Remediation practices around recruitment fees and related costs paid by workers in UK agriculture |
Introduction
In line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, companies are responsible for preventing adverse human rights impacts in their operations and supply chains, and for providing or co-operating in remediation of adverse human rights impacts where they have caused or contributed to it.
This Survey aims to map current remediation practices around recruitment fees and related costs paid by workers in UK agriculture, and to better understand the extent of any commitment to the Employers Pays Principle, which stipulates that no worker should pay for a job, the costs of recruitment should be borne by the employer and not the worker.
It has been developed by the SWS Taskforce Workstream 4. We estimate that it will take you 5-10 min to respond to it. We won’t ask for your organisation’s name; the results are anonymous.
The answers should be based on your business’s current related policies and practices.
In this survey we are using the ILO Definition of Recruitment Fees and Related Costs and distinguishing between:
1. In Section 1, any recruitment fees and related costs as defined in the ILO definition which are not permitted by UK law
2. In Section 2, all recruitment fees and related costs as defined in the ILO definition
See below for a breakdown of which fees and costs as defined by the ILO are generally not permitted by GLAA Licensing Standards, SWS rules and other relevant legislation.
