Principal social workers (PSWs) have said they are “deeply concerned” about the impact of Social Work England’s plan to raise registration fees by 33%.
The Adult Principal Social Worker Network has warned that the proposal risks increasing hardship for social workers and exacerbating workforce instability and retention problems, in a statement responding to the regulator’s plan.
Proposed fee rises
Under the proposal, issued for consultation last month, the fee to join the register, and to annually renew, would rise from £90 to £120 from 1 September 2025.
At the same time, the free to be restored to the register for practitioners who have left would increase from £135 to to £180, while overseas practitioners would face a £670 charge for scrutiny of their application to register in England, up 35% on the current £495.
All three fees would then rise by 1.85% per year up to 2028-29.
How Social Work England justifies plan
Social Work England’s rationale for the proposals is to take account of the higher-than-expected costs it has faced since becoming the profession’s regulator in 2019.
These excess costs have been borne by the taxpayer – via the Department for Education – with registration fees having remained flat, as they have been since 2015.
According to Social Work England, this was “not sustainable over the longer-term given the significant strain on public finances”.
Widespread criticisms from social workers
The plans have been widely criticised by social workers, across social media platforms and on Community Care, with UNISON also coming out in opposition to them.
Meanwhile, the British Association of Social Workers (BASW) and Social Workers Union have voiced concerns about the impact on practitioners, in the light of pressures on the cost of living.
These concerns were echoed by the Adult PSW Network, which said: “Social workers are already facing significant financial pressures due to the ongoing cost of living crisis which makes any additional financial burden particularly difficult to manage.
PSWs’ concerns for low-paid and retention
“An increase in registration fees adds to this strain and may disproportionately impact lower-paid social workers.”
It also highlighted the potentially adverse impact on part-time staff, those with caring responsibilities and practitioners working in the voluntary sector.
The network also warned that any fee increase risked “exacerbating workforce instability”, adding: “Social workers already experience high levels of stress and burnout, with financial pressures adding to their reasons for leaving the profession.
“A fee increase could further deter new entrants and push experienced practitioners out of the workforce.”
Some councils cover the costs to practitioners of their annual registration fees, but the network warned that the proposed rise could lead authorities to cease doing so, in the face of “severe financial deficits”.
Network seeks dialogue with Social Work England
The network said it was “committed to working with Social Work England to explore alternative solutions that support the financial sustainability of regulation without disproportionately impacting social workers”.
It said it was seeking dialogue with the regulator in relation to:
- Ensuring that any increase is proportionate, phased and justified, with clear evidence of improved regulatory functions.
- Engaging stakeholders across the sector to consider a universal reimbursement of fees.
- Exploring alternative funding models that do not place the burden solely on individual registrants.
Respond to the consultation
The consultation on the proposals runs until 13 May 2025; you can take part by filling in this survey or emailing consultation.responses@socialworkengland.org.uk, using the subject line, ‘fees consultation’, to answer the following questions:
- To what extent do you agree that the proposed increases to fees in 2025 to 2026 are reasonable in balancing implications for taxpayers and for social workers?
- To what extent do you agree that the proposed incremental increases to fees from 2026 to 2029 are reasonable in giving clarity about future fees?
- Do you think that the proposed changes to the fees could have a positive or negative impact on people with any of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership and pregnancy and maternity.
Celebrate those who’ve inspired you
Photo by Daniel Laflor/peopleimages.com/ AdobeStock
Do you have a colleague, mentor, or social work figure you can’t help but gush about?
Our My Brilliant Colleague series invites you to celebrate anyone within social work who has inspired you – whether current or former colleagues, managers, students, lecturers, mentors or prominent past or present sector figures whom you have admired from afar.
Nominate your colleague or social work inspiration by filling in our nominations form with a few paragraphs (100-250 words) explaining how and why the person has inspired you.
*Please note that, despite the need to provide your name and role, you or the nominee can be anonymous in the published entry*
If you have any questions, email our community journalist, Anastasia Koutsounia, at anastasia.koutsounia@markallengroup.com
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Oxfordshire County Council 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Webinar: building a practice framework with the influence of practitioner voice 
‘They don’t have to retell their story’: building long-lasting relationships with children and young people 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
How managers are inspiring social workers to progress in their careers 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
My LA reimburses the cost via expenses. So ultimately the tax payer will pay for it anyway. My employer is not alone. I am sure SWE must know this so I think the tax payer argument is disingenuous . They should really have to do more for less – a bit like the rest of us.
