A care worker who travelled from India to the UK on a Skilled Worker visa has been awarded almost £30,000 by an employment tribunal after spending months without work despite being recruited for a full-time role.
Shabin Shaji moved from Kerala to Stafford in 2023 after receiving sponsorship from Swan Care Solutions Ltd. He arrived in Britain expecting to begin employment in the care sector but was never allocated any shifts by the company.
The Birmingham Employment Tribunal heard that Shaji repeatedly contacted his employer seeking work and income but remained without assignments throughout his employment.
In her ruling, Employment Judge Kate Edmonds found that the company had failed to honour its obligations despite Shaji being available and prepared to work.
“The claimant had done what needed to be done to start work,” the judge stated.
The tribunal found that Shaji possessed the required immigration status, had relocated to the area and was ready to begin employment. Despite this, the company did not provide any work opportunities.
“The respondent did not provide him with work, nor did they pay him,” the judgment said.
Judge Edmonds also criticised the company’s approach to employment, concluding that it effectively treated Shaji as though he were employed on a casual basis despite no such arrangement existing.
“What in effect the respondent was doing, was treating the claimant as a zero-hours worker,” she said.
“The problem, of course, was that the claimant was not a zero-hours worker.”
The tribunal determined that the employer’s failure to provide work amounted to an unlawful withholding of wages. In its conclusions, the tribunal ruled: “There was therefore an unauthorised deduction from his wages.”
As a result, Swan Care Solutions was ordered to compensate Shaji for unpaid wages, accrued holiday entitlement and related losses. The total award approached £30,000.
During proceedings, Shaji explained that he had invested substantial sums to secure employment in Britain. He told the tribunal that he spent around £17,000 on recruitment and relocation costs before travelling to the UK.
Instead of beginning the job he had been promised, he found himself without income and dependent on outside support to survive.
Evidence presented to the tribunal described how he relied on food donations and charitable assistance while waiting for work that never arrived.
Shaji said local churches and community groups helped him access meals and basic necessities during the period when he was unable to earn a wage.
The case has drawn attention to concerns surrounding the recruitment of overseas care workers under Britain’s sponsorship system. Advocacy groups argue that some migrant workers arrive in the UK after paying significant fees only to discover that the volume of work promised by employers does not exist.
The tribunal judgment also noted that Swan Care Solutions later lost its sponsorship licence. The company’s authorisation to sponsor overseas workers was revoked in 2024 following concerns identified by immigration authorities.
Although Shaji subsequently secured sponsorship with another employer, his circumstances reportedly deteriorated and he later returned to India because of health issues.
Employment specialists say the ruling underlines a key principle of UK labour law: workers who are contracted and available to perform their duties cannot simply be denied work and pay by an employer.
The decision is likely to be closely examined by organisations supporting migrant workers, particularly within the social care sector, where overseas recruits often depend on a single sponsoring employer for both their livelihood and immigration status.
This version reads more like a newspaper feature and is substantially different in wording and structure while preserving the verified facts and direct tribunal quotations.
