Four Square in Thames penalised after migrants paid for employment

A Thames Four Square and its owner have been ordered by the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) to pay $44,000 in penalties after requiring two migrant workers to pay a total of $120,000 in unlawful premiums to secure their jobs.

ERA Member Helen van Druten ordered A Dharni Enterprises Ltd, trading as Four Square Martina, to pay a penalty of $32,000 and its sole director, Jaswinder Singh, to pay a further $12,000. The two workers will each receive $1,000 from the company's penalty. The $120,000 paid in premiums had already been repaid to the workers by the company before the ERA hearing.

In addition to the penalties, A Dharni Enterprises Ltd and Mr Singh were jointly ordered to pay more than $7,000 in costs to the Labour Inspectorate.

"There is absolutely no place in New Zealand for employers seeking payment in exchange for jobs. Migrant workers have the same employment rights and protections as all other workers, regardless of where they come from," Labour Inspectorate Migrant Exploitation Manager Natalie Gardiner said

The case followed a Labour Inspectorate investigation that began after the workers complained about the premiums in September 2023. The matter was initially investigated by Immigration Compliance and Investigations before being referred to the Labour Inspectorate for further action.

The successful outcome reflects the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment's (MBIE's) integrated compliance approach, with specialist teams working together to identify potential breaches, share information and expertise, and take coordinated enforcement action.

In its findings, the ERA determined the workers had effectively funded their own wages.

“Effectively, A Dharni Enterprises Ltd used the premiums to pay the employees’ own wages,” Ms van Druten said.

She found the arrangement gave A Dharni Enterprises Ltd a financial advantage by freeing up company funds that would otherwise have been used to pay wages.

Ms van Druten also found the workers were particularly vulnerable because their visas were tied to their employer and they were new to New Zealand.

The two workers, who each paid $60,000 to secure employment, had family ties to Mr Singh and entered New Zealand on Accredited Employer Work Visas (AEWV) in July and August 2023.

The money was paid in India in seven instalments. The workers were employed by the business only briefly before leaving after Mr Singh believed they had misrepresented their English-language ability during the recruitment process.

The Labour Inspectorate said its investigation was complex, requiring inspectors to contact witnesses in India, where the payments were made, establish the role of intermediaries who facilitated the transactions, and demonstrate a link between the payments and the workers' employment. The investigation also involved reviewing employment records and Immigration New Zealand documentation.

Labour Inspectorate Investigations Manager (Northern) Katriona Ikenasio said the agency had a longstanding history of engaging with Four Square franchisor Foodstuffs NZ and the wider supermarket sector to promote understanding of employment standards and support sustainable compliance.

“Sector engagement does not replace accountability; it helps build awareness of obligations while ensuring employers remain responsible for meeting them.

“Enforcement outcomes like this one provide valuable opportunities for employers and industry bodies to reflect on their own systems and strengthen workplace practices.”

Labour Inspectorate Migrant Exploitation Manager Natalie Gardiner said demanding money from migrant workers in exchange for employment was a serious breach of employment standards.

"In this case, 2 workers were required to hand over a total of $120,000 for the promise of employment and the prospect of building a life in New Zealand. These unlawful premiums placed significant financial pressure on the workers and their families and undermined the integrity of New Zealand's immigration and employment systems,” Ms Gardiner said.

She said although the premiums had been repaid, repayment only occurred after the Labour Inspectorate became involved.

Correction: The feature image accompanying this article has been updated to reflect the correct location