Penal labour in the United Kingdom

{{further|Penal Servitude Act}}

File:Pentonville Prison Treadmill 1895.jpg, London, 1895]]

Imprisonment with hard labour was first introduced into English law with the Criminal Law Act 1776 (16 Geo. 3. c. 43),{{cite web

|url=http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/rd/8a353961-049c-4507-8b50-0db0fbb85da2

|title=Public Act, 16 George III, c. 43

|publisher=The National Archives

|access-date=12 June 2016}} also known as the "Hulks Act", which authorised prisoners being put to work on improving the navigation of the River Thames in lieu of transportation to the North American colonies, which had become impossible due to the American War of Independence.{{cite web

|url=https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/Punishment.jsp#new-forms-of-punishment

|title=Crime and Justice – Punishments at the Old Bailey

|last1=Emsley

|first1=Clive

|last2=Hitchcock

|first2=Tim

|last3=Shoemaker

|first3=Robert

|date=March 2015

|website=www.oldbaileyonline.org

|publisher=Old Bailey Proceedings Online

|access-date=12 June 2016}}

The Penal Servitude Act 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 99),long titled "An Act to substitute, in certain Cases, other Punishment in lieu of Transportation",[http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1896/act/14/enacted/en/print Short Titles Act 1853] substituted penal servitude for transportation to a distant British colony, except in cases where a person could be sentenced to transportation for life or for a term not less than fourteen years. Section 2 of the Penal Servitude Act 1857 (20 & 21 Vict. c. 3)[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/20-21/3/section/2 Section 2] of the Penal Servitude Act 1857 abolished the sentence of transportation in all cases and provided that in all cases a person who would otherwise have been liable to transportation would be liable to penal servitude instead. Section 1 of the Penal Servitude Act 1891[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/54-55/69/section/1 Section 1] of the Penal Servitude Act 1891 makes provision for enactments which authorise a sentence of penal servitude but do not specify a maximum duration. It must now be read subject to section 1(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1948.

Sentences of penal servitude were served in convict prisons and were controlled by the Home Office and the Prison Commissioners. After sentencing, convicts would be classified according to the seriousness of the offence of which they were convicted and their criminal record. First time offenders would be classified in the Star class; persons not suitable for the Star class, but without serious convictions would be classified in the intermediate class. Habitual offenders would be classified in the Recidivist class. Care was taken to ensure that convicts in one class did not mix with convicts in another.

Penal servitude included hard labour as a standard feature. Although it was prescribed for severe crimes (e.g. rape, attempted murder, wounding with intent, by the Offences against the Person Act 1861) it was also widely applied in cases of minor crime, such as petty theft and vagrancy, as well as victimless behaviour deemed harmful to the fabric of society. Notable recipients of hard labour under British law include the prolific writer Oscar Wilde (after his conviction for gross indecency), imprisoned in Reading Gaol.

Labour was sometimes useful. In Inveraray Jail from 1839 prisoners worked up to ten hours a day. Most male prisoners made herring nets or picked oakum (Inveraray was a busy herring port); those with skills were often employed where their skills could be used, such as shoemaking, tailoring or joinery. Female prisoners picked oakum, knitted stockings or sewed.{{cite web |url=http://www.inverarayjail.co.uk/the-jails-story/life-in-jail.aspx |title=Inveraray Jail and County Court, Life in Jail |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150212220425/http://www.inverarayjail.co.uk/the-jails-story/life-in-jail.aspx |archive-date=12 February 2015 }} Semi-punitive labour also included oakum-picking: teasing apart old tarry rope to make caulking material for sailing vessels.

Forms of labour for punishment included the treadmill, shot drill, and the crank machine.

Treadmills for punishment were used for decades in British prisons beginning in 1818; they often took the form of large paddle wheels some 20 feet in diameter with 24 steps around a six-foot cylinder. Prisoners had to work six or more hours a day, climbing the equivalent of 5,000 to 14,000 vertical feet. While the purpose was mainly punitive, the mills could have been used to grind grain, pump water, or operate a ventilation system.{{cite book|last=Thompson|first=Irene|title=The A-Z of Punishment and Torture|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=y-1MSMxWekQC&pg=PT134|publisher=BeWrite Books|isbn=978-1-906609-43-6|page=134}}

Shot drill involved stooping without bending the knees, lifting a heavy cannonball slowly to chest height, taking three steps to the right, replacing it on the ground, stepping back three paces, and repeating, moving cannonballs from one pile to another.

