The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment has issued 142 immigration employment infringement notices to 139 employers in the past year, as part of New Zealand’s drive to tackle migrant worker mistreatment. The penalties, totalling $431,000, fell heavily on the construction, hospitality, and beauty industries.
Widespread Non-Compliance Across Key Sectors
According to MBIE, several severe cases emerged from the first year of the immigration infringement regime. A mining company received a $27,000 fine for underpaying migrant workers, and a Wellington-based construction firm was penalised $18,000 after five migrants were discovered working in breach of visa rules. There’s also one migrant was also found to be in the country unlawfully.
Non-compliance remains concentrated in industries where migrant labour is common. MBIE reports that the construction, hospitality, and beauty sectors received the bulk of the 142 infringement notices issued, indicating that underpayment and unlawful employment practices are not isolated cases but part of a wider trend.
A New Tool for a Persistent Problem
The Immigration Employment Infringement scheme was designed to target mid- to lower-level immigration offences that previously fell through gaps in enforcement. Introduced to streamline compliance action, the scheme gives officials faster legal tools to address breaches without resorting to lengthy legal processes.
According to Michael Carley, Acting General Manager of Immigration Compliance and Investigations, the approach has already made a difference.
“Before the scheme, there were limited tools for us to use to address lower-level immigration offending,” Carley said. Now, employers can no longer claim they are unaware of the rules of hiring migrants, nor can they rely on their past compliance to escape the consequences. There are serious penalties for those who fail to follow immigration laws.”
Accountability Without Excuses
The removal of plausible deniability is central to the new enforcement framework. Employers are expected to be fully aware of immigration requirements, and those failing to comply—whether through oversight or outdated practices—face penalties.
The scheme enables immigration officials to issue infringements without needing to prove intent, allowing for more immediate enforcement.
Conclusion
MBIE has not announced any formal changes to the enforcement framework, but early results suggest further developments may follow. Infringement notices were recorded across a wide geographic and industry spread, signalling continued oversight and potential for future adjustments.
“The days of lax oversight and minimal consequences for immigration-related employment offences are over,” officials have said. As Carley stated, “There are serious penalties for those who fail to follow immigration laws.” More than $400,000 in fines have already been issued, with efforts now focused on high-risk and repeat offenders.