Employing Ukrainian Refugees in the UK: Rules & Right to Work 2026

UK employers continue to employ significant numbers of Ukrainian nationals under special immigration arrangements introduced following the invasion of Ukraine. While many of these routes were designed as humanitarian measures, they operate within the UK’s mainstream immigration control framework and are actively enforced by UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI). For employers, this means that employing Ukrainian nationals is not a goodwill exercise or informal accommodation, but a regulated workforce activity carrying real legal, financial and operational risk.

In practice, many employers rely on outdated guidance from 2022–2023, misunderstand the legal nature of Ukrainian immigration status, or assume that humanitarian schemes dilute right to work obligations. These assumptions create exposure to civil penalties, criminal liability and sponsor licence enforcement action. UKVI does not distinguish between “refugee-related” employment and any other form of illegal working when conducting compliance visits or audits. For route and scheme updates, see our current guidance on Ukraine-related immigration permission: Employing Ukrainian nationals and the Ukraine schemes.

For HR teams and business owners, the core challenge is not simply whether a Ukrainian national can work, but how to verify status correctly, manage time-limited permission, plan for visa expiry and avoid discriminatory recruitment practices, all while maintaining workforce continuity and protecting the organisation from enforcement action. These obligations sit within the wider UK immigration compliance landscape for employers, including the rules on right to work checks and workforce eligibility under UK immigration law.

What this article is about

This article provides a compliance-grade guide for UK employers, HR professionals and sponsor licence holders on employing Ukrainian nationals lawfully. It explains who can legally work in the UK under Ukraine-related immigration routes, whether sponsorship is required, how right to work checks must be carried out in 2026 and what happens if employers get it wrong. The focus throughout is on defensible employer decision-making, workforce risk management and alignment with UKVI enforcement practice, not surface-level procedural guidance.

Section A: Who can UK employers lawfully employ under the Ukraine schemes?

UK employers frequently ask whether Ukrainian nationals automatically have the right to work, whether “refugee status” applies, and whether all Ukraine-related permissions carry the same employment rights. These questions go to the heart of compliance risk. The legal position depends on the individual’s immigration route, the type of permission granted and whether that permission remains valid at the point employment starts and continues.

For employers, the safest working assumption is that Ukraine-related permission is treated by UKVI as time-limited immigration leave outside the asylum system. It can expire, it can change and it must be verified using the prescribed right to work process. An employer’s defensible position comes from checking what permission the individual holds now, not what scheme they originally applied under.

1. What immigration routes currently allow Ukrainian nationals to work in the UK?

Ukrainian nationals may lawfully work in the UK only if they hold valid immigration permission that expressly permits employment. The primary routes created in response to the conflict were the Ukraine Family Scheme and the Homes for Ukraine route. Historically, there was also the Ukraine Extension Scheme, but that route is no longer open to new applications and employers should not assume it remains available to solve workforce continuity issues.

While these routes shared a broad policy intent of enabling access to work and public services, employers should not treat them as uniform. Permission length, extension options and transitional arrangements can vary depending on when and how permission was granted and what the individual’s current status shows on the Home Office systems. The employer’s compliance obligation is therefore to verify the individual’s current right to work at the point of recruitment and to keep that position under review where permission is time-limited.

Crucially, permission under a Ukraine-related route is personal to the individual and does not attach to the employer. The fact that a Ukrainian national was previously lawfully employed does not confirm that their current permission remains valid or continues to allow work. UKVI enforcement focuses on whether the individual had permission to work at the relevant time and whether the employer carried out the prescribed checks, rather than whether the employer believed the scheme was broadly work-permissive.

From a workforce risk perspective, employers should also plan for what happens when time-limited permission approaches expiry. If an employee’s permission expires and the business continues employment without confirmed ongoing permission, the organisation moves immediately into illegal working exposure, with the associated civil penalty and sponsor licence risk consequences. This is one reason employers should treat visa expiry as an operational risk issue rather than an administrative deadline, including planning for potential route changes such as the Skilled Worker visa where relevant.

