This ruling allowed the case to proceed to trial.
According to the complaint, the more than 13,000 garment workers on Saipan often worked 12-hour days, seven days a week, in unsafe, unclean conditions that violated U.S. labor laws and international treaties.
In a 55-page decision, U.S. District Judge Alex R. Munson held that these allegations, if proven at trial, were sufficient to establish liability of both the factories and retailers for engaging in a “conspiracy” to use indentured labor in violation of racketeering laws.
Directly addressing the plaintiffs’ claims that the Saipan’s sweatshop industry was dependent on indentured foreign labor, the court stated:
“When the labor is tied to a debt owed to the employer and the employer physically coerces the worker to labor until the debt is paid or the consequences of failing to work to pay off the debt are so severe and outside the customary legal remedy that the worker is compelled to labor, a condition of peonage results, and this is the essence of plaintiffs’ allegations.”
In a separate but related action solely against the Saipan factory owners for requiring “volunteer work” to meet production quotas in violation of American overtime laws, Judge Munson ordered that some 20,000 current and former garment workers in several countries be provided notice of their right to submit claims for back wages.
The complaint in a California state court case against The Gap and other retailers for alleged false advertising and fraud in claiming only to sell “sweatshop free” goods was also upheld.
One of the many workers who stood up and fight for what’s right was “Carmencita “Chie” Abad.
She spent six long years as a garment worker on Saipan. During that time, she endured wretched working conditions, frequently working 14-hour shifts in sweatshop conditions in order to meet arbitrary production quotas. Chie worked for the Korean-owned Sako Corporation, which made clothes for The Gap, among other major U.S .retailers.
After suffering intolerable living and working conditions for four years, Chie attempted to organize Saipan’s first garment worker union. When the factory management learned of her organizing efforts, managers began an intense campaign against the formation of a union. They threatened employees that they would shut down the plant and, in general, they intimidated workers, frightening them from supporting the union. The eventual union-certifying election was lost by only five votes.
As a result of her attempts to organize workers at the Sako factory, Chie’s yearlong work contract was not renewed for the first time in five years. Rather than return to her home in the Philippines, she chose to come to the U.S. in order to expose the harsh reality of Saipan to the American people and government. Chie served a spokeswoman for the workers of Saipan’s garment industry as she works with several U.S. organizations on a lawsuit that hoped to improve living and working conditions on the island.
Chie’s vision for all foreign garment workers on Saipan was in vain
Why are former garment workers after the residual trust fund from the Garment Workers Trust Fund that is being awarded and distributed to numerous non-profit organizations?
As early as Nov. 28, 2001, one garment worker showed me a letter from Law Firm Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes, & Lerach LLP confirming that they represented these garment worker on claims of alleged violation of a garment factory in San Antonio, Saipan for failure to pay all overtime premiums due and other related claims. This law firm found out that the claimants had valid reason and I quote:
“Our firm has conducted an investigation of this situation and we believed there is valid basis to prosecute an action against the said garment factory for violations of the Fair Labor Standard Act.”
On Feb. 14, 2002, the garments workers filed in the Motion for Class Certification, Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and Motion for an Order Requiring Defendants to Post Notices of Proposed Settlement on May 10, 2002 at the US. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, consolidating CV 01-0036, CV 01-0037 into Case No. CV 01-0031. Attorneys Pamela Parker, Pamela Brown, Joyce C.H. Tang, G. Patrick Civille, and Michael Rubin appeared in behalf of the plaintiffs.
Upon consideration of the written and oral arguments of counsel, the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification was granted. The plaintiffs then moved the court to grant class certification pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.P.23 (a) and 23(b)(1), (b)(2) for the following proposed class:
“All persons other than resident citizen who, at any time since Jan. 13, 1989, had been employed on Saipan as factory garment workers for one or more contractor defendants.”
Rule 23(a)(1)-Numerosity states that the prerequisite of numerosity is satisfied when “the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.”
An estimated class of 30,000 members consisting of all nonresident garment workers who, at any time since Jan. 1989, were employed by any of the contractor defendants (garments factories) satisfied this requirement.
Former Judge Timothy H. Bellas who chaired the Garment Workers Trust Fund said in his press release dated Dec. 16, 2009:
“It is important to remember that only (former garment workers working for certain garment factories involved in class action suit) were entitled to a distribution of this money. In other words, not every former garment workers was entitled to a payment from the settlement.”
These former garment workers who are now asking to be part of the residual funds money are included under the prerequisite of numerosity as part of an estimated 30,000 member consisting nonresident garment workers who, at any time since Jan. 1989 were employed by garment manufacturers. Why is it that they were not included as beneficiaries of the residual funds?
To further support their claims for the residual funds I quote Rule 23(a)(2)-Commonality:
“The plaintiffs have asserted that this is a class action challenging the garment production system of Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, based upon allegations of peonage and involuntary servitude. They have alleged a conspiracy of all defendants to perpetuate this garment production system and to exploit the plaintiff class for defendants own profit.”
The plaintiffs did allege injuries that stemmed from the alleged conspiracy among the defendants to dominate and control the garment workforce of the commonwealth. Therefore, these former garment factory workers deserved to be awarded the residual funds, not the charitable institutions that had nothing to do with THEIR sufferings as factory workers.
It was the purpose of this lawsuit to redress the alleged statutory, constitutional, and human rights violations against all foreign garments workers.
While it is true that the plaintiffs asserted that the proposed settlement was fair and beneficial to the settlement class and met the standard for preliminary approval and designated 10 percent of the settlement fund to be used for Cy Press purposes consistent with the goals of the California state actions, this is not applicable to the case of garment workers in the Northern Mariana Islands who suffered peonage and involuntary servitude.
In the absence of peonage and involuntary servitude, Cy Press is an option to be made by the court.
CARLITO J. MARQUEZ
Puerto Rico, Saipan
