Poundland. Photograph by Martin Pettitt
The government has lost an appeal to the Supreme Court over a ruling that its “back-to-work” scheme at places like Poundland was legally flawed.
The original case was brought by recent graduate Cait Reilly, who claimed that requiring her to work for no pay at Poundland breached forced labour laws. The judge found in her favour, stating that the regulations underpinning the back-to-work scheme were invalid.
This ruling was upheld by five Supreme Court justices because of how poorly the schemes and penalties were explained to those taking part, but found that the laws did not constitute forced labour.
Many commentators described the scheme as unfair, forcing the poorest in society into unpaid work in places like Poundland or face cuts to the jobseeker’s allowance. It is also argued that by getting people to work for free, it is taking away jobs that would otherwise have gone to people earning minimum wage, with the scheme essentially using public money to give private companies a partially free workforce.
The government claims that this scheme would give people experience of holding down a job, and have vowed to use new safeguards to continue as it continues.