2. Do Ukrainian nationals have refugee status under UK law?

A common and legally significant misunderstanding is the assumption that Ukrainian nationals in the UK are “refugees” in the formal legal sense. In UK immigration law, refugee status arises only where an individual has been recognised under the Refugee Convention following an asylum claim. Ukrainian nationals admitted under the Ukraine schemes do not generally hold refugee status.

Instead, these individuals are granted temporary humanitarian immigration permission outside the asylum system. While this permission may allow access to work and public services, it does not convert into refugee status and it does not dilute standard immigration control or enforcement mechanisms. For employers, the distinction matters because refugee status carries different evidential pathways and different long-term workforce assumptions.

Using imprecise terminology can also lead to compliance errors. For example, assuming that refugee-related exemptions apply to right to work checks or that employment can continue indefinitely is incorrect. Employers should frame internal processes around “Ukrainian nationals with time-limited permission to work”, ensuring HR systems trigger follow-up checks and renewal planning in the same way as for other non-UK nationals.

3. What work is permitted under Ukraine-related immigration permission?

In most cases, Ukraine-related permission allows both employed and self-employed work. That said, employers should not treat “broad permission to work” as a substitute for role-specific compliance. Employment must still comply with UK employment law and, in regulated professions, individuals may be legally permitted to work from an immigration perspective but unable to perform the role without professional registration or recognised qualifications.

From an employer risk perspective, duration is the central issue. Ukraine-related permission is time-limited and must be monitored. Employers should consider whether a role can realistically be filled on a temporary basis, whether the business is prepared to sponsor a future route where appropriate and whether contingency planning is in place if permission expires. Failure to align immigration permission with workforce planning can lead to sudden loss of key staff, operational disruption and, in the worst cases, continued employment after permission has expired. Employers should treat expiry risk and overstaying risk as a compliance trigger, including escalation where there is uncertainty about ongoing permission: see overstaying a visa.

Section Summary

UK employers may lawfully employ Ukrainian nationals only where the individual holds valid, current permission that allows work. Ukraine scheme permission is not refugee status, is time-limited and must be verified and monitored like any other immigration leave. Employers who rely on assumptions about schemes rather than checking an individual’s current status increase exposure to illegal working enforcement action, workforce instability and sponsor licence risk.

Section B: Do employers need a sponsor licence to employ Ukrainian nationals?

One of the most persistent sources of confusion for UK employers is whether employing Ukrainian nationals triggers sponsorship obligations. This uncertainty is particularly acute for organisations that already hold a sponsor licence, as HR teams often assume that all non-UK nationals must be sponsored or managed through the Sponsor Management System. In reality, the legal position is more nuanced, and misunderstanding it can expose employers to both compliance failures and unnecessary operational constraints.

UKVI enforcement does not assess sponsorship in isolation. Instead, it looks at how well employers understand and apply the distinction between sponsored and unsponsored workers and whether right to work controls are consistently applied across the workforce.

1. When sponsorship is not required to employ Ukrainian nationals

Ukrainian nationals who hold valid permission under the Ukraine Family Scheme or Homes for Ukraine route are not sponsored migrants. Their right to work arises directly from their immigration permission and is not linked to employer sponsorship. As a result, employers do not need to hold a sponsor licence to employ individuals working lawfully under these routes.

Where sponsorship is not required, employers do not need to assign a Certificate of Sponsorship, meet Skilled Worker salary or skill thresholds or report employment activity through the Sponsor Management System (SMS). Employment can proceed in the same way as for other unsponsored workers, provided a compliant right to work check is carried out and retained.

However, the absence of sponsorship does not reduce immigration compliance exposure. UKVI enforcement action for illegal working applies equally to sponsored and unsponsored workers. Employers who assume that humanitarian routes fall outside enforcement scrutiny are particularly exposed, as UKVI routinely identifies Ukrainian nationals during right to work audits and civil penalty investigations.

2. When sponsorship may still become relevant

Although sponsorship is not required at the point of recruitment, it may become relevant later in the employment lifecycle. Ukraine-related permission is time-limited, and not all individuals will be able to extend or transition automatically under future policy changes. Employers relying on Ukrainian nationals to fill long-term or business-critical roles should therefore assess sponsorship viability early.

