A migrant construction engineer who was put to work for 10-hour days doing building work for under the minimum wage after being given “assurances” he would get support for a work permit has secured €14,000 for employment rights breaches at the Workplace Relations Commission.
Dongming Hou secured the award after making complaints under the National Minimum Wage Act 2000 and the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 against his former employer, Buildify Construction and Technology Limited.
At a hearing in Cork last month, Pretty Ndawo of the Migrant Rights Centre of Ireland (MRCI) said Hou was a construction engineer by trade and started work with Buildify after assurances that the company would help him get a work permit.
He was to be paid €1,600 a month during a probationary period for an 8am to 5pm work day, with a pay rise to follow when he finished his probation, the tribunal was told.
READ MORE
“The actual hours were much greater,” Ndawo said.
Hou’s tasks on the job went “beyond engineering functions”, Ndawo said, with her client being tasked with painting, electrical work and plumbing.
How can tech offer solutions for obesity and weight management?
Staff were required to post photos of when they started and finished work in a WeChat group operated by the company, which were exhibited by MRCI as evidence of working hours.
Ndawo said that during a reference period from September 2nd, 2024, to December 7th, 2024, her client’s average working week ran to 56.76 hours.
There were “regular working days in excess of 10 hours”, she said.
Hou was generally being paid €1,600 a month – €800 in cash, €800 by bank transfer, she said.
“Apart from one month during which a higher payment was received, remuneration remained unchanged, notwithstanding the volume of hours worked,” Ndawo added.
There was no response from the firm when she wrote on behalf of her client seeking a statement of his average hourly pay, a prerequisite for a claim under the National Minimum Wage Act.
When no representative of the firm arrived to a hearing on June 16th this year in Cork, adjudication officer Tom O’Driscoll proceeded to hear the matter in its absence, noting that a registered letter sent by MRCI to the respondent was “recorded as received”.
MRCI had calculated that based on the hours worked, its client was underpaid by €12,151.34 over the course of his nine months working for Buildify.
Ndawo said her client had been living in company housing when his employment ended in March 2025 and found himself in an “exceptionally vulnerable position”.
The adjudication officer noted Hou’s limited English, lack of familiarity with Irish labour law, and uncertainty about his immigration status.
Hou had tried without success to recover money directly from his ex-employer before going to MRCI for help, O’Driscoll noted further.
He ruled the WeChat to be a “credible and persuasive” record of working hours and accepted Hou’s case he worked the 56.76 hours stated for the reference period.
O’Driscoll added that he was satisfied there was a “continuing underpayment throughout the employment” and awarded €12,151.34 for pay arrears.
He awarded a further €2,106 for accrued annual leave, bringing the total awarded in the case to €14,257.
