A recent employment tribunal case (Ong v Yatson & Co Ltd) involving a hotel manager who did not have the legal right to work in the UK has raised significant questions for employers, HR teams, and employment law professionals across the country.
The case, reported by People Management, involved a worker who successfully brought discrimination claims despite lacking lawful immigration status at the time of employment.
The tribunal’s findings have attracted considerable attention because they sit at the intersection of two increasingly sensitive and legally complex areas: immigration compliance and workplace discrimination law.
For employers, the case is a reminder that right to work obligations do not exist in isolation from wider employment law duties.
While organisations remain legally required to carry out compliant right to work checks and avoid employing individuals unlawfully, they must also remain mindful of discrimination risks, procedural fairness, and how immigration-related concerns are handled in practice.
For employees and workers, the case highlights the reality that certain workplace protections may still apply even where immigration status is disputed or unlawful working has occurred.
Most importantly, the decision reflects a broader shift taking place across UK employment law. Increasingly, tribunals are being asked to balance immigration enforcement obligations against equality protections, human rights considerations, procedural fairness, and the realities of modern workplaces.
That balancing exercise is likely to become even more significant in the years ahead.
The growing complexity of right to work compliance
For UK employers, right to work checks have become a routine but critically important part of recruitment and workforce management.
Under the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006, employers are required to verify that individuals have the legal right to work in the UK before employment begins.
Failure to conduct compliant checks can expose organisations to substantial civil penalties, reputational damage, sponsor licence issues, and in serious cases, criminal liability.
In recent years, enforcement activity around illegal working has intensified significantly.
According to Home Office data, civil penalties for illegal working reached record levels during 2024 and 2025, with fines for employers increasing dramatically following government reforms. Employers can now face penalties of up to £60,000 per illegal worker, and up to 5 years in prison, for repeat breaches.
As a result, many employers have understandably adopted stricter compliance procedures around recruitment documentation, visa monitoring, and immigration status verification.
However, the legal challenge for employers is that immigration compliance must still be handled lawfully, fairly, and without discriminatory treatment.
That is where cases such as this become particularly important.
The tribunal case that has prompted wider debate
The case reported by People Management centred on a hotel manager who succeeded in claims linked to discriminatory treatment despite lacking lawful permission to work in the UK.
While the specific legal findings are fact-sensitive, the broader implications are attracting attention because they demonstrate that unlawful immigration status does not automatically remove all workplace protections or prevent scrutiny of employer conduct.
That distinction is crucial.
Employment tribunals are often required to assess not only whether an employer had legitimate immigration concerns, but also how those concerns were handled procedurally and whether decisions were influenced by discriminatory assumptions, inconsistent treatment, or unlawful conduct unrelated to immigration compliance itself.
In practice, this creates a legally delicate area for employers. Organisations must comply with strict immigration laws while also avoiding discriminatory behaviour connected to race, nationality, ethnicity, or perceived immigration status.
The two obligations must operate together.
Why this matters for the future of employment law
This case reflects a wider shift taking place across UK employment law and workplace regulation. Historically, immigration compliance and employment rights were often treated as largely separate issues. Increasingly, however, tribunals are examining the overlap between the two far more closely.
That overlap is likely to become increasingly important as workplaces become more internationally diverse and immigration policy continues to change.
Several key trends are already emerging:
- First, tribunals appear increasingly willing to examine the process employers follow when addressing immigration concerns, rather than simply accepting that right to work issues automatically justify dismissal or adverse treatment.
- Second, discrimination law continues to expand in practical significance within employment disputes generally. Claims involving race discrimination, nationality discrimination, and harassment remain among the most sensitive and reputationally damaging cases employers can face.
- Third, heightened immigration enforcement is creating greater pressure on employers to act quickly when concerns arise. However, acting quickly without proper process, consistency, or legal advice can itself create legal exposure.
The result is a growing tension between compliance urgency and procedural fairness. That tension is likely to shape employment law disputes far more frequently in the coming years.
Employers are navigating increasing legal risk on multiple fronts
For employers, one of the most difficult aspects of modern employment law is that legal obligations rarely exist in isolation.
A decision taken to reduce immigration risk may inadvertently create discrimination risk, an attempt to act quickly may undermine procedural fairness, and an internal investigation into visa concerns may unintentionally expose inconsistencies in treatment between employees.
This is particularly important because discrimination claims can carry substantial financial and reputational consequences. Unlike ordinary unfair dismissal claims, compensation in discrimination cases is uncapped.
There is also the reputational reality that allegations involving race, nationality, or discriminatory treatment can attract significant scrutiny regardless of the final legal outcome.
As a result, employers increasingly need to approach right to work concerns with far greater strategic care than simply asking whether an individual possesses valid immigration status.
This means that the wider context matters, the consistency of decision-making matters, documentation matters, communication matters, and the process matters enormously.
Right to work checks must be carried out carefully and consistently
One of the key lessons from cases of this nature is the importance of consistency.
Employers should ensure that right to work checks are conducted uniformly across the workforce rather than targeting particular nationalities, ethnic groups, accents, or perceived immigration backgrounds.
Selective or inconsistent checks can quickly create allegations of discriminatory treatment, even where employers believe they are acting cautiously or protectively. The Home Office itself has repeatedly emphasised that employers must avoid discriminatory practices when carrying out immigration checks.