The crank machine was a device which turned a crank by hand which in turn forced four large cups or ladles through sand inside a drum, doing nothing useful. Male prisoners had to turn the handle 6,000–14,400 times over the period of six hours a day (1.5–3.6 seconds per turn), as registered on a dial. The warder could make the task harder by tightening an adjusting screw.

File:Convict labourers in Australia in the early 20th century.jpg

The British penal colonies in Australia between 1788 and 1868 provide a major historical example of convict labour, as described above: during that period, Australia received thousands of transported convict labourers, many of whom had received harsh sentences for minor misdemeanours in Britain or Ireland.

As late as 1885, 75% of all prison inmates were involved in some sort of productive endeavour, mostly in private contract and leasing systems. By 1935, the portion of prisoners working had fallen to 44%, and almost 90% of those worked in state-run programmes rather than for private contractors.{{Cite journal |last=Reynolds |first=Morgan O. |author-link=Morgan Reynolds |year=1994|title=Using the Private Sector to Deter Crime|publisher=National Center for Policy Analysis |journal=Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies |volume=19 |issue=2 |page=33 |url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/636fd003fb31089403a2c13c7fab7799/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1819661}}

File:Coldbath-fields-oakum-room-mayhew-p301.jpg in London, circa 1864]]

Penal servitude was abolished for England and Wales by section 1(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1948.[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/11-12/58/section/1 section 1(1)] of the Criminal Justice Act 1948 Every enactment conferring power on a court to pass a sentence of penal servitude in any case must be construed as conferring power to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding the maximum term of penal servitude for which a sentence could have been passed in that case immediately before the commencement of that Act.

Imprisonment with hard labour was abolished by section 1(2) of that Act.

Penal servitude was abolished in Scotland by section 16(1) of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1949 on 12 June 1950, and imprisonment with hard labour was abolished by section 16(2) of the act.{{Cite legislation UK

|type=act

|year= 1949

|chapter= 94

|act= Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act

|date=1949-12-16

|accessdate= 2024-07-08}}

Every enactment conferring power on a court to pass a sentence of penal servitude in any case must be construed as conferring power to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding the maximum term of penal servitude for which a sentence could have been passed in that case immediately before 12 June 1950. But this does not empower any court, other than the High Court, to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding three years.{{Cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1975 |chapter=21 |section221 |act=Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act|date=1975-05-08 |accessdate=2024-07-08 }}{{Cite legislation UK |type=act |year=1995 |chapter=21 |section=307(4) |act=Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act|date=1975-05-08 |accessdate=2024-07-08 }}

Penal servitude was abolished for Northern Ireland by section 1(1) of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1953.{{Cite legislation UK

|type=act

|year= 1953

|chapter= 14

|act= Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland)

|section=1

|date= 1953-05-05

|accessdate=2024-07-08 }} Every enactment which operated to empower a court to pass a sentence of penal servitude in any case now operates so as to empower that court to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding the maximum term of penal servitude for which a sentence could have been passed in that case immediately before the commencement of that Act.

Imprisonment with hard labour was abolished by section 1(2) of that Act.

According to section 45(1) of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998,[https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/39/section/45 Section 45] of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 prisoners are excluded from the national minimum wage. According to §2.7.2 of Prison Service Order 4460 prisoners are released on temporary facility licence to undertake work for outside employers, they will not qualify for the national minimum wage.{{cite web | author1 = HM Prison Service | author-link = HM Prison Service | title = Prisoners' Pay | website = GOV.UK | publisher = HM Prison Service | date = January 27, 2020 | url = https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f9c35c6d3bf7f03a7a99135/pso-4460-prisoners-pay.pdf | access-date = June 19, 2024}} 30px Text was copied from this source, which is available under an [http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/ Open Government Licence v3.0]. © Crown copyright.

According to section 2(1) of the Prisoners' Earnings Act 1996, the government is entitled to apply deductions and levies on the earnings of prisoners in respect of work carried by the prisoner during his period of detention.

