A Helsinki District Court has sentenced the chief executive of a cleaning company to one year and 10 months in prison after finding that the company collected more than €60,000 from foreign job seekers through a recruitment scheme built around jobs that did not exist.
The court ruled on 26 June that the executive committed aggravated fraud after applicants paid illegal recruitment fees in exchange for promised employment and work-based residence permits in Finland. Two other defendants received convictions for assisting the fraud, while charges against a fourth defendant were dismissed.
The judgment is not yet final.
The case centred on the recruitment of workers from abroad, including the Philippines. Applicants were told they could secure employment with the Finnish company and improve their chances of receiving a work-based residence permit. Before receiving employment contracts, they were required to pay between €500 and €3,000.
Almost 90 people applied for Finnish work permits through the company. None of them was later employed.
The court found that the company never intended to hire the applicants. Instead, it concluded that the recruitment process existed to collect what are known in Finland as “entry fees” from people seeking work.
According to the judgment, the chief executive directed the operation by overseeing recruitment, managing intermediaries, arranging the collection of payments and supervising the overall scheme.
The court found that two other individuals recruited applicants and passed on job offers, while another assisted with preparing employment contracts and handling practical matters linked to residence permit applications.
Judges concluded that the chief executive attempted to secure the participation of others by offering or promising positions within the company or ownership interests.
The court viewed the chief executive as the main offender and noted that the company’s business activity remained too limited to justify recruiting such a large workforce. It found that the operation generated substantial financial benefit for the company.
Most of the victims were Philippine nationals living outside Finland. The court said the payments represented significant financial losses for many of them.
The two people convicted of assisting the fraud received lighter sentences because the court found they acted under the direction of the chief executive. While they knew applicants were paying recruitment fees, the court found they were unaware that the company had no intention of employing the workers. The court also found they did not receive the proceeds of the fraud.
Charges against the fourth defendant were dismissed after the court concluded there was no evidence that the individual knew the true nature of the recruitment operation. That person had been hired to assist with drafting employment contracts and handling residence permit paperwork.
The judgment stressed that employers in Finland are prohibited from charging applicants for jobs or recruitment.
Natalie Eklund, a labour protection lawyer at Finland’s Licensing and Supervisory Authority, said requests for payments in exchange for employment should be treated as a warning sign.
“If getting a job requires payment to an employer or its representative, it is a serious warning sign,” Eklund said.
She added that the case showed how foreign job seekers remain exposed to exploitation because they are often unfamiliar with Finnish employment practices.
“This was an unfortunate example of foreign job seekers being misled into believing they had to pay to obtain employment. The case shows that foreign job seekers may be in a vulnerable position and may not know what practices are permitted in Finland. A job seeker should never pay for a job, an employment contract or recruitment,” Eklund said.
HT