This requires employers to consider whether the role meets Skilled Worker eligibility requirements, whether salary thresholds can be sustained and whether the organisation is willing to accept the compliance obligations that sponsorship brings. Where an employer does not hold a sponsor licence, dependency on Ukrainian nationals can create a future recruitment cliff edge if permission expires and sponsorship is not available.

Continuing to employ an individual after unsponsored permission has expired constitutes illegal working, regardless of commercial pressure or humanitarian intent. UKVI enforcement does not accept workforce disruption as a justification for non-compliance.

3. Sponsor licence risk exposure for mixed workforces

For employers that already hold a sponsor licence, employing Ukrainian nationals introduces additional compliance risk. While Ukrainian nationals are not sponsored workers, UKVI does not assess workforces in silos. During a compliance visit, officers may review right to work practices across the entire organisation, including unsponsored employees.

Weak right to work controls identified in relation to Ukrainian nationals can undermine UKVI’s confidence in an employer’s overall compliance culture, increasing the risk of sponsor licence enforcement action such as suspension or revocation. This risk is amplified where employers also fail to understand or apply sponsor duties correctly.

Employers should therefore treat Ukrainian nationals as unsponsored workers for immigration purposes while applying sponsor-level compliance standards to right to work checks, record-keeping and internal audits. Over-reporting unsponsored workers via the SMS can itself signal a lack of understanding and create unnecessary regulatory exposure.

Section Summary

UK employers do not need a sponsor licence to employ Ukrainian nationals working under Ukraine-related immigration permission. However, sponsorship may become relevant where permission expires and long-term employment is intended. For sponsor licence holders, failures involving unsponsored Ukrainian nationals can still trigger licence enforcement action where UKVI identifies systemic right to work compliance weaknesses.

Section C: How should employers carry out right to work checks for Ukrainian nationals?

Right to work compliance is the primary enforcement mechanism used by UK Visas and Immigration against employers. For Ukrainian nationals, this is also where most employer errors arise. Temporary humanitarian routes, changing documentation formats and the move to digital status have increased complexity, but the legal standard applied by UKVI remains strict. Employers are assessed on whether the prescribed process was followed, not on intent or mitigating circumstances.

In enforcement terms, right to work failures involving Ukrainian nationals are treated no differently from any other case of illegal working. Employers must therefore apply the same level of rigour, documentation discipline and audit readiness.

1. What the law requires: prescribed right to work checks in 2026

UK law requires employers to carry out a prescribed right to work check before employment begins. This obligation applies equally to Ukrainian nationals and all other non-UK nationals. There is no relaxation of the law because an individual entered the UK under a humanitarian route.

By 2026, the Home Office online checking service is the compliance norm for verifying the right to work of Ukrainian nationals. Most individuals now hold digital immigration status in the form of an eVisa. Employers must obtain a valid right to work share code from the individual and verify their status online, ensuring that the permission allows the specific type of work being offered.

Manual document checks are now limited to specific scenarios permitted by Home Office guidance and should not be treated as a routine fallback. UKVI enforcement teams increasingly regard incorrect reliance on manual checks as a high-risk compliance failure. A check carried out using the wrong method, at the wrong time or without proper evidence does not establish a statutory excuse.

2. Managing time-limited permission and follow-up checks

Ukraine-related immigration permission is time-limited. Where an employee has time-limited permission to work, the employer must carry out a follow-up right to work check before that permission expires. Failure to do so is one of the most common triggers for civil penalties.

Employers should implement systems that accurately record visa expiry dates and trigger action well in advance. Reliance on informal reminders or employee disclosures is a frequent failure point. UKVI expects employers to demonstrate proactive monitoring, particularly where Ukrainian nationals form part of a wider non-UK workforce.

Where an employee has applied for further permission and their status cannot be confirmed through the online service, employers may need to use the Employer Checking Service to obtain a Positive Verification Notice. This provides a time-limited statutory excuse only. Continuing employment beyond the validity of a verification notice, or without confirmation, removes protection against enforcement action.