It shows that Social Work England does not care about social workers’ wellbeing. This year social workers’ salaries were increased by 1.9% yet SWE is increasing their fee by 35%. Is that justified? I would think they are selfish.
I suggest SWE relocate to a cheaper part of country. We get nothing for our £90. Odd how ccetsw managed (remember them) without such a cost, then Blair syeps in, creates another body to increase state control rather than fund socoal work. Plenty of other careers about where i dont have pay £90 tax to work
Maybe I’m just a little bit dim but I really can’t see where the evidence for the claim by SWE of “higher then expected costs” is. FtP cases might be high but it’s not exactly addressing those in a timely manner is it? SWE doesn’t promote social work, doesn’t promote good practice, doesn’t engage in any positive publicity drives as our regulator. Admittedly it’s HQ is a perhaps a bit costly given most staff seem to work from home but salaries, rent/lease apart what does it spend money on? PSWs would do better and ask the real questions rather than engaging with SWE on how to raise fees more ‘equitably’. If APSW Network were serious about protecting and promoting social workers they would start there. That of course requires independence rather than being part of the cosy club of self affirming buddies.
Matt raises many valid points. Indeed I question the FTP process and its effectiveness. I was recently managed by a manager subject to FTP for domestic abuse toward a female partner for many years. Although he had a formal warning and the LA were aware . It did not stop him managing an all female team and leading Safeguarding investigation into vulnerable adults , some of which involved Domestic abuse . This makes a mockery of the FtP process and sanctioning system . Zero tolerance must be demonstrated to SW in cases such as this .
They have more influence and determination to push for what they want, while we’re just randomly accept some ridiculous offer by the end of the year.
I am yet unsure of the direct impact of SWE on practitioners except for being the regulatory body.
Every aspect of living costs are galloping, unfortunately, increases are unfelt in the final pay that get to the practitioner as deductions gulp them up. Yet, more are being required from them.
Note still, many SWs bear the brunt of the registration fees. Not all have their fees covered by the LA.
I know, I pay my fees out of my pocket.
What justification do they have for increasing the fees? in my opinion, even the £90 was too much to pay and it did not reflect any support that I received from them. Only the stress of the renewal process and nothing else to show for it. Are they aware of the other financial responsibilities on us social workers and the impact on our families? We should have a vote on this.
A large amount of the “higher than expected costs” probably came from their legal costs and the damages which they had to pay Rachel Meade, the gender critical feminist whom an employment tribunal found had been harassed by Social Work England and her employer, Westminster City Council. Social Work England foolishly and uncritically accepted the complaints of a trans rights activist at face value and then foolishly retained the services of a Barrister who appeared to place trans activism ahead of the interests of her client. The whole case was a very expensive charade which undermined the status of the profession. Social Work England have yet to make any kind of statement which recognises the rights of social workers to free speech or which indicates that have learnt lessons.
You know that you can claim the cost back via your tax. It’s a simple form, the link is on the SWE website.
So that makes it a tax payer funded registration fee then doesn’t it?
It is also possible to claim for previous years payments- I am not sure how many. You can also ask for tax relief on books that you bought for your work. You just need to ensure that what you ask for is reasonable and genuine. I didn’t claim for these things for years simply because I couldn’t be bothered and I understand that busy social workers will feel the same. However, if it is recurrent expenditure such as a professional membership you will only need to update them if the fees change.
None of this, however, excuses Social Work England for their poor performance in relation to fitness to practise.
Hi Daniel. I’m aware of the tax relief but not claiming back the entire fee cost. Do you have a link for the claim?
I’d be interested in knowing how many sw have found the registration process in the event of missing the deadline for renewal.
Under the Freedom Of Information Act – Can social workers ask what our fees are used for? I suspect that like most monies, it is banked into some offshore accounts!!
Personally I’m deeply concerned that the only time I get to be reminded that our authority has a PSW is when it’s desperation time over SWE registration. Then we have the visit followed by seemingly never ending briefing notes and emails. Which become ever more hysterical and finally bullying. Over this issue, not a vegan sausage.