A technology firm has been ordered to pay more than €27,000 in wages illegally withheld from a salesman who told a tribunal he was “consistently deceived by false promises” to pay him.
In a decision published on Monday the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) decided to redact the identity of the video company to “encourage” it to “bring the matter to a close without adverse publicity”.
It follows a statutory complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 by the salesman, who resigned last year with the company owing him some five months’ salary and commission.
The salesman joined the company in April 2023 on a contract which paid a base salary of €75,000 and commission of up to €55,000 annually.
The tribunal heard difficulties first arose when his wages were not paid in November 2023, but that this was rectified the following month.
There was further non-payment in January and February 2024, the salesman told a hearing earlier this month, and in March, that he had “less than half” his normal salary payment. His salary did come in April that year, but went unpaid in May and June 2024, he told the WRC.
Bobby Healy on why Manna drone delivery could be the ‘biggest technology company in the world for its space’
In July 2024, the salesman handed in notice of resignation effective August 30th, 2024. When he left on that date, he was owed €19,450 in salary and €7,979 in commission, net of tax and statutory deductions, the tribunal heard.
The salesman presented the WRC with emails and WhatsApp messages he exchanged with senior executives in the company, all of whom had confirmed to him that he was owed the money, he said.
The company had been able to pay him two months’ wages prior to his resignation after applying for a loan in August 2024, the tribunal noted.
About 10 weeks after the claimant left, he had an email from the chief executive confirming that half of the outstanding sum would be “available by the end of the week” and that the rest would be “available in December [2024]”.
WRC adjudicator Catherine Byrne noted that when the case was first called on in April this year, the salesman “agreed to an adjournment when his former employer indicated that they would shortly be in funds”.
When the salesman’s case was heard earlier this month, he showed Ms Byrne correspondence from May 2025 in which an executive at the firm stated that the company was about to draw down funds which would allow it to pay him.
“However, no money was transferred to the complainant,” she said.
The salesman told the WRC in a submission that he had suffered “stress and inconvenience” because of the failure to pay the wages he was owed. He had spent an “inordinate amount of time writing to various managers” and had been “consistently deceived by false promises”, he added.
Adjudication officer Catherine Byrne decided to anonymise her decision on the case “to encourage the [company] to bring the matter to a close without adverse publicity”.
Ms Byrne wrote in her decision: “It is extremely regrettable that the complainant had to spend so much time and energy trying to exert his basic entitlement to be paid his wages, an issue about which there is no dispute.”
The company had made an “illegal deduction” from the claimant’s wages by failing to pay him the €27,429 owed to him when he resigned on August 30th last year, she found.
Upholding the complaint, Ms Byrne directed the company to pay the salesman the sum as compensation under the Payment of Wages Act 1991.