3. Evidence retention and audit readiness

Carrying out a right to work check is only part of compliance. Employers must also retain clear and accurate records showing how and when the check was conducted. For online checks, this includes retaining a copy of the Home Office profile page confirming the individual’s right to work, together with the date of the check.

UKVI enforcement action frequently turns on record-keeping failures rather than the underlying immigration status. Inability to produce evidence during an audit can result in penalties even where the individual held valid permission at the time.

For Ukrainian nationals, this risk is heightened by changes in documentation over time. Employers should ensure that records reflect the most recent check and that expired or superseded evidence is not relied upon. Internal audits and spot checks are critical, particularly for organisations employing both sponsored and unsponsored workers.

Section Summary

Employers must carry out prescribed right to work checks for Ukrainian nationals using the correct method, retain evidence and monitor time-limited permission through follow-up checks. Online checks using share codes and eVisas are now the compliance standard. Failures in process or record-keeping expose employers to civil penalties, sponsor licence risk and wider enforcement action.

Section D: What are the penalties and enforcement risks if employers get it wrong?

Employers often underestimate the enforcement consequences of immigration non-compliance, particularly where Ukrainian nationals are involved. UKVI does not apply a reduced enforcement standard because an individual entered the UK under a humanitarian route. In practice, right to work failures involving Ukrainian nationals are assessed in exactly the same way as any other case of illegal working.

UKVI enforcement action is risk-based and increasingly focused on systemic weaknesses rather than isolated errors. Employers who cannot demonstrate robust right to work controls, escalation procedures and audit readiness are more likely to face penalties and wider regulatory scrutiny.

1. Civil penalties for illegal working

Where an employer employs an individual who does not have the right to work, or fails to carry out a prescribed right to work check, the Home Office may impose a civil penalty. Civil penalties operate on a strict liability basis. This means that intent, humanitarian motivation or lack of awareness does not prevent enforcement action where a statutory excuse has not been established.

The level of penalty depends on several factors, including whether this is a first or repeat breach, the employer’s compliance history and whether mitigating steps were taken. UKVI will also assess whether failures were isolated or indicative of wider systemic non-compliance. Detailed guidance is set out in the Home Office civil penalty regime, including the circumstances in which penalties may be increased or reduced: see civil penalties for illegal working.

For Ukrainian nationals, civil penalties most commonly arise where employers continue employment after permission expiry without carrying out a follow-up check. Assumptions that an application has been made or that transitional arrangements apply do not preserve the statutory excuse unless verified through the correct Home Office process.

2. Criminal liability for knowing employment

In more serious cases, criminal liability may arise. This occurs where an employer knowingly employs an individual who does not have the right to work, or has reasonable cause to believe that the individual is working illegally. The criminal threshold is higher than for civil penalties and prosecutions are generally reserved for aggravated or deliberate breaches.

Indicators that can contribute to criminal exposure include internal warnings about visa expiry, inconsistent or clearly invalid documentation and decisions to continue employment despite clear compliance risks. Conviction can result in imprisonment of up to five years and an unlimited fine. Directors and senior managers may also face personal liability where consent, connivance or neglect can be established. Further guidance on offence thresholds is available under the Home Office illegal working framework: see illegal working offences.

Employers should be clear that commercial necessity or humanitarian concern does not justify knowingly breaching immigration law. UKVI enforcement does not accept business disruption as a defence to criminal non-compliance.

3. Reputational, regulatory and sponsor licence consequences

Beyond fines and criminal sanctions, immigration non-compliance can trigger significant regulatory and reputational consequences. Employers who hold a sponsor licence are particularly exposed. Evidence of illegal working or systemic right to work failures can result in sponsor licence suspension or revocation, even where the affected workers were not sponsored migrants.

Loss of a sponsor licence can have immediate operational consequences, including curtailment of sponsored workers’ visas and the inability to recruit overseas staff. UKVI routinely assesses illegal working investigations alongside sponsor compliance. Employers should therefore understand how illegal working findings can escalate into licence action: see sponsor licence suspension and revocation.

