.jpg)
Saturday January 19, 2008
Letters to the Editor
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Hodges' distortions are shameful
H.R. 3079, the federalization bill now pending in the U.S. Senate, does indeed deport every single foreign worker from the Commonwealth. That bill is awaiting action by a Senate that doesn't know much about the Commonwealth and, for that reason, may pass the bill. Let's make this clear: EVERY FOREIGN WORKER IN THE COMMONWEALTH WILL BE DEPORTED WITHIN FIVE YEARS OF PASSAGE OF THE FEDERALIZATION BILL. There are no exceptions. It is possible, as Pete A. says, that there will be an extension of another five years. But the Marianas will have no say in that. It is the intent of the federalization bill, and those like Mr. Hodges who support it, to deport every single foreign worker, bar none, from the Marianas.
The new Commonwealth labor law, P.L. 15-108, welcomes foreign workers, as the Commonwealth always has, and improves their working conditions and protections to a standard virtually unmatched anywhere else in the world. Tell me, where in the world do foreign workers get guaranteed medical coverage? Nowhere. And where in the world do foreign workers get bonded protection that their wages will be paid? Nowhere. One could go on and on. Mr. Hodges’ comparison to Hitler is despicable!
And let's look at the treatment of minors. Mr. Hodges is once again not only wrong, but so terribly wrong that one has to conclude his efforts are deliberate propaganda to slander the U.S. citizens who are of Chamorro and Carolinian heritage. What do you suppose Mr. Hodges is doing in the classroom? Maybe we need parent monitors in his classroom to be sure nothing like this unfounded hateful propaganda is going on there.
Here's the deal. Under H.R. 3079, the federalization law, when all foreign workers are deported, all U.S. citizen children will likely go with them unless they have U.S. citizen or permanent relative residents in the U.S. somewhere. Under U.S. law, when a foreign worker is forced to leave, he or she may petition the U.S. immigration officials for what they call “cancellation of removal” but the foreign worker will have to show “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to their U.S. citizen son or daughter. It is very difficult to meet this standard. (See, for example, the decision in In re Ariadna Gonzalez Recinas, et al., Respondent, file A75 696 573 (Los Angeles), decided Sept. 19, 2002, by the Board of Immigration Appeals.) If the foreign worker has any relatives or any resources in their home country, or any capacity to earn a living there, however small, the U.S. will not allow them to stay, no matter what hardship may occur to their U.S. citizen children from the move to the home country.
Under PL 15-108, the Commonwealth labor law, foreign workers will be required to leave the Commonwealth only for 60 days, once every three years, if the foreign worker is an employee of a qualifying employer and for six months, once every three years, if the foreign worker is an employee of a non-qualifying employer. If a foreign worker meets this periodic exit requirement (perhaps during the children's summer school vacation), the foreign worker can remain in the Commonwealth for as long as they are employed.
The new labor law is now in effect. I urge Mr. Hodges to take the time to read it, as he has obviously not done. The regulations under the new law will come into effect on Feb. 1, 2008. Similarly, I urge Mr. Hodges to read the regulations as they apply to the periodic exit. Anyone can see that the Commonwealth law is quite generous, especially compared to U.S. law. Nothing in PL 15-108 deprives any foreign worker of any aspect of belonging in the community. That is certainly more than one can say for “federalization” which has, from the beginning, divided the community, pitted foreign workers against U.S. citizens, and generally aroused negative feelings on both sides. Shame on Mr. Hodges and equal shame on federal officials who told foreign workers that “federalization” would benefit them.
Cinta M. Kaipat
Author of PL 15-108
Showing posts with label Labor and Immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Labor and Immigration. Show all posts
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Summary of My Impromptu Speech At The Breakfast With The DC Folks
[Note: Apologies to my visitors -- and especially to Dave, Lex, Lewie, & Angelo who have been bugging me to update this blog . For those of you who are still with me, THANKS for your patience. :) My computer challenges are temporarily resolved and my beloved Auntie Bernie's funeral is now behind us.]
"Chairwoman Christensen, Congresswoman Bordallo, Speaker Babauta, President Mendiola, Distinguished Colleagues and Guests, Good Morning, Hafa Adai, and Tirow! Thank you for this opportunity to share a few thoughts with you.
First of all, many of my constituents question the decision to hold this most important hearing at the courthouse given the limited space there. I realize this might be a bit late now, but wouldn't it have been better to hold this historic hearing at the Multi-Purpose Center where it could accommodate more people?
