How Employers Should Handle Migration Tensions at Work

Key takeaways

• Migration protests, anti-foreigner pressure and rumours about new rules do not replace South African employment or immigration law. An employer should verify each worker’s actual authority to perform the job, comply with lawful inspections, apply labour standards, prevent and address harassment, and manage genuine safety risks. It should not profile people by name, accent, race or language, hand immigration enforcement to private groups, or dismiss workers because of a crowd demand or proposed policy.
• Separate lawful work authorisation, fair employment treatment, harassment, physical safety and business continuity. Assign responsibility, protect personal documents and obtain advice before an adverse step. Workers should preserve records and report threats without confronting a crowd or surrendering documents to an unauthorised person.

What the 2026 migration tensions change—and what they do not

South Africa experienced anti-immigration protests and related incidents in June 2026. The government’s Inter-Ministerial Committee on Migration stated that immigration enforcement belongs to the state, that unauthorised people may not demand proof of nationality and that intimidation or violence against foreign nationals or citizens is unlawful. It also announced intensified enforcement against immigration and labour violations.

That may increase inspection, safety and employee-relations risk, but does not create a new legal test. A statement, post, protest notice, private demand or proposed quota is not authority to change a contract or remove a worker.

Keep the legal questions separate:

The immigration checklist can help organise status documents and questions. It does not authorise profiling or decide whether a particular document permits the work.

1. Put lawful authority ahead of public pressure

The employer has statutory workforce duties. Section 38 of the Immigration Act prohibits employing an illegal foreigner or a foreigner whose status does not authorise that work. It also requires good-faith status or citizenship checks, prescribed records and specified reporting.

Verification should be private, consistent and role-specific. Use a trained HR, legal or compliance person rather than a public line manager or security guard. Record:

• the legal employer and actual place of work;
• the person’s status or citizenship category relevant to work authority;
• the document type, number, validity period and conditions;
• any employer, occupation, capacity or location restriction;
• the original-inspection or authoritative-verification step;
• renewal evidence and the next review date; and
• any unresolved discrepancy and who must decide it.

Do not assume every non-citizen needs the same document. Permanent residents, recognised refugees, asylum seekers and visa holders have different legal positions. The asylum-seeker permit glossary, General Work Visa glossary and Critical Skills Visa glossary provide orientation; current law and documents control.

Limit collection to what is needed, restrict access and protect copies. Status information can expose a worker to harm if shared carelessly. POPIA does not prevent a lawful employer check, but the purpose, accuracy, access, retention and security of the information must be controlled.

2. Do not turn colleagues into immigration officers

A worker should not be asked to identify “foreign-looking” colleagues, report accents, inspect passports or answer for another person’s status. Those methods are unreliable, invasive and likely to escalate conflict.

Use one controlled procedure for everyone whose right to work requires checking. Record a specific discrepancy—such as a missing expiry page, employer mismatch or unverified renewal—not “staff say this person is illegal”. Give the person a fair opportunity to respond through the designated channel.

If a private person or group arrives at the premises demanding nationality documents:

1. activate the approved security and incident plan;
2. protect staff from confrontation;
3. identify whether any official is present and verify official credentials through an authorised channel;
4. do not disclose employee records to an unauthorised requester;
5. record names, time, demands, conduct, witnesses and available lawful footage; and
6. contact police or emergency services where threats, violence, unlawful entry or property damage arise.

Do not ask a targeted worker to negotiate with the group. Immigration compliance and crowd safety are management responsibilities.

3. Treat protest risk as a safety question, not a nationality question

Section 8 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act requires an employer, as far as reasonably practicable, to maintain a safe working environment. A migration-related protest can create a workplace hazard where it affects entrances, customer areas, employer-controlled transport, work travel or the premises.

Use current, location-specific evidence:

• police, municipal, building-management or verified security information;
• planned route, time and access points;
• prior threats or incidents affecting the site;
• vulnerable entrances, deliveries and public-facing roles;
• emergency exits, assembly points and communication channels;
• staff transport or travel controlled by the employer; and
• the needs of employees who have received targeted threats.

Controls may include access management, adjusted deliveries, a temporary location change, staggered hours, security or justified closure. The lawful option depends on risk, role, contract, consultation and feasibility. Do not order all foreign nationals home or declare all absences unpaid without reviewing the facts and employment rules.

Communicate without political slogans or nationality labels. State the verified risk, affected site or hours, temporary control and next update time.

4. Act on xenophobic or migration-related harassment

The Employment Equity Act prohibits unfair discrimination in employment policies and practices on listed and qualifying arbitrary grounds. The listed grounds include race, ethnic or social origin, colour, culture, language and birth. Harassment related to a prohibited ground is a form of unfair discrimination.

