Former robotics firm manager wins constructive dismissal case

A robotics company manager who defaulted on loans when his employer’s Russian investors couldn’t send funds to cover their payroll has won a constructive dismissal claim against the firm.

Shane Fagan told the Workplace Relations Commission his family’s Christmas was “ruined” last year because Eiratech Robotics Ltd failed to pay him for November and December 2022 as well as January 2023.

He said the company owed him €19,000 when he quit in February, telling the WRC he “could not trust” that the firm would be able to pay him and “could not be confident” it wouldn’t happen again.

In its decision, the tribunal criticised the company’s chief executive, Alexey Tabolkin, whom it said had shown “no evidence of careful and/or prudent management and planning” by failing to react last year to the looming financial impact of the war in Ukraine.

More offices for fewer clients and sitting down with an Irish Brexiteer

---

‘Britain needs a shake up’: UK economist from a Kilburn Irish family on banks, business and Boris

---

‘Sustainability’ is a turn-off, so try selling a good life

---

Why don’t auditors find fraud?

---

Responding to Mr Fagan’s complaints under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 and the Payment of Wages Act 1991 at a hearing in June, Mr Tabolkin denied constructive dismissal, or “any contravention of employment rights”.

Mr Tabolkin said the company’s Russian investors “were unable to send promised funds as and when they had promised they would” and the firm was “simply unable” to pay its workforce as there were “no reserve funds”.

There was a “heavy reliance” on Russian investment in the firm and the war in Ukraine had a “profound impact” on this source of funding, Mr Tabolkin said.

Mr Fagan said his salary of between €6,000 and €7,000 a month did not come through at the end of November 2022 – and that despite “many assurances and promises” he got nothing for December that year or January this year.

The complainant told the WRC it was a “difficult” period as he had a “wife, family and household bills to be met” and that “Christmas of 2022 was ruined by this non-payment”.

He added that he defaulted on loans during this time, and was still short about €19,000 when he quit in February 2023, after the company informed it would put him on lay-off.

By then the company had paid “some small sums” towards the arrears, adding up to just €1,800, he said.

Mr Fagan said the company had “large clients”, including the UK supermarket chain Asda.

He said he “could not understand” why these clients had not been asked to pay outstanding invoices to pay his Eiratech’s 40 staff.

Questioned on whether he had sought investment elsewhere, the company’s chief executive, Mr Talbokin, “did not appear to recognise there was an obligation on him and his financial director to organise their affairs so that, at a minimum, payroll would be met as a matter of urgency every month,” wrote WRC adjudicator Penelope McGrath.

Ms McGrath wrote in her decision that Russia had invaded Ukraine in February 2022, but that Mr Talbokin “could not demonstrate any steps had been taken” to react to the financial impact of the war and sanctions regime, which he “must have suspected was coming”.

“I accept the complainant’s argument that at the very least [Mr Talbokin] ought to have insisted on payment for services rendered to various existing clients,” Ms McGrath wrote.

She wrote that Mr Fagan was entitled to terminate his employment because of the non-payment of wages, a “fundamental” and “significant” breach of the contract of employment.

As Mr Fagan had found new work a month later, his losses from the constructive dismissal were confined to four weeks’ pay, for which Ms McGrath awarded €6,000.

The adjudicator also ordered Eiratech firm to pay Mr Fagan a further €1,500 for an unpaid bonus – a “finder’s fee” for recruiting another employee due to be paid to Mr Fagan.

Although this had been disputed by the employer, the WRC found “on balance” that it had been due to Mr Fagan on the basis of custom and practice.

The total orders against Eiratech in the case amounted to €7,500.