Former Garment Workers common statement and reaction upon reading Judge Bellas explanation gave them more confusion that needs further disclosure and clarification. We are very grateful that Judge Bellas was compelled and tried to dispel the misinformation according to him. But the former garment workers interpret this as the true facts arising from the distribution of the Trust Fund money. According to Judger Bellas response letter:
“NOT ALL GARMENT WORKERS WERE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE MONEY FROM THECLASS ACTION LAWSUIT”
It is very well said that only those garment workers “A class action lawsuit is brought on behalf of a specific group of people by a lawyer or a firm. In this case, the attorneys who brought this class action brought it on behalf of workers who worked for only certain of the garment factories on Saipan during a specific period of time. Therefore, in order to qualify to be a member of the “class” a garment worker had to meet two factual requirements: One, he/she had to have worked for one of the factories that was sued, and two, that person had to have worked for the factory during the period covered by the lawsuit. To put it another way, even if you were a garment worker in the past, you may not have been qualified to be a member of the class of persons who were represented in this case-if you did not work for a factory that was sued in the case or you did not work for one of those factories during the period covered by the lawsuit”
Majority of these former garment workers who are now seeking to be part of the garment workers trust fund or residual money were actually employed in the factories during that period covered by lawsuit. In fact, they had received part of the first and second distribution but the amount they received is far less than what the settlement agreement promised them. Chie Abad herself according to her email to this writer dated February 5, 2010 received only $76.00 (Double figures) from the settlement agreement. While the lawyers involved in these case received $$$,$$$.$$ (about Six figures) from the settlement agreement money as legal fees and or Attorneys Fees.
Judge Bellas also said that; “In addition, there was a third practical requirement. Even if you met the above two requirements, you had to be registered with the law firm that brought the lawsuit, otherwise there is no way to know that you were a member of the class that they were representing. Therefore, even if you were qualified, you would not have received any money if the attorneys did not have you listed as one of their clients.”
The statement above according to the former garment workers is ridiculous. It appears that there were two or more listings of garment workers in the class action lawsuit and a number of law firms that has different listings of garment workers including the latest additional list from the CNMI Department of Labor and the office of Federal Ombudsman. Unlike “Schindler’s List” the story of Nazi Czech business man Oskar Schindler, who uses Jewish (In CNMI, Foreign Workers as Jewish) labor to start a factory in occupied Poland. As World War II progresses, and the fate of the Jews becomes more and more clear, Schindler’s motivations switch from profit to human sympathy and he was able to save over 1100 Jews from death in the gas chambers, according to Anthony Hughes in the Steven Spielberg movie in 1993.
In the case of garment workers, whose list they took? 1) specific group of people by a lawyer or a firm; 2) registered with the law firm that brought the lawsuit; 3) List from the CNMI Department of Labor, or 4) List from the federal Ombudsman that was entitled to receive the money from settlement agreement? Are they really genuine garment factory workers? These according to the minutes of meeting of former garment workers should be properly address and clarified by the trustees. Oskar Schindler should be their model that instead of receiving huge amount of legal fees, they should give it to the garment workers who suffered peonage and involuntary servitude by the garment factory owners. “FROM PROFIT TO HUMAN SYMPATHY.”
First facts; “a specific group of people by a lawyer or a firm. In this case, the attorneys who brought this class action brought it on behalf of workers who worked for only certain of the garment factories on Saipan during a specific period of time”.
Second facts; “Even if you met the above two requirements, you had to be registered with the law firm that brought the lawsuit, otherwise there is no way to know that you were a member of the class that they were representing. Therefore, even if you were qualified, you would not have received any money if the attorneys did not have you listed as one of their clients.”
On this meeting former garment workers felt that they were mislead by Judge Bellas or by the trust fund trustees because according to them “the list of the specific group of people by a lawyer or a firm” should be the basis of the official list of people who are qualified to receive from the settlement agreement money. There should be very specific names of garment workers on the specific group of people by a lawyer or a firm otherwise there will be no complainant or group of garment workers complainant that the law firm to represent in the class action lawsuit.
A former garment workers from Advance Textile said that; he is included on the list of the specific group who filed the class action lawsuit but he was not able to registered with the law firm that brought the lawsuit, in that case he is no longer included as beneficiaries as stated in the second facts. These former garment workers had strong convictions that they were cheated by the trustees of the settlement agreement money. According to them, the trustees prolonged the distribution of the money in their favor as trustees. The class action lawsuit was settled in 2003 but they only started the distribution in 2006 after receiving a lot of phone calls from the class action members. It took 3 years to begin distribution of the money when some of the garment factories were started to close down their operation and majority of the garment workers were now leaving the island. Obviously their addresses in Saipan are nowhere to find or their addresses back home had changed already due to hardship.
These former garment workers is now seeking legal assistance on how they could still re-open and or pursue the class action lawsuit by way of disclosing the entire distribution process of the settlement agreement money. We are not losing our hope that the money that is intended for us can still be recovered although it has been distributed to non-profit organization. They had also noted that some of the charitable institutions who received the money are not really a charitable one but it is a private entity that is earning or generating money out of their activities within their organization. All of their statement as stated in this letter was part of the minutes of meeting.
CARLITO J. MARQUEZ
Puerto Rico, Saipan
