(C) OpenDemocracy
This story was originally published by OpenDemocracy and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
UK Seasonal Worker Scheme: Women suffer harassment and financial insecurity [1]
[]
Date: 2025-08
Migrant women working on British farms under the Seasonal Worker Scheme (SWS) report suffering sexual harassment, feeling like “slaves” and being given lower-paid roles than men on the scheme.
Workers and experts alike have long warned that the SWS, which was introduced in 2019 to address shortages in the agricultural labour market, may be facilitating exploitation. Despite this, Labour has this year renewed the scheme for another five years.
A new briefing by us at Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX), a charity working to end human trafficking in the UK, has laid bare the gendered nature of many of the problems arising from the scheme.
Our report, Uneven fields: women workers’ experiences of the Seasonal Worker Scheme, directly confronts the realities migrant women face in the fields and the ways in which they are put at risk of harm. Its findings should raise grave concerns for the government.
Get our free Daily Email Get one whole story, direct to your inbox every weekday. Sign up now
While many of the problems with such seasonal work are experienced by workers of all genders – such as the risks of debt bondage, insufficient hours and difficulties raising complaints – women are often hit harder than men by these issues.
What’s more, the gendered dynamics within the agricultural sector also create specific, unique risks for women workers. In this way, women on the SWS are pushed to the margins of an already precarious workforce – and it is time we paid attention.
The price of entry
The SWS grants migrant workers a visa to live in the UK and work in horticulture – picking fruit, vegetables or flowers – for up to six months and in the poultry industry from 2 October to 31 December.
But entering the scheme is not a simple process, with many migrant workers forced to take out loans to cover visa and illegal recruitment fees, as well as other related costs such as travel.
Women are particularly affected by these problems, with 77% of women workers reporting taking out loans to cover the expenses associated with joining the scheme, compared to 70% of men, according to data from FLEX’s survey.
For women, this risk of debt bondage is then compounded when their earnings prove to be less than they were promised. The scheme’s guidance states that workers should be paid the National Living Wage (£12.21 an hour for those aged 21 and over) and be provided at least 32 hours of paid employment each week. Yet 21% of women FLEX surveyed reported receiving less than 32 hours a week, compared to 11% of men.
This mismatch between promised and actual hours can prevent women from earning enough to pay off their loans, putting them at risk of being trapped in financial insecurity.
Gendered work
In interviews with FLEX, many women workers described the tough nature of the work and expressed feeling like “slaves”, or being shouted at by farm employers about the need to meet their targets.
This speaks not just to a tough working environment, but a fundamental question of power and intimidation as a gendered tool of labour control by employers.
Gender has also appeared to be a factor in the allocation of work, with the sector still holding stereotypical and outdated views on the types of work women are better suited for.
In our study, some women reported being placed in ‘easier’ indoor roles, which were perceived as being less physically demanding. Unsurprisingly, these roles are also reported to be lower paid and have fewer opportunities for bonuses.
When farms using the scheme distribute roles by gender in this way, they prescribe what women should be doing, and thus reinforce inequalities and potentially perpetuate economic disadvantage.
Unacceptable accommodation
Even in what should be their downtime away from work, some women on the Seasonal Workers Scheme feel they are being put at risk.
Workers are sometimes placed in mixed-gender accommodations, typically cramped caravans, where privacy is extremely limited. Women are made particularly vulnerable in these settings, which create an environment ripe for harassment.
Our interviews saw workers reporting mixed-gender showers with no locks and toilets outdoors in cold conditions. These living arrangements are not just uncomfortable, they are often actively unsafe.
Various women surveyed reported unwanted sexual attention. Given how normalised certain forms of sexual harassment can be, and how often it goes underreported, it is likely far higher than what this data indicates.
In one instance, a woman faced repeated threats of sexual assault from eight men who were also on the SWS. Rather than addressing the perpetrators’ violent behaviour, her employer chose to resolve the situation by relocating the woman.
This highlights the systemic nature of how sexual harassment goes untackled in precarious workplace contexts and across society. All too often, the victim is expected to shoulder the problem of an unsafe work environment, while the harassers face no real consequences.
This is, in part, a failure of employers to meet their obligations under UK law. The Equality Act 2010 places responsibility for sexual harassment on both the employer and the perpetrator. But it’s also a result of the UK’s extremely fragmented labour market enforcement system.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), responsible for enforcing the Equality Act, has limited resources and powers, while the Health and Safety Executive, the public body that regulates Britain’s workplaces, does not even recognise sexual harassment as a matter of workplace safety.
In short, harassers get away with it, employers fail to deal with the problem, and enforcement is unable to do anything about it. Yet again, women workers pay the price for the failure of the systems responsible for protecting their welfare.
The need for review
We found that the SWS’s flawed design increases the risks of exploitation for workers, and the answer to that must be an overhaul of the scheme as a whole.
This includes improved independent monitoring of the scheme, including working and accommodation conditions, increased labour market enforcement, as well as pathways for redress and guaranteed rights for workers.
Earlier this year, the government announced its intention to establish a single body for labour market enforcement: the Fair Work Agency. While this would be an important step forward, ministers must ensure it will be properly resourced to oversee the SWS and ensure the safety and rights of all workers.
The agency must also take a proactive, gender-responsive approach to enforcement, including monitoring both working and living conditions, and ensuring workers have clear pathways to report abuses without fear of retaliation.
Lucila Granada is the chief executive officer at Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX), a charity working to prevent labour abuses and protect workers. Its new report, Uneven fields: women workers’ experiences of the Seasonal Worker Scheme, can be read here.
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/seasonal-worker-scheme-uk-women-farms-gender-harassment-debts-financial-insecurity/
Published and (C) by OpenDemocracy
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-ND 4.0.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/opendemocracy/
