Government sets tighter rules for gig economy employers

"HR professionals face a minefield of constantly shifting legal requirements that can trip up even the most diligent organisations," said Zinc's Luke Shipley

Employers that hire gig workers are now legally required to carry out employment checks, the Home Office announced on Sunday (30 March).

This extends the obligation to carry out right-to-work checks, already a requirement for other employers, to gig-economy and zero-hours employers. Organisations will need to confirm that any gig economy worker they employ is eligible to work in the UK.

Organisations that fail to carry out these checks will face penalties that are already in place for employers hiring illegal workers outside of the gig economy. These include fines of up to £60,000, business closure and potential prison sentences of up to five years.

This new requirement may bring more administrative complexities, especially for smaller gig worker employers, stated Jonathon Insley, partner at law firm Ellisons’ Solicitors.

Speaking to HR magazine, Insley said: “The gig economy has always been a tricky area when it comes to employment law, and this latest change adds another layer of complexity. Businesses that rely on flexible, on-demand workers now have to carry out the same right to work checks as traditional employers. For some, that’s going to mean a significant increase in admin.

“Larger operators may already have processes in place, but for smaller businesses that don’t, this could be a real challenge. The key is making sure these checks don’t slow down recruitment or unintentionally lead to discrimination claims.”


Read more: Half of UK gig economy workers paid below minimum wage


Marie van der Zyl, employment partner at law firm, Keystone Law, echoed this, reminding that gig economy employers already face compliance issues.

She told HR magazine: “Employers in the gig economy face significant compliance challenges due to the nature of their workforce. High turnover, flexible working arrangements and the use of multiple digital platforms make it harder to implement consistent hiring processes.

“The distinction between employees, workers and self-employed contractors can also be unclear, leading to uncertainty over legal obligations.”

The new requirement is part of the government’s plan to strengthen the immigration system. The requirement also followed measures announced in November, equipping immigration enforcement teams with new technology. From May 2025, body-worn cameras are due to be rolled out to officers tackling illegal work and organised immigration crime. 


Read more: Oxford professors win gig economy tribunal


HR leaders in all sectors have a challenging time ensuring that their company’s compliance is up to date, according to Luke Shipley, CEO of background checks business, Zinc.

Shipley told HR magazine: “HR professionals face a minefield of constantly shifting legal requirements that can trip up even the most diligent organisations. Regulations can change as rapidly, on a monthly basis, making keeping up to date with compliance manually incredibly difficult. In today’s rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, relying on manual processes is inefficient at best and catastrophic to businesses at worst.

“HR must leverage automation to stay on top of regulatory changes, without having to even think about it. Through automation, HR teams will be able to free up time to focus on growth and more pressing priorities, like giving new employees a welcoming onboarding experience.”

HR leaders should also avoid considering right to work checks as a on-off task, said Sohan Sidhu, head of immigration at law firm Ellisons’ Solicitors.

Sidhu told HR magazine: “HR teams need to get ahead of this now. The safest approach is to start embedding right-to-work checks into the recruitment process as standard. Using the government’s online checking service wherever possible makes it easier, reduces human error and ensures consistency.

“It’s also important to train hiring managers properly; these checks have to be done correctly to avoid serious penalties, but they also have to be handled carefully to avoid any risk of discrimination claims.”