What changes would be needed in UK law to allow asylum seekers to work after six months, and how have neighbouring countries implemented such rules?
Executive summary
Granting asylum seekers the right to work after six months would require explicit changes to the UK’s Immigration Rules and Home Office guidance — removing the current 12‑month “waiting” condition and either abolishing or exempting asylum applicants from the Immigration Salary List and related job‑list constraints (House of Commons Library; Migration Observatory) [1][2]. European neighbours show a variety of legal routes: some give a straight statutory right or a temporary permit after six months, others couple access with labour‑market tests or limited hours — demonstrating models the UK could copy or adapt (House of Commons Library; Migration Watch; BBC) [1][3][4].
1. What would have to change in UK primary and secondary law: remove the 12‑month rule and amend the Immigration Rules
The core legal fix is straightforward in form: amend the Immigration Rules and Home Office policy so the current threshold — permission to work only after 12 months of an outstanding claim “through no fault of the applicant” — is replaced by a six‑month eligibility trigger (Migration Observatory; UNHCR/immigration rules summary) [2][5]. Practically this means updating the Home Office “Permission to work” policy and the Immigration Rules that currently require both a 12‑month wait and that employment be on the Immigration Salary List — both statutory or ministerial instruments that can be revised without new primary legislation, though politically contentious (House of Commons Library; Migration Observatory) [1][2].
2. What statutory and administrative details would also need attention: the Salary List, checks and enforcement
Beyond the timing threshold, the UK would need to decide whether asylum applicants are constrained by the Immigration Salary List or any resident labour‑market test; the current policy links permission to work to that list, limiting occupations even after 12 months (Migration Observatory; House of Commons Library) [2][1]. Amending rules therefore requires either removing asylum seekers from the Salary List regime or creating a separate, broader permit category for asylum applicants, and updating right‑to‑work checks and employer guidance to avoid illegal working and fraud — practical steps the Home Office would operationally implement if policy changes are made [2][6].
3. How neighbouring countries and comparators implement six‑month (or quicker) access
Several European states offer earlier access: France allows a temporary work permit after six months, though it carries administrative restrictions; the Netherlands permits work after six months but, historically, restricted the total weeks available; Denmark — which opted out of some EU asylum rules — also allows work after six months in practice (BBC; Migration Watch; House of Commons Library) [4][3][7]. Outside Europe, Canada commonly grants work permits quickly or immediately, and the USA permits eligibility after six months — illustrating more liberal comparative models referenced by UK campaigners and researchers (House of Commons Library; CGD/Lift the Ban commentary) [1][8].
4. Political and legal obstacles: “pull factor” logic, backlog realities and recent UK reforms
Policy change faces political resistance rooted in the “pull factor” argument — successive UK governments have resisted earlier access on the ground it could incentivise irregular migration — a contention repeatedly cited in parliamentary briefings and think‑tank analysis (House of Commons Library; CGD) [1][8]. Administrative reality complicates matters too: asylum decision backlogs have lengthened dramatically, increasing the fiscal and practical arguments for work rights but also raising enforcement concerns about informal work (Migration Observatory; Refugee Action) [2][9]. Newer government measures around asylum support and enforcement (including policy shifts since 2023) further change the political calculus, though specifics on how those reforms intersect with right‑to‑work rules remain contested in recent government statements (GOV.UK) [6].
5. A plausible UK model and trade‑offs: six months + targeted safeguards
A practicable UK model would set a six‑month statutory trigger, remove or relax the Salary List constraint for asylum applicants, and pair the right with safeguards: limited initial permits, sector‑based priority for shortage roles, stronger right‑to‑work checks and funding for integration services — an approach that mirrors variants used in France, the Netherlands and Canada while answering UK‑specific concerns about labour markets and enforcement (House of Commons Library; Migration Observatory; Migration Watch) [1][2][3]. The alternative viewpoints — those warning of pull effects and those arguing for immediate, unconstrained access — are well documented, and any reform would need to balance labour, enforcement and humanitarian objectives explicitly (Lift the Ban / Refugee Action; CGD; Home Office analyses) [9][8][1].