In his complaint for judicial review or mandamus relief, attorney Robert Myers said there were 127 members of the class group as of yesterday.
Labor Secretary Gil M. San Nicolas, Labor Deputy Secretary Cinta Kaipat and Labor Director Barry Hirshbein were named as the defendants, together with 20 “Does” that are surety or bonding or insurance companies that issued statutory surety labor bonds to the employers of the guest workers.
Myers said the complaint aims to compel Labor to enforce the surety’s obligation under the statutory labor bonds and to direct those insurance companies “to marshal, account for, and inventory the proceeds of the labor bonds.”
According to the complaint, the total proceeds of the labor bonds involved amount to $557,977.
In an interview, Myers said if the court accepts his arguments, the case will not only benefit those who joined the class suit but also the other displaced alien workers.
“It is a very complex case,” he said.
Labor, he noted, has not collected on the bonds since its hearing officers issued administrative order awards for the displaced alien workers.
San Nicolas and other Labor officials have said that they will not enforce the surety’s obligation, unless in very limited circumstances, and that the specified amounts on each bond is solely for repatriation cases.
San Nicolas said unpaid administrative orders are spelled out in detail in the small claims packets provided to the workers.
Kaipat, for her part, said the Department of Commerce is responsible for bonding companies.
Commerce, she added, didn’t give Labor any licensing, disciplinary, or collection authority over bonding companies.
Labor has no authority to go after bonding companies because the Legislature didn’t give the department such authority, Kaipat said.
According to Myers, Labor’s “refusal to enforce is in direct violation of the authority for the enforcement of the bond obligations that have been legislatively vested with [the Labor] director.”
The Legislature, he added, “did not intend for Labor to direct complainants to small claims court and abrogate the procedure regarding the issuance, content and enforcement of such bonds supplied under an extensive statutory and regulatory scheme.”
Myers said nonresident workers are entitled to have the reviewing court apply the one or more of the equitable remedies to prevent inequity, miscarriage of justice and egregious unjust enrichment.
Myers said the “unlawful scheme between Labor and sureties in the CNMI will result not in the delay of, but in the denial of justice.”
He added, “No one, except Labor and the sureties involved in the scheme to prevent collection and remittance of the proceeds of the labor bonds, benefits from such an unfair and prejudiced scheme.”