Reputational damage is a further consequence. The Home Office has the power to publicly name employers who have employed illegal workers. For organisations operating in regulated sectors or competing for contracts, enforcement publicity can undermine trust, commercial relationships and regulatory confidence.

Section Summary

Immigration non-compliance exposes employers to civil penalties, criminal liability in serious cases and significant reputational and regulatory damage. For sponsor licence holders, right to work failures involving Ukrainian nationals can escalate into licence enforcement action. UKVI enforcement focuses on systemic compliance weaknesses rather than humanitarian intent.

Section E: What HR and workforce risks should employers actively manage?

Employing Ukrainian nationals under temporary immigration arrangements creates a distinct set of HR and workforce risks that extend beyond basic right to work compliance. While immigration permission may allow employment, failure to integrate immigration controls into workforce planning, recruitment governance and role design can expose employers to operational disruption, discrimination claims and regulatory action.

UKVI increasingly expects employers to demonstrate that immigration risk is actively managed as part of wider governance and compliance systems, particularly where non-UK nationals make up a material part of the workforce.

1. Workforce continuity and visa expiry risk

The most significant workforce risk arises from the time-limited nature of Ukraine-related immigration permission. Employers who integrate Ukrainian nationals into business-critical roles without planning for visa expiry expose the organisation to sudden loss of skills, service disruption and rushed decision-making that can lead to illegal working.

Employers should ensure that HR systems accurately record immigration expiry dates and trigger action well in advance. This includes engaging with employees about future immigration intentions, assessing whether sponsorship is viable and deciding whether alternative resourcing strategies are required. Leaving these decisions until permission is close to expiry significantly increases compliance risk.

UKVI enforcement experience shows that illegal working frequently arises through inaction rather than deliberate breach. Where an employee continues working after permission has expired, the employer immediately loses the statutory excuse and becomes exposed to civil penalties and, in serious cases, criminal liability. Employers should therefore treat visa expiry and overstaying risk as a compliance escalation point: see overstaying a visa.

2. Equality, recruitment and discrimination risk

Recruitment presents another area of risk. While many employers wish to support Ukrainian nationals, UK equality law places clear limits on how recruitment and selection decisions can be framed. Employers may welcome applications from Ukrainian nationals, but cannot lawfully restrict recruitment or selection on the basis of nationality alone.

Risk arises where well-intentioned messaging crosses into unlawful discrimination or where selection decisions cannot be objectively justified. Complaints may be brought by unsuccessful candidates and evidence of discriminatory recruitment practices can also undermine an employer’s credibility during UKVI audits. Employers should ensure recruitment criteria are role-based and immigration status is considered only insofar as it affects the legal right to work. Further guidance on lawful recruitment practice is available under discrimination at work principles.

Training and internal guidance are particularly important in decentralised recruitment environments, where line managers may not fully understand the legal boundaries. Failure to manage this risk can result in employment tribunal claims alongside immigration enforcement exposure.

3. Qualification recognition and regulated roles

For Ukrainian nationals working in regulated professions, immigration permission alone is not sufficient. Employers must ensure that professional qualifications are recognised and that any required registrations or licences are in place before employment begins.

Risk arises where employers assume that permission to work equates to fitness to practise. In sectors such as healthcare, education, engineering or financial services, employing an individual without the necessary professional recognition can result in regulatory breaches, contractual failures and reputational harm.

Employers should also consider how qualification recognition interacts with future immigration planning. Where sponsorship may be required, the role and the individual’s credentials must meet sponsorship eligibility requirements. Failure to assess this early can make sponsorship impossible when permission expires, forcing termination or unlawful continuation of employment.

Section Summary

Employing Ukrainian nationals creates workforce continuity, equality and regulatory risks that must be actively managed. Time-limited permission, recruitment discrimination and qualification recognition are common failure points. Employers who integrate immigration compliance into HR strategy and workforce planning are better positioned to avoid enforcement action and maintain operational stability.