Migration-related conduct may engage those grounds even though “foreign national” is not a uniform legal category. The analysis depends on the conduct, targeting, workplace impact and any genuine work-authorisation requirement.

The 2022 Code of Good Practice on the Prevention and Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace expects employers to prevent and address harassment. Relevant conduct can include:

• threats, slurs, degrading labels or hostile jokes;
• messages or images targeting a person’s perceived origin;
• pressure to disclose private documents publicly;
• exclusion from work, meetings or facilities without a lawful reason;
• customers, suppliers or other third parties harassing staff;
• circulating false allegations that a named worker is undocumented; and
• retaliation after a complaint or participation in an investigation.

Provide another reporting route where the line manager is involved. Preserve the complaint, assess protection, investigate fairly, control retaliation and record the outcome. Do not force confrontation or require proof of immigration status before reporting workplace harm.

The workplace-harassment glossary provides issue and route context without deciding the legal finding.

5. Prepare for lawful inspections without staging a clean-up

Employers should expect greater official scrutiny, but an inspection is not the time to reconstruct records, hide workers or create retrospective documents. Maintain a current file before an inspector arrives.

The inspection protocol should identify:

• who receives officials and verifies credentials;
• who has lawful access to immigration, payroll, time, safety and employment records;
• how confidential records are shown or supplied securely;
• how copies, notices, instructions, questions and deadlines are logged;
• who may answer factual questions and how workers can speak without coaching; and
• when legal advice is required.

Do not obstruct an authorised official, delete records, hide workers, relabel employees or manufacture checks. Do not give workforce files to anyone merely claiming to inspect. Record the official’s identity, authority, requests and receipts.

The Department of Employment and Labour’s June 2026 inspection report confirms that joint operations have examined immigration status alongside BCEA, minimum-wage, occupational-safety, UIF and compensation compliance. A valid status file does not cure underpayment or unsafe work, and a labour-compliant payroll does not cure prohibited employment.

6. Apply labour standards even when status is disputed

Employers may not use a worker’s vulnerability to justify lower pay, excessive hours, withheld earnings or unsafe conditions. In Discovery Health Ltd v CCMA, the Labour Court held that the worker in that case remained an employee for Labour Relations Act purposes despite a work-authorisation problem and could use the unfair-dismissal system. The judgment did not authorise prohibited work; it rejected the idea that an employer could erase labour protection by relying on its own unlawful engagement.

The distinction is essential:

• immigration law can prohibit continued work;
• labour law can still regulate how the employer treats the person and ends employment;
• earned remuneration and statutory claims do not disappear merely because status is disputed; and
• a status problem does not prove dishonesty, misconduct or a fair dismissal.

When authority is uncertain, verify the document, obtain the person’s account, decide whether work may continue, consider feasible interim measures and use a fair process. The unfair-dismissal service page can help identify professional assistance.

7. Separate current law from policy and proposals

Policy, a Bill, an Act, commencement measures and a quota notice are different instruments. Label each source by legal status and date.

Do not:

• cite a proposed quota as a current percentage cap;
• cancel offers or dismiss workers to “prepare” for an unspecified future rule;
• classify permanent residents, refugees, asylum seekers and visa holders as one group;
• use a news headline as evidence of commencement; or
• hide current Immigration Act non-compliance until new legislation arrives.

Current duties remain enforceable. Individual decisions must rest on law in force, the person’s status and fair process.

Employer response file

Keep one dated response file containing:

1. verified government or security updates relied on;
2. site risk assessments and operational decisions;
3. neutral staff communications and acknowledgement records;
4. the controlled work-authorisation register and access log;
5. official inspection credentials, requests, notices and responses;
6. harassment complaints, interim protections, investigation records and outcomes;
7. payroll, time, contract and safety records relevant to a complaint;
8. minutes of consultation with employees, unions or representatives;
9. the legal instrument relied on for any individual distinction; and
10. the owner and review date for unresolved risks.

The employment dispute pack can help a worker or employer organise a chronology and source records after a dispute starts.

What workers should preserve

A worker affected by migration tension should keep lawful copies of:

• the employment contract, job description and payslips;
• the current status document, conditions and renewal evidence;
• employer requests and the documents supplied in response;
• threatening messages, posts or recordings already lawfully received;
• incident dates, locations, witnesses and exact words or conduct;
• internal reports, acknowledgements and outcomes;
• schedule changes, exclusion instructions, suspension or dismissal records; and
• police, medical, union, CCMA or other official reference numbers where applicable.

Do not access another person’s account, provoke a confrontation or circulate identity documents on social media. Report an immediate danger to the appropriate emergency or police channel. Employment discrimination may have a six-month CCMA referral period under section 10 of the Employment Equity Act, while dismissal and other disputes use different periods; confirm the correct forum and trigger promptly.

FAQs

Related Lexuno paths