Likewise, asylum seekers were in 2014, being paid at most £1.25.{{cite web | last1 = Miller | first1 = Phil | title = True scale of captive migrant labour revealed | website = Corporate Watch | publisher = BASE Community Co-operative | date = August 22, 2014 | url = https://corporatewatch.org/true-scale-of-captive-migrant-labour-revealed/ | access-date = June 19, 2024 | quote = The majority of detainees were only paid £1 an hour, with some paid £1.25 for certain jobs.}} In 2023, asylum seekers were still being paid £1 per week, and by this point no prisoners were on the wage for "special projects" of up to £1.25 per week.{{cite web | last1 = Barton | first1 = Jack | title = Home Office paying asylum seekers £1 an hour to clean detention centres | website = openDemocracy | date = February 23, 2023 | publisher = HM Chief Inspector of Prisons | url = https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/home-office-immigration-detainees-paid-1-pound-hour-wage-exploitation-uk/ | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = There is plainly a link between the work undertaken by detainees and the potential for a reduction in the centre operators’ overheads.}}

The independent monitoring for HMP Belmarsh has continued to question the efficacy of the work "opportunities" provided there.{{cite web | author1 = Independent Monitoring Board for HMP Belmarshs | title = Annual Report of the Independent Monitoring Board at HMP Belmarsh: For reporting year 1 July 2022 – 30 June 2023 | website = Independent Monitoring Boards | date = October 25, 2023 | url =https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/13/2023/10/Belmarsh-IMB-2022-2023-annual-report-1.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = The Board has continued to question the efficacy of the work opportunities provided at Belmarsh. While new initiatives abound, they do not always materialise for a variety of reasons and sometimes without explanation..}}

According to the independent monitoring board for HMP Thameside and the independent monitoring board for HMP Dovegate, the job opportunities that are available are of low quality.{{cite web | author1 = Independent Monitoring Board for HMP Thameside | title = Annual Report of the Independent Monitoring Board at HMP Thameside: For reporting year 01 July 2022 – 30 June 2023 | website = Independent Monitoring Boards | date = November 22, 2023 | url = https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/13/2023/11/Thameside-IMB-2022-2023-annual-report.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = There is, however, a lack of higher-level, vocational employment opportunities.}}{{cite web | author1 = Independent Monitoring Board for HMP Dovegate | title = Annual Report of the Independent Monitoring Board at HMP Dovegate For reporting year: 1 October 2022 to 30 September 2023 | website = Independent Monitoring Boards | date = March 7, 2024 | url = https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/13/2023/11/Thameside-IMB-2022-2023-annual-report.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote =There are plenty of companies offering packing and uninspiring work, but fewer companies that could provide quality work, who wish to work with prisons.}}

According to the independent monitoring board for HMP Leeds, "much of the work is repetitive" and is restricted due to the "Victorian facilities" in an interview regarding the UK government's management of the prison service of England and Wales.{{cite web | author1 = Independent Monitoring Board for HMP Leeds | title = Annual Report of the Independent Monitoring Board at HMP Leeds: For reporting years January 2021 – December 2022 | website = Independent Monitoring Boards | date = September 6, 2023 | url = https://cloud-platform-e218f50a4812967ba1215eaecede923f.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/sites/13/2023/09/IMB-Leeds-2021-22-annual-report.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = Much of the work is repetitive and opportunities for other contracts for work is limited by the lack of space and the Victorian facilities. }}

Rachel Halford, director of the Women in Prison think tank has said that women in prison are underpaid and this "reinforces the belief they are worthless".{{cite interview | last1 = Halford | first1 = Rachel | interviewer-last1 = Harrison | interviewer-first1 = Karen | title = Where does the prison system go from here? (Special Edition) | website = Centre for Crime and Justice Studies| publisher = Prison Service Journal | url = https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sites/crimeandjustice.org.uk/files/PSJ%20193%2C%20Rachel%20Halford.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = We need more work projects where women get paid properly and pay tax. The money they currently receive is an insult and is degrading; it is like child pocket money. Also for many women in prison it just reinforces their belief that they are worthless.}}

