Holland & Barrett and Centrica are amongst 491 employers who have been named and shamed for failing to pay their employees at least the National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage.
National Minimum Wage: Named And Shamed
491 employers have been named and shamed by the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) for a variety of breaches of their legal obligation to pay their employees at least the National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage.
The latest list of those who failed to pay the National Minimum Wage and the National Living Wage includes many very well known employers, including Holland & Barrett and Centrica (parent company of British Gas).
Approximately 42,000 workers were found to have been underpaid around £6 million by the 491 employers named and shamed, with those employers named being fined over £10 million for breaches of the National Minimum Wage and the National Living Wage
The Top 10
The top 10 of the 591 employers named and shamed on the list of those who failed to pay the National Minimum Wage and the National Living Wage, were as follows:-
- Euro Garages Limited – 3,317 employees were underpaid a total £824,383.62
- Red Contract Solutions (Back Office Support) Ltd – owed £652,395.20 in back pay to 11,631 workers
- CSG FM Limited – 467 workers were underpaid a total of £529,083.65
- Adecco UK Ltd – £436,877.95 was owed in back pay to 3,356 workers
- Avis Budget UK Limited – 477 workers were underpaid a total of £432,035.46
- Genting Casinos UK Limited – £303,936.69 was owed as back pay to 1,583 workers
- Go Outdoors Retail Limited – 2,058 workers were underpaid a total £240,105.62
- Centrica PLC – £167,814.69 was owed in back pay to 356 workers
- Holland & Barrett Retail Ltd – 2,551 workers were underpaid a total of £153,079.29
- CC33 FS Limited – £81,016.88 was owed in back pay to 462 workers
Increased Regularity
The Government confirmed back on the 10th October 2024 that it intends to name and shame those employers who fail to pay at least the National Living Wage and National Minimum Wage more regularly. It stated: "The National Minimum Wage Naming Scheme remains a key deterrent to employers breaking minimum wage law. The Naming Scheme highlights non-compliant employers by publicly exposing their breaches and promoting their future compliance to deter other businesses from underpaying the minimum wage. The naming scheme also aims to increase compliance by publishing an educational bulletin tailored to the areas of non-compliance for that particular round."
This latest release is the second set of naming and shaming this year, with the last release back in May 2025. However, that release had been the first since February 2024 (under the previous Government) when 524 employers were named and shamed.
Historical Breaches
Nevertheless, as with the last release, yet again the data appears to relate to historical breaches in relation to the National Minimum Wage and the National Living Wage that go back many years and have long since be rectified by the businesses concerned. One has to wonder why this is being dredged up now? This was not the original purpose behind naming and shaming. That was to publish data relating to recent breaches to shame the guilty into long term compliance. It was not designed to simply embarass those who have long since learned from their mistakes and put things right.
Euro Garages, (aka EG Group), for instance pointed out at that: "These historic payroll issues that took place between 2015 and 2019 have been fully rectified. All affected employees were subsequently reimbursed in full in agreement with HMRC."
Holland & Barrett also pointed out that the issues relating to their breaches were of an historical nature and resolved many years ago, and added that they were "disappointed that naming has occurred over three years after the matter was settled".
Comment
Commenting upon the findings, the business secretary, Peter Kyle, stated: "our Plan to Make Work Pay cracks down on those not playing by the rules". However, much of the data that has been released in the last two instalments of naming and shaming is so old, that is was not this Government cracking down on non-compliance, it was the previous Government. There is next to no evidence contained in these two instalments to back up the assertion that this Government is doing anything at all
Restoring Confidence To The Naming And Shaming Scheme
Whilst the original intention behind naming and shaming employers who breach National Minimum Wage laws is commendable, the current approach risks undermining its original purpose. The scheme was conceived as a timely deterrent, publicly exposing those guilty of recent breaches to encourage immediate compliance and protect workers’ rights. However, by continuing to highlight historical cases that have already been resolved, the impact of this initiative is diluted. Instead of focusing public attention on employers who are currently failing their staff, it casts a shadow over businesses that have since corrected their mistakes and made amends. That does nothing other than damage the economy.
For naming and shaming to be effective, it must return to its roots: shaming only those guilty of recent or ongoing breaches. This not only ensures justice for affected workers but also maintains fairness for businesses that have rectified past errors. Timeliness is crucial; otherwise, the scheme risks being seen as punitive rather than corrective. By restoring the focus upon current offenders, the government can better protect vulnerable workers, incentivise compliance across industries, and uphold the integrity of this important mechanism. Only then will naming and shaming truly serve its intended purpose, shaming the guilty, not simply embarrassing those who have already long since paid their dues.
