From 1 October 2026, liability for a civil penalty in relation to an illegal worker can also be extended beyond the traditional direct employer relationship to education institutions further up a chain of contracts, this will be known as “extended liability”.

Whether your organisation is an independent school, further education college or university in the UK, all education institutions should now be undertaking a review of their entire workforce to ensure that they are well-prepared for the new RTW regime.

What are the new RTW rules?

The current rules make it illegal to employ an adult in the UK who does not have the Right to Work. Employers can protect themselves against civil penalties – a fine of up to £60,000 per illegal worker – if they correctly carry out a Right to Work check to establish a ‘statutory excuse’. Broadly, these RTW rules will continue, albeit with added emphasis on impersonation/imposter verification, so you can build upon the policies and procedures you already have in place.

Expanded Definition of Employer

From 1 October 2026, liability for a civil penalty will be expanded to more working arrangements beyond the traditional employer-employee relationship, reflecting the diversification of working practices in the UK. The new RTW regime will effectively see the definition of ‘employer’ expanded so that responsibility for undertaking RTW checks will extend to more people and working arrangements.

Responsibility for conducting Right to Work checks will now fall on those who engage individuals to carry out work in the UK on or after 1 October 2026 in the following scenarios:

  • Under a Worker’s Contract: this will cover individuals who fall between an employee and self-employed contractor (ie engaged on a contract for services). The Home Office’s draft Right to Work guidance gives an example of an individual engaged by an employment business on a contract for services who is supplied to work at bars or restaurants on short-term assignments to cover busy periods. In this situation, the employment business is considered to be the employer for Right to Work check purposes and is responsible for carrying out the Right to Work check.

For education institutions which temporarily use supply teachers supplied by a specialist recruitment agency, the recruitment agency would be  responsible for carrying out the right to work checks. However, care should be taken where the supply teacher working arrangements become longer term as the Home Office may consider that responsibility for the RTW check then shifts to the education institution. The Home Office will always look at the substance and operation of the working arrangement for Right to Work purposes rather than the contractual label applied by the parties. 

  • As an Individual Sub-Contractor: This typically is a contract for work or services between an individual (I) and a business (A), where A has been contracted by a third party (T) to provide the same work or services. For example, a person signs up for gig work with a platform, such as a food delivery or ride hailing app, determining their own working patterns and hours, and the individual jobs they accept. The business, A (in the example, the platform) is an employer for the purposes of the  prevention of illegal working regime, and will be obliged to check the Right to Work eligibility of the individual sub-contractor (I). This scenario is unlikely  to apply to the education sector. 
  • Through Online Matching Services: the online matching service matches clients with an individual offering a service for a fee. For example, an app connects an individual to a cleaner or tradesperson for a one-off task. The online matching service is the individual’s employer for the purposes of the Right to Work check. This scenario is unlikely to apply to the education sector.

What is the new “Extended Liability” concept?

Whilst the Home Office has confirmed it will first seek to determine if there is an employer in a direct relationship with the worker, the Home Office will go on to determine whether liability should be applied to another party in the chain of contracts. This is now known as “extended liability”, a totally new concept in the UK’s RTW regime which has essentially added a new, second form of, statutory excuse (ie defence).

The Home Office is clearly seeking to impose liability in as many working arrangements as possible, even if the organisation now ‘responsible’ is far removed from the potential illegal worker. Where there is a chain of contracts involved in the supply of goods or services, pinning down where liability for illegal working will be placed becomes more complicated and precarious.

To establish a statutory excuse against extended liability, an education institution must comply with the following three prescribed requirements:

  • Have in place a written statement before the work/service commences setting out a prescribed set of provisions around the RTW,
  • Have in place substitution controls aimed at ensuring that any substitute has the RTW, and
  • Carry out identity verification to confirm that the individual undertaking the work is in fact the person that the RTW check was undertaken on.

Out of scope scenarios

A welcome clarification in the new RTW guidance is that the new rules do not apply in certain common circumstances.

For example, the wider definition of ‘Employer’ does not apply to:

  • Individuals who are operating an independent business and who contract directly with clients or customers for the provision of goods or services. For example, a plumbing business in a Business to Business (B2B) relationship that invoices for their work.  In this scenario, the client/customer is not required to carry out a RTW check. However, this must be a genuine self-employment relationship, and the Home Office will look behind these arrangements to ensure it is not just a label that is being applied to avoid having to undertake a RTW check.

