing. Primarily from European states, the Philippines, and Ghana with fewer numbers of fishers from Indonesia, India, and Sri Lanka, there have long been concerns and reports of systemic pay and wage inequalities, pervasive labour abuses, and exploitative immigration schemes. In January 2020, the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) (2007) Work in Fishing Convention (C188) came into force in the United Kingdom (UK). In conjunction with the Modern Slavery Act, on paper, the UK has one of the most stringent fisheries labour regulation environments; yet the abuse of migrants continues. From June 2021 through October 2021, the University of Nottingham Rights Lab conducted an independent baseline study of working conditions across the UK fishing fleet (108 surveys and 16 interviews covering England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were collected). Several key findings confirmed the concerns long raised by other stakeholders. First, despite fishing crew being eligible for skilled-worker visas, there is no evidence of non-European (non-EEA) migrants working on these skilled-worker visas. Instead, non-EEA migrants continue to enter the UK through the use of transit visas which exploits a lack of legal clarity in UK immigration law. As a result, migrant fishers are required to work a “majority” of their time beyond the 12 nautical mile boundary (although this is not quantified or explained and is therefore open to interpretation, which makes enforcement difficult) and have no legal authority to “enter” the UK when returning to port following their 1st fishing trip and repeatedly thereafter during their 10- 12 month contract. As a result, they are forced to live on board the vessels, creating multiple employment dependencies that can be readily exploited by vessel owners. Additionally, vessel owners and recruitment agencies are issuing fishermen’s work agreements (FWAs) that are non-complaint with ILO C188. In practice this means migrant fishers are unduly treated as violators of UK immigration law even when other parties are responsible for the illegal nature of their migration, recruitment, and work. As a result, they are intimidated and prevented from seeking help, can be denied access to medical care and insurance if injured or compensation for the family if killed, and can be denied the right to repatriation if “caught.” Furthermore, 18% of migrant fishers reported being forced to work on a vessel not named in their contract. Because the transit visa scheme ties them to the one vessel named in their contract, when this situation occurs, migrant fishers are again in violation of immigration laws through no fault of their own 

Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham Rights Lab, 2022. 51p. 

By Melanie Gower

‘Safe and legal routes’ are authorised immigration arrangements which enable a person to move to another country for humanitarian reasons. ‘Safe and regular’, ‘safe and regulated’ and ‘safe and lawful’ are common alternative terms. The UK immigration system includes several different safe and legal entry pathways. They can be grouped into four broad categories: Refugee resettlement schemes: The UK Resettlement Scheme, Community Sponsorship and the Mandate Scheme are available to people recognised as refugees by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.Refugee family reunion visas: Available to close relatives of people recognised as refugees.Nationality-specific routes: Available to some Afghans, Ukrainians and people from Hong Kong.Labour mobility pathways: The Displaced Talent Mobility Pilot and Healthcare Displaced Talent Program are small-scale initiatives helping refugees overseas obtain UK work visas. Each route has distinct eligibility criteria and conditions. Not all routes grant beneficiaries refugee status. This means that only some people on the UK’s safe and legal entry pathways receive all the protections laid out in the 1951 Refugee Convention. Most schemes are free of charge, but a few require applicants to pay fees. Calls for more safe and legal routes to the UK. Expanding safe and legal routes is often suggested as a policy response to small boat crossings and other forms of unauthorised migration to the UK. Commentators have noted, for example, that very few Ukrainians have made small boat crossings or been detected trying to enter the UK without authorisation since the launch of special visa schemes for Ukrainians. However, some experts have cast doubt on how much increasing the availability of legal routes would reduce demand for people smugglers and levels of unauthorised migration, given the number of people who might want to apply. The Labour government isn’t considering increasing safe and legal routes to the UK. ntroducing an annual limit on humanitarian routes: In 2023, the government legislated to introduce a ‘cap’ (an annual limit) on the number of people to be admitted to the UK through certain safe and legal routes. The size of the cap would reflect local councils’ assessed capacity to support new arrivals. It was expected to take effect from 2025, but the implementing regulations haven’t been made yet. When in opposition, Labour supported the principle of a cap. The Liberal Democrats and SNP both wanted an annual target rather than a cap.

London: UK Parliament House of Commons Library,   2024. 25p,