Migrant nurse wins legal victory over British company, which could cost her £13,000

A migrant nurse could be eligible for a substantial payment from a British health insurer after an employment tribunal ruled he is likely to win his unfair dismissal case, in a ruling that could pave the way for dozens of other similar cases.

Employment judge Natasha Joffe ruled that London-based healthcare provider Clinica Private Healthcare may have to pay Kirankumar Rathod £13,000 in unpaid wages after the company sacked him in 2023. Rathod was sacked after raising concerns about the lack of work offered to him and other colleagues who had also moved to the UK on the promise of full-time employment.

Campaigners hope the interim decision will encourage hundreds more to come forward, after the Guardian last month revealed widespread allegations of worker exploitation in the sector. A final ruling in the case is expected later this year.

Sarmila Bose, head of employment at the Work Rights Centre, which represented Rathod, said: “This is a very important ruling. It is the first time that a healthcare worker has received this kind of principled relief.”

Nicola Ranger, acting head of the Royal College of Nursing, said: “This is a crucial victory for migrant health workers. This case is not the end of the matter, as we know that exploitation is widespread in social care. Migrant care workers urgently need the next government to launch an urgent investigation and take action to ensure that employment standards are upheld.”

Rathod’s case echoes dozens of others uncovered by the Guardian. More than 30 people said they had paid up to £20,000 to immigration agents (and sometimes employers themselves) to secure job offers, only to find little or no work upon arrival.

Many had taken on huge debts to secure jobs and now live in poverty in Britain, unable to get regular work and unwilling to return home for fear of not being able to pay their debts.

After The Guardian exposed the practices, shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper promised that Labour would launch an investigation into the treatment of migrant care workers if she took power.

Rathod said he came to Britain in 2023 after paying £22,000 to an immigration agent in India to obtain a visa and work. He was given a certificate of sponsorship from Clinica, which said he would become a healthcare assistant, working 39 hours a week for just over £23,000 a year.

Once he arrived in Britain, Rathod completed an introductory course and three days’ training, but was subsequently denied work. According to the tribunal documents, he questioned why he was not being offered services and was told: “It has been very difficult to find suitable services for all of you in the care homes which have long shift hours, as most of you wanted (sic).”

Rathod says he called his employer in November 2023 to protest again about not getting work and threatened to take legal action against them.

The next day he received a termination letter stating that he was being fired for his “failure to heed several verbal warnings regarding insubordination to the employer and the company.”

The case is still ongoing. But in an interim ruling in June, Joffe ruled that Rathod was likely to win his case for unfair dismissal, and that he would therefore have to pay out all unpaid wages between the date of his dismissal and the end of the case. This would amount to at least £13,000, and possibly much more depending on how long the case lasts.

Joffe ruled: “The apparent irregularities in the way the claimant and other employees were treated in relation to their employment contracts and sponsorship certificates appeared to indicate that there was something wrong with the way the first defendant (Clinica) ran its business. which it would not be pleased with if light were shone on it.”

She added: “The contract provided a job that did not materialise and the subsequent behaviour of the respondents suggested that the claimant and others were being strung along.”

Clinica did not respond to a request for comment.

During the trial, the company told the court that it could not pay Rathod’s unpaid wages because it had since lost its license to sponsor migrant workers, and that paying such workers would be illegal. The judge will rule on the matter at a further hearing in late July, with a final ruling expected to take several months.

Lawyers say even the decision to grant injunctive relief in principle is a major victory for others who have found themselves in similar situations.

Jamila Duncan-Bosu, lawyer at the Anti Trafficking and Labor Exploitation Unit, said: “This is a very interesting and welcome judgment. Hopefully this is the beginning of the turning of the tide, and more employees will be able to come forward after this.”