A move to make British berry growers pay for the recruitment and travel costs of the seasonal workers they employ could cost the industry £60m a year, a leading figure and former grower has claimed.

Nick Marston, chair of British Berry Growers, said the changes proposed by the Supplier Ethical Data Exchange (SEDEX) to its SMETA 7.0 audit regime could “wipe out the berry sector at a stroke”.

The changes would require farming and growing businesses to pay for the recruitment and transportation fees of their seasonal workers under the ‘employer pays’ principle.

“British berry growers employ thousands of seasonal workers each year to help pick berries and work on our farms,” Nick said. “The new auditing requirements could cost the berry industry an extra £60 million per year. That is simply unsustainable.”

He went on: “The new requirements have been announced without proper consultation and ahead of a British Retail Consortium (BRC) and DEFRA impact assessment into the workability of the employer pays principle.

“That assessment is due to be completed in Spring 2025. Right now, there is no clarity on how the supply chain is going to pay for these new requirements. We are concerned that growers could be forced to foot the bill; a bill they simply cannot afford.

“This new standard has the potential to cause chaos and stress in the berry industry if introduced without appropriate consultation across the whole supply chain.”

British Berry Growers wants the requirement for the employer to pay for travel and visa costs to be removed from the SEDEX proposals and for the BRC to confirm that no action will be taken if suppliers do not meet these targets.

It is also calling for a fair consultation across the whole supply chain. It said in a statement: “In future all farm packhouse assurance schemes should have a mandatory requirement for a proper governance structure which allows for full consultation of all stakeholders that considers all the consequences of the scheme requirements, including both cost and practically.”

The organisation also wants additional costs related to the employer pays principle to be shown separately so that they can be recompensed.

“The burden of the cost cannot be absorbed by our members without the cost being underwritten by either retailers or the Government. There are serious implications for the UK food price inflation and security,” said Nick.