Vulnerable migrant workers are generally very reluctant to take legal action to challenge exploitation given the many obstacles they face, and instances of such action are important to examine for their exceptionality. This article presents a case study of non-unionised Portuguese construction workers who engaged in a lengthy legal battle against their Portuguese employers for various forms of wage theft while they worked in Ireland. The aim of the article is to assess the extent to which their legal action was an effective form of collective action. To do so, we draw on industrial relations and law literature to explore the purposes of collective action and litigation and apply this understanding to assess the outcomes of the migrant workers’ legal cases. We find that the workers’ legal action was a partially effective form of collective action that sought to address the source of their discontent. The case study highlights the regulatory dilemmas that arise in an institutional environment where workers ability to engage in voluntarist forms of collective action is constrained and they seek to use the legal system as collective subjects.

中文翻译：

---

移民工人和工资盗窃：法律行动是集体行动的有效形式吗？

鉴于他们面临的许多障碍，弱势移民工人通常非常不愿意采取法律行动来挑战剥削，而此类行动的实例对于检查其例外情况非常重要。本文介绍了一个非工会葡萄牙建筑工人的案例研究，他们在爱尔兰工作期间与葡萄牙雇主就各种形式的工资盗窃进行了漫长的法律斗争。这篇文章的目的是评估他们的法律行动在多大程度上是一种有效的集体行动形式。为此，我们利用劳资关系和法律文献来探索集体诉讼和诉讼的目的，并将这种理解应用于评估农民工法律案件的结果。我们发现，工人的法律行动是一种部分有效的集体行动形式，旨在解决他们不满的根源。该案例研究强调了在制度环境中出现的监管困境，在这种环境中，工人参与自愿形式的集体行动的能力受到限制，他们寻求将法律制度用作集体主体。