Sentencing — employee exploitation — Wages Protection Act 1983 — immigration — Holidays Act 2003 — Minimum Wage Act 1983. The defendant appeared for sentence having accepted a sentencing indication on three charges of exploitation of an employee as an employer, failing to pay holiday pay, failing to pay at least minimum wage and contravening the Wages Protection Act 1983. The defendant and his wife established a company to operate as both a hairdressing and massage business and an immigration advisory business. The victim was given a contract and employed to work in the salon. The contract stipulated that the victim would be paid $15 per hour with employment starting upon approval of a work visa. The victim was asked to complete a work visa application and the defendant told him his wife would complete the balance of the application and submit it. The victim started work the next day, was permitted to live in the salon (no mention of accommodation in the contract) and worked 120 days out of the 128 days the victim was at the business, logging 1324 hours. At $15 per hour, that figure would equate to a $19,860 pre-tax wage, however, the total paid to the victim was just $2165. The defendant also failed to record obligations to the victim under the Holidays Act 2003 or the Minimum Wage Act 1983, and substituted food for wages in contravention of the Wages Protection Act 1983. The Judge had provided a sentencing indication with a starting point of 16 months' imprisonment, given the primary aim of deterrence. The Judge granted a discount of 6 months for previous good character and a willingness to at least attempt to make amends under strained financial circumstances. That brought the sentence to one suitable for home detention. The Judge sentenced the defendant to five months' home detention and ordered reparations of $8845. Judgment Date: 27 July 2018.