FAQs: Employing Ukrainian nationals in the UK

Can UK employers employ Ukrainian nationals without a sponsor licence?
Yes. Where a Ukrainian national holds valid immigration permission under a Ukraine-related route that allows work, an employer does not need a sponsor licence. However, sponsorship may become relevant if that permission expires and the employer wishes to continue employment under a sponsored route.

Do Ukrainian nationals automatically have the right to work in the UK?
No. Ukrainian nationality alone does not confer a right to work. The individual must hold valid, current immigration permission that expressly permits employment. Employers must verify this through a prescribed right to work check before employment begins.

Are Ukrainian nationals classed as refugees under UK immigration law?
In most cases, no. Ukrainian nationals admitted under the Ukraine Family Scheme or Homes for Ukraine hold temporary humanitarian immigration permission outside the asylum system. They do not have refugee status unless formally recognised following an asylum claim.

What right to work checks should employers carry out for Ukrainian nationals in 2026?
In most cases, employers should use the Home Office online right to work checking service using a share code, as Ukrainian nationals are now typically issued with digital immigration status in the form of an eVisa. Manual checks should only be used where expressly permitted by Home Office guidance.

What happens when a Ukrainian employee’s immigration permission expires?
If permission expires and no further lawful status is confirmed, the employer must stop employing the individual immediately. Continuing employment after expiry constitutes illegal working, even if an application has been submitted but not verified.

Can employers continue employing Ukrainian nationals while an application is pending?
Only where the employer has obtained confirmation from the Home Office, usually via the Employer Checking Service, in the form of a Positive Verification Notice. This provides a time-limited statutory excuse and must be monitored carefully.

Can employers prioritise Ukrainian nationals during recruitment?
Employers may welcome applications from Ukrainian nationals but cannot lawfully restrict recruitment or selection on the basis of nationality alone. Recruitment decisions must be objective, role-based and compliant with UK equality law.

Do Ukrainian nationals have the same employment rights as other workers?
Yes. Once lawfully employed, Ukrainian nationals are entitled to the same statutory employment rights as other workers, including national minimum wage and working time protections, subject to their employment status.

Are sponsor licence holders exposed to additional risk when employing Ukrainian nationals?
Yes. Although Ukrainian nationals may be unsponsored, right to work failures can undermine UKVI’s confidence in an employer’s overall compliance culture and trigger sponsor licence enforcement action.

What is the most common compliance mistake employers make?
The most common failure is not monitoring time-limited immigration permission and missing follow-up right to work checks, leading to illegal working after permission expiry.

Conclusion

Employing Ukrainian nationals in the UK is not a discretionary or informal exercise. It is a regulated activity governed by the Immigration Rules, right to work legislation and UKVI enforcement practice. While Ukraine-related immigration routes were introduced as humanitarian measures, employers remain fully subject to the same compliance standards, penalties and licence risks that apply across the wider UK immigration system.

For employers, the central compliance challenge is not whether Ukrainian nationals can work, but whether their immigration permission has been verified, monitored and managed correctly throughout the employment lifecycle. Time-limited permission, evolving digital status records and workforce dependency all create points of failure where well-intentioned employers can quickly move into non-compliance. UKVI enforcement does not accommodate assumption, delay or reliance on outdated guidance.

From a strategic perspective, immigration compliance should be treated as a core workforce risk issue. Employers should integrate right to work checks into governance frameworks, plan proactively for visa expiry, understand when sponsorship may become necessary and ensure recruitment practices remain lawful and defensible. Sponsor licence holders must be particularly vigilant, as failures involving unsponsored Ukrainian nationals can still result in licence suspension or revocation.

Organisations best placed to withstand audit and enforcement scrutiny are those that embed immigration controls into HR decision-making rather than treating them as administrative formalities. In the context of employing Ukrainian nationals, this means clear ownership of compliance, accurate record-keeping, forward planning and timely escalation where immigration status is uncertain.

Handled correctly, employers can lawfully employ Ukrainian nationals while protecting their business from civil penalties, criminal liability and reputational damage. Handled poorly, even a single oversight can expose the organisation to enforcement action with lasting operational and regulatory consequences.

Glossary

Useful Links