HM Inspectorate for Prisons in Scotland (HMIPS) has noted that there were issues around prisoners missing wages leading to a breakdown between hall staff and the Activities Team.{{cite web | author1 = HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland | title = Independent Prison Monitoring (IPM) Findings - Annual Report - HMP Addiewell | website = HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland | publisher = HM Chief Inspector of Prisons | url = https://prisonsinspectoratescotland.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publication_files/HMIPS%20-%20IPM%20-%20Annual%20Report%20-%20ADDIEWELL%202022-23%20FINAL.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = At the start of the year IPMs heard from a number of prisoners with issues around missing wages or being asked to do jobs they were not cleared for, so they did not get paid. This demonstrated a breakdown between hall staff and the Activities Team. This does seem to have improved during the year though.}}

According to the Criminal Justice Inspection of Northern Ireland report, the application of the progressive regimes and earned privileges scheme (PREPs) in Maghaberry Prison was predominantly "punishment orientated".{{cite web | author1 = Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland | title = Report on an unannounced inspection of Maghaberry Prison: 11–22 May 2015 | website = Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland | date = November 2015 | url = https://www.cjini.org/getattachment/a98fca95-ae81-4443-88cc-1870be44250f/report.aspx | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = The application of the progressive regimes and earned privileges scheme (PREPs) was predominantly punishment orientated.}}

According to the Criminal Justice Inspection of Northern Ireland report Hydebank Wood Young Offender Centre differentiated a prisoner's wages based on certain whether a prisoner was based on PREPS status{{cite web | author1 = Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland | title = Report on an announced inspection of Hydebank Wood Young Offender Centre: 5 – 9 November 2007 | website = Justice Inspectorates | date = March 2008 | publisher = Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland | url = https://www.cjini.org/getattachment/a98fca95-ae81-4443-88cc-1870be44250f/report.aspx | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = All levels received an activity payment of £6, with those on enhanced getting an additional regime payment of £14 and those on standard getting £5. Young people on basic got nothing extra and could have their activity payment reduced from £6 to £4 if they consistently failed to engage in developmental activity. Enhanced young people were allowed a mini-fridge, extra CDs and video games. The number and length of visits and the amount young people could spend on telephone credits were linked to the scheme. This was inappropriate as it penalised families and risked undermining resettlement prospects.}}

In 2019, there were 6 cases of prisoners intentionally failed to "work properly" and were thus punished by a loss of privileges.{{cite web | author1 = Government of Jersey | title = States of Jersey Prison Service: HMP La Moye, Annual Report 2020, 2018 – 2020 | website = GOV.JE | date = May 26, 2021 | publisher = Government of Jersey | url = https://statesassembly.gov.je/assemblyreports/2021/r.93-2021.pdf | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = 2019, 6, Loss of privileges, intentionally fails to work properly}}

The States of Guernsey's website explicitly implies that the system of privileges is designed to encourage prisoners to participate in "mandatory" employment, implying some privileges would be restricted if a prisoner refuses to participate.{{cite web | author1 = States of Guernsey | title = Custody | website = GOV.GG | publisher = Bailiwick of Guernsey | url = https://gov.gg/prison-custody | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = The system of privileges aims to encourage responsible behaviour in prisoners; to encourage effort and achievement in work and other constructive activity; to encourage sentenced prisoners to take an active part in their rehabilitation and engage in positive sentence management and benefit from activities designed to reduce reoffending; to help prison staff or other prisoners, and to create a disciplined, controlled and safer custodial environment for prisoners, staff and visitors. ... Guernsey Prison is a working Prison, and all prisoners are required to be engaged in employment and/or education unless otherwise exempt.}}

Access to enhanced privileges, requires having a high enough "work ethic".{{cite web | author1 = Isle of Man Government | title = Addressing behaviour in custody | website = GOV.IM | publisher = Isle of Man Government | url = https://www.gov.im/about-the-government/departments/home-affairs/isle-of-man-prison-and-probation-service/addressing-behaviour-in-custody/ | access-date = June 20, 2024 | quote = Prisoners, whose continued standard of behaviour, attitude and work ethic is exceptionally good, can be rewarded by attaining enhanced Level.}}

{{Reflist}}

Category:Penal system in the United Kingdom

United Kingdom