Changing the law for domestic workers
/Two cases brought by survivors of modern slavery have led to significant changes being made to the law. These changes will make a huge difference to the lives of domestic workers in the UK.
The Family Worker Exemption
On 20 July 2020, the London South Employment Tribunal heard the case of Puthenveetil v Alexander, George v Alexander, George & The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy 2361118/2013. This case challenged the lawfulness of regulation 57(3), known as the ‘family worker exemption’, which operates as a loophole for modern slavery. Under the exemption there is no requirement to pay the national minimum wage, or indeed a salary at all, to live-in domestic workers who are treated as a member of the family.
The Tribunal found that the exemption was unlawful and that our client was entitled to receive the national minimum wage for every hour that she had worked.
Following the judgment, the government asked the Low Pay Commission to review the exemption and its impact. They carried out research and heard evidence from those affected by the exemption. As a result, on 22 October 2021, the commission recommended that the exemption be removed in its entirety.
In March 2022, the government accepted this recommendation (11.36) and will shortly take steps to revoke the exemption. This means that employers will no longer be able to rely on the exemption to pay low or no wages to their live-in domestic workers.
State Immunity
ATLEU’s clients, Mrs Benkharbouche and Ms Janah were been employed as domestic workers by embassies who raised state immunity as a defence to their employment claims. Neither client was able to obtain a remedy for their mistreatment as the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear their cases. ATLEU argued, on the clients’ behalf, that the State Immunity Act 1978 went beyond what was required by international law, and as a result it was barring all employees, regardless of circumstances, from asserting their employment rights.
ATLEU pursued Mrs Benkharbouche and Ms Janah's cases all the way to the Supreme Court, where the Court found that the State Immunity Act had interfered with their rights to pursue a claim in the employment tribunal. In 2017, the Supreme Court confirmed that their claims arising from EU employment rights could be pursued, but those arising from UK domestic employment legislation were indeed curtailed by the State Immunity Act and so there was incompatibility between the clients’ rights and the law in force.
Following the judgment, the government confirmed that it would amend the State Immunity Act, so that it could not be relied on in each and every employee dispute, but only in respect of specific employees, such as those operating sovereign authority as envisaged by international law.
Both of ATLEU’s clients have now received orders for compensation from the UK Government.
We are delighted that the government has finally confirmed that it intends this year to bring before Parliament a remedial order amending the offending sections of the State Immunity Act 1978.
Both the revocation of the family worker exemption and the limitation on embassies invoking state immunity in employment matters are significant changes to the law. We pay tribute to the tenacity and courage of Ms Puthenveetil, Mrs Benkharbouche and Ms Janah, who have fought for a decade to achieve justice. Their fight has led to an improvement in the protections for all domestic workers who face labour exploitation.
Puthenveettil v Alexander & George, & Others 2361118/2013
Benkharbouche (Respondent) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Appellant) and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Libya (Appellants) v Janah (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 62
The cases will change the lives of workers employed in domestic settings or embassies, closing loopholes in the law that allowed employers to avoid complying with employment rights.