For example, the new concept of ‘Extended liability’ does not apply to:

  • Businesses that purchases work or services from another business, or  where a client, customer or end-user  is purchasing work or services for their own internal operations.  Examples of ‘out of scope’ scenarios arising in the education sector where extended liability should not arise include:

(a) purchasing cleaning or catering services for your own institution’s premises or use  – in which case liability for RTW checks rests with the cleaning or catering company

(b) using agency teaching staff to fill temporary staff absences  –  in which case the agency bears the onus of undertaking the RTW check

(c) an external afterschool club provider teaching pupils tennis – in which case the afterschool club must undertake the RTW check on its tennis coaches

Again, care still needs to be taken by an education institution where the supply teacher or tennis coach’s actual working arrangements become longer term and the individual becomes integrated into the education institution internal processes. In this scenario, the Home Office may consider that responsibility for carrying out a RTW check has shifted to the education institution under the new wider definition of ‘employer’ even where there is no chain of contracts for ‘extended liability’ purposes.

The Home Office also does not place the burden on individual members of the public. For example, if someone posts a pamphlet through your letterbox offering a window-cleaning service as an individual, you would not be under an obligation to check that person has the RTW in the UK before engaging them to clean your windows and you would not be fined if they turn out to be working illegally.

What should education institutions  do now?

The changes take effect from 1 October 2026, but organisations should act now to understand how these may affect them, and to give themselves sufficient time to put in place any new systems needed to address the newly covered arrangements. This includes reviewing your RTW practices and identifying any arrangements (such as your education institution’s position in a chain of contracts) to determine who will ultimately bear responsibility / liability in the eyes of the Home Office, and what provisions you need to have in place to avoid ‘extended liability’.

For education institutions, extended liability could be especially relevant where, for example, your school or college is currently undergoing a significant building project and there is a ‘chain of contracts’. Education institutions should start to think carefully about their non-employee population and assess carefully if for example; self-employed supply teachers, agency catering staff etc in reality (ignoring the labels) could be viewed by the Home Office as “workers” and pulled into the new RTW regime.

We have set out below a suggested plan of action:

  1. Inform leadership that changes are being rolled out in October, and additional budget will be required to ensure compliance.
  2. Map out ALL individuals you employ, engage or who are on your premises regularly — including agency workers, secondees, subcontractors and self‑employed individuals.
  3. Identify who is in-scope of the new rules, by looking at the substance of the arrangement not just the label.
  4. Update existing RTW policies and processes and ensure these include measures to manage the risk of impersonation and imposters.
  5. Review contracts with third party contractors, agency staff, and self-employed / consultancy agreements to make sure warranties and indemnities are appropriately drafted in line with new extended liability rules.
  6. Operationally – check with HR, recruitment, and onboarding operations, who will be responsible for these additional checks and if more resources are needed.
  7. Consider tech solutions to help manage the increase in volume of those who now need RTW checks and undertake ‘imposter checks’ for both employees and non-employees (i.e. checking the RTW output relates to the person presenting for work). RTW Document Verification Service Providers can help to streamline.
  8. Upskill your HR teams with the new changes and increased scrutiny, given the Home Office’s ability to audit.

What are the consequences of getting the new rules wrong?

Failure to undertake correct RTW checks can lead to severe consequences for an education institution , including:

  • Civil penalties: The Home Office may impose a fine up to £60,000 per illegal worker.
  • Criminal liability: Where you knew or had reasonable cause to believe that a worker did not have the RTW.
  • Loss of Student/Skilled Worker sponsor licences: Sponsors can lose their ability to sponsor non UK staff and students where inadequate procedures are in place to conduct RTW checks.
  • Reputational damage: The Home Office operates a ‘name and shame’ system by publishing online a list of the employers found to have been hiring illegal workers.

Education institutions should therefore take their updated RTW obligations seriously or face significant penalties if it transpires that someone they engage directly or via the new “extended liability” concept did not have the appropriate RTW.

How we can help

RTW checks should form a key part of your HR processes, but the system is now more complex than ever. Doyle Clayton can assist education institutions by:

  • Advising who is in scope of the new RTW rules once you have mapped out your entire workforce.
  • Advising on which of your contractual arrangements and additional working arrangements are now covered by the extended liability concept, and how to amend your contracts to retain a statutory excuse using the new prescribed requirements.
  • Undertaking audits to confirm that checks have been carried out correctly to establish a statutory excuse and identifying where these should be carried out again.
  • Preparing processes and policies tailored to your education institution to ensure robust systems are in place to incorporate the new rules, minimising burden whilst ensuring compliance.
  • Providing training to staff on how to carry out the new RTW checks, and how to avoid discrimination when doing so.
  • Advising on strategy where illegal working issues arise and liaising with the Home Office in respect of illegal working allegations.

In the present climate of increased enforcement, sound advice is key to complying with the RTW regime and avoiding penalties for hiring illegal workers. We therefore recommend education institutions  act now and take steps to ensure they are well prepared for 1 October 2026.

Previous Next
Next