A Russian aircraft leasing firm which closed down its Irish office when it was hit by the EU’s Ukraine war sanctions has been ordered to pay nearly €12,000 to a former technical manager.
The Workplace Relations Commission made the order under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 to Anton Gremin, who was a technical manager at Avia Capital Leasing Ltd in Sandyford, Dublin.
The tribunal rejected a further claim Mr Gremin had made under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977, ruling there had been a redundancy situation when it closed up.
The lessor told staff on 26 April last year that it was terminating their employment because its shareholders had been placed under “freezing sanctions” by the EU over the war in Ukraine, the Workplace Relations Commission heard.
Mr Gremin, one of a number of staff who have lodged pay claims, said that he did not receive his €5,986-a-month salary for the two months prior to the complete closure of the firm’s Irish office.
However, he told the employment tribunal that when he queried his position with the Revenue Commissioners he was advised that his former employer had “paid his taxes” for those two months – but not the €11,970.80 he said was due to him for the period.
A former senior financial manager at Avia Capital Leasing who gave evidence in support of Mr Gremin’s claim said “everything” Mr Gremin said was true.
“The staff had attempted to meet with the director of the company in Ireland, but scheduled meetings were cancelled and then the management left,” the senior financial manager said in her evidence.
The termination letter sent to Mr Gremin stated that Avia’s two shareholders, the state-owned bank VTB and the aircraft leasing group GTLK, had been “added to the list of designated persons” under the European Council’s fifth package of economic restrictions on 8 April 2022.
“The company has been attempting to perform the payments of salary since February 24, 2022 and these have not been processed by VTB Bank (Europe) SE with which the company has bank accounts due to sanctions and geopolitical situation and insufficient liquidity of funds,” the termination letter read.
Three other former employees of Avia are known to have brought pay claims for the same two-month period prior to its closure.
Last month, Elena Bondareva an administrator with the firm, won a claim for €5,545.74, consisting of €5,000 in pay for March and April 2022 and a further €545.74 for unpaid annual leave entitlements, on top of a ruling that she was entitled to statutory redundancy.
Avia Capital Leasing Ltd made no appearance in either Mr Gremin’s case or in Ms Bondareva’s case when they were heard in person at Lansdowne House in Dublin in March and May this year.
However, the firm did appear at a joint hearing of similar claims by senior finance manager Alexandra Skavronskaja and her colleague Sofija Kascuka, who allege they were not paid for April 2022 and should also get a redundancy payment.
The aircraft lessor’s Moscow-based lawyer, Stanislav Dobshevich said on that date that as the firm’s Irish directors and legal secretaries had all resigned when the sanctions hit and it had closed its Irish offices, it had not received notice of the claims.
In a preliminary submission on that date, Mr Dobshevich said: “The issue is pretty simple – we don’t have bank accounts which aren’t frozen in Europe.”
“We are actually willing to pay wages to employees and moreover, [they] were promised to pay for their troubles in roubles in Russia,” Mr Dobshevich said. “Employees refused [our] proposal,” he added.
In their complaint forms, Ms Skavronskaja and Ms Kascuka said the company’s bank had not confirmed their former employer’s position that the accounts were frozen.
Their cases were adjourned to a future date.
In Mr Gremin’s case, WRC adjudicating officer Roger McGrath rejected the complaint of unfair dismissal, making a finding that there had been a redundancy situation at the company.
Mr McGrath added that the deduction of €11,970.80 from Mr Gremin’s pay was “clearly not required by statute, did not constitute a term of contract nor were they given by prior consent”.
“I believe the evidence of the complainant in this matter,” he wrote, and made an order for the sum under the Payment of Wages Act.
