An Auckland company has been ordered by the Employment Relations Authority to pay back the $45,000 it charged a migrant worker for a job.
In condemning the "serious exploitation", a Labour Inspectorate investigator said: "A person who came here seeking a new life was charged a significant sum for a work opportunity that should have been free."
The company, 7 Solutions Limited – trading as a lawn maintenance business – has also been penalised $16,000. Its sole director, Kamal Jeet Singh, was also ordered to pay a further $8000 to the worker.
Employment Relations Authority member Simon Greening determined that, should the company be unable to repay the $44,750 premium demanded for the job, Singh would be personally liable for the amount.
Greening found the demanded payments breached the Wages Protection Act 1983, which prohibited employers from charging workers premiums to secure employment.
Payments funnelled through intermediaries
The worker travelled to New Zealand from India in August 2023 after being offered work by Singh, who told him he could arrange a job and work visa – but payment was required.
The worker then made payments totalling to $44,750, which was facilitated through various people connected to the director. The worker was employed by 7 Solutions Limited between September 25, 2023, and September 1, 2024.
The Labour Inspectorate was alerted when the worker lodged a complaint.
The ensuing investigation found evidence of the payments through bank records, WhatsApp communications, and witness testimony.
Greening rejected claims the payments were family loans or unrelated transactions.
It was found the payments were directly linked to securing employment with 7 Solutions Limited as the director had requested the payments; the timing of the payments aligned with the worker’s visa application and job offer; and the total amount closely matched sums discussed in messages between the parties, the FMA said.
Although some payments were made to third parties, Greening found the company had effectively received the money through “constructive possession” due to the director’s knowledge and control.
Greening added the company breached the law by both seeking and receiving unlawful premiums.
'Serious exploitation of a migrant'
Labour Inspectorate investigations manager for the northern region, Katriona Ikenasio, said the case was a "serious exploitation of a migrant worker" and charging workers for jobs is illegal and had no place in New Zealand.
"Workers in New Zealand are protected by minimum employment standards, regardless of their visa status."
Ikenasio said premiums represented one of the most egregious forms of exploitation.
“They prey on the vulnerability of migrants, both offshore and onshore, who often rely heavily on the advice and direction of employers and agents to secure employment or visas.
"In this case, the complainant transferred funds through multiple intermediaries at the direction of the company director, demonstrating a deliberate and calculated strategy."
Ikenasio added the conduct "reflects a clear message of the inherent power imbalance in employment relationships, allowing employers to exploit both individuals and regulatory systems for their own gain".
"Enforcement outcomes in cases like this are intended to act as a strong deterrent. The Labour Inspectorate will not hesitate to utilise the full extent of its enforcement powers to hold those engaged in this type of offending accountable."
SHARE ME