This means that organisations should have clear, documented processes covering:
- Recruitment checks
- Repeat visa checks where required
- Document verification procedures
- Escalation processes for concerns
- Communication protocols
- Record-keeping systems
- Manager training
Importantly, those procedures should apply consistently to all employees and candidates regardless of nationality or background.
Many employers unintentionally expose themselves to legal risk not because they ignore compliance obligations, but because internal processes are poorly implemented or inconsistently applied.
The human reality behind these cases
Cases involving immigration status often become politically charged very quickly. However, from an employment law perspective, tribunals are generally focused on legal rights, procedural conduct, and workplace treatment rather than broader political debates around immigration policy.
It’s important to note this distinction because employment tribunals are not immigration tribunals. The role of an employment tribunal is to assess whether employment law obligations have been met, whether discrimination occurred, and whether employers acted lawfully within the circumstances of each case.
That means even difficult or sensitive immigration situations may still involve legal protections and obligations that employers must navigate carefully.
For employees and workers, these cases can involve profound uncertainty around livelihood, immigration status, housing, family security, and professional future.
For employers, they can involve complex decisions balancing legal compliance, operational pressures, workforce management, and reputational considerations.
The reality is rarely straightforward for either side.
Why employers need proactive employment law advice
One of the clearest themes emerging from modern employment disputes is that reactive decision-making creates risk.
Many employers only seek legal advice once a dispute has escalated into grievance procedures, disciplinary action, or tribunal litigation. By that stage, positions may already be entrenched and procedural mistakes difficult to reverse.
In complex areas involving right to work checks, discrimination risks, sponsorship obligations, or immigration-related dismissals, early legal guidance is becoming increasingly important.
Employers need advice not simply on what the law says, but on how to implement compliant, defensible, and fair workplace processes in practice.
That includes:
- Conducting compliant right to work checks
- Responding to visa concerns appropriately
- Managing sensitive employee conversations
- Avoiding discriminatory practices
- Carrying out investigations lawfully
- Protecting organisational reputation
- Handling dismissals fairly where required
- Defending tribunal claims effectively
As employment law and immigration compliance continue overlapping more frequently, organisations that rely solely on outdated HR processes may expose themselves to unnecessary legal and commercial risk.
This case is unlikely to be the last of its kind
The broader legal and workplace trends suggest disputes involving immigration status and discrimination are likely to increase rather than disappear.
Several factors are driving that reality:
- Increased immigration enforcement
- Greater workforce diversity
- Heightened awareness of discrimination rights
- Growing scrutiny of employer practices
- Expanding compliance obligations
- More complex visa systems
- Increased tribunal willingness to examine process and fairness
At the same time, employment tribunal backlogs continue placing additional pressure on employers trying to manage long-running disputes effectively.
For many organisations, prevention and early legal guidance are becoming far more commercially sensible than reacting once litigation begins.
What employers should be doing now
Employers do not need to panic following cases like this. However, they do need to recognise that immigration compliance and discrimination law must now be considered together rather than separately.
That means reviewing whether current processes are genuinely robust, consistent, and legally defensible.
Organisations should consider:
- Reviewing right to work policies
- Auditing recruitment procedures
- Training managers on discrimination risks
- Reviewing sponsorship compliance processes
- Updating internal documentation systems
- Seeking early advice when concerns arise
- Ensuring disciplinary procedures remain fair and proportionate
The goal is not simply avoiding penalties for illegal working; it is creating legally compliant workplace processes that reduce exposure across all areas of employment law simultaneously.
Ong v Yatson & Co Ltd from an employment trainee solicitor’s perspective
I consider this case to be a significant indicator of the increasingly complex legal environment facing UK employers in relation to right to work checks and discrimination risks.
The decision is striking in its illustration that an individual’s lack of lawful immigration status does not extinguish all workplace protections, particularly those concerning discrimination, and acts as a warning that employers must approach right to work compliance in tandem with their obligations under equality and employment law.
I welcome this tribunal outcome because it affirms that even where immigration compliance issues arise, workers must still be treated with dignity and afforded a fair, non-discriminatory process.
It is evident that tribunals are placing greater emphasis on the procedures employers follow- examining not just whether immigration concerns are valid, but how those concerns are handled and whether they give rise to differential or discriminatory treatment.
The key practical lesson is that inconsistent, selective, or poorly documented right to work procedures can quickly escalate into significant legal and reputational risks, including uncapped discrimination claims. Therefore, robust and consistent compliance processes, ongoing manager training, and careful documentation are essential.
Therefore, robust and consistent compliance processes, ongoing manager training, and careful documentation are essential.
Speak to Magara Law about employment law and right to work compliance
We support employers across a wide range of complex employment law matters, including workplace investigations, discrimination claims, disciplinary procedures, unfair dismissal disputes, and immigration-related employment issues.
As employment law and immigration compliance continue to shift, employers are facing increasing pressure to balance legal obligations carefully, fairly, and consistently. Early legal advice can often prevent sensitive situations from escalating into costly and reputationally damaging disputes.
Our team provides strategic, commercially focused support that’s structured to help employers navigate difficult workplace issues with clarity and confidence.
To speak with Magara Law about employment law support, workplace investigations, discrimination risks, or right to work compliance, call 01869 325 883, email hello@magaralaw.co.uk or book your consultation direct.
Once you’ve scheduled your consultation, subscribe to our YouTube channel and follow us on social media for all the latest employment law updates and information you need.