Chairwoman Christensen, I want you and the Committee to know that the people of the CNMI are not bad people. For all the criticisms that we get, the vast majority of our people do not even own businesses; we don't all employ foreign workers; and contrary to what is consistently reported about the Commonwealth, most of us do not condone labor abuses either. That is not to say that abuses haven't happened here, but to make it seem as though nothing is being done to correct such mistakes is wrong.
On the contrary, so much of what has been reported about labor abuses in the Commonwealth are, in fact, old reports that continue to be regurgitated over and over again. Let me share a couple examples of what I mean by such biased reporting.
How many of you have heard of a documentary called "Behind the Labels:...." that came out a few years ago? The woman who made this so-called "documentary" contacted me while I was working as a hearing officer for the Department of Labor. I'd been told that she was with Oprah Winfrey's Oxygen Network. When I began asking questions about the purpose of her film, she immediately ceased all communication with me. Later on, I heard that the "documentary" was shown at Stanford University, and, as predicted, the film succeeded in reinforcing people's condemnation of the CNMI.
But peer behind the making of "Behind the Labels...." and this is what most fair and decent people would be shocked to learn. The producer/director of this so-called "documentary" hired a couple of my mainland American friends to help her film footage of this "documentary." My friends told me that they quit in disgust over this person's ethics which they came to question during the filming. One of the things they said bothered them about this woman was her blurring of the line between fact-gathering and coaching her interviewee(s). On one occasion, for example, my friends told me that they witnessed an interviewee being coaxed by the producer/director: "It would be better if you didn't smile"; "It would be better if you said it this way;" and "It would be better if you cried." My friends said that the final straw was when she asked them to break the law and break into a warehouse with her so they could snoop around and film it.
Another example is the article about forced abortions that appeared in Ms. Magazine. It was very obvious to us that this tired old story was already written before the author ever even set foot in the Commonwealth. It was crystal clear from reading the magazine article that the writer had an agenda when she arrived in the Commonwealth. Hence, the purpose of the trip was not necessarily to find the truth, but to find supporting evidence -- whether real or not -- to bolster the article's claims.
Madame Chair and Committee members, I worked as a Labor Hearing Officer for over five years and I mediated and presided over quite a number of labor cases. I've seen my fair share of cases up front to be able to say that there are good employers and good employees and bad employers and bad employees. That's nothing unique to the CNMI. However, as a hearing officer, it didn't matter to me whether it was a "local" or "foreigner" breaking the law. I'd like to think that I was firm, but fair.
Now, the original intent of the Nonresident Worker's Act, which I believe we've strayed so far from these days, was to bring in ONLY those guest workers that the Commonwealth needed to supplement the available workforce where needed PROVIDED THAT doing so does NOT impair the wages and living conditions of the Commonwealth's citizens. Madame Chair, I say to you, the wages and living conditions of the citizens of the Commonwealth have, in fact, been severely impaired for a number of years. This observation was shared last year by Ms. Rosemary Cowan of U.S. Labor.
For a long time, the minimum wage was kept low to satisfy our acquired addiction to cheap labor. The wages were kept so low that our returning residents who had gone off to school and returned with their degrees could not afford to take jobs at such low wages. Many of them found it impossible to stay, and many who stayed have now also left the Commonwealth.
I was one of those who left the Commonwealth in search of a higher education. I was gone almost 20 years and returned only after I obtained my law degree. Let me be clear about this. All of us appreciate the contributions that the guest workers have made to the CNMI. I, for one, love the diverse, multi-ethnic rainbow of friends that go out every weekend with me as members of Beautify CNMI to enhance our environment and quality of life. Most importantly, I am grateful for their contributions to building the CNMI economy and for the many services provided to the Commonwealth.
Nevertheless, as Senator Mendiola mentioned earlier, there is a huge concern in the CNMI community about the impact of grandfathering in thousands of workers and their immediate relatives without studying the short and long-term impact on our small island communities. I, too, share his concern about this issue. I say this because the Legislature continues to be bombarded with funding shortages for our public school systems and community college. We never have enough money to hire teachers for our ever-expanding student populations. The crowded classrooms get more and more crowded. Demands to build more classrooms are heard constantly and existing buildings are falling apart. And let us not forget the heavy demands put on our poor infrastructures which continue to plague us.
Add to all this the reality that CNMI citizens now have fewer job prospects in the private sector because of the state of the CNMI's economy and the impact of many businesses folding. This translates into fewer taxes paid and an ever-shrinking ability of this Government to afford to pay for basic essential needs and services.
Now, as to those long-term foreign workers who are vying for U.S. citizenship, if that's what they want, I say "go for it." But why do they feel compelled to stand on CNMI soil and paint such an ugly picture of our home and our people to get it? Is this the only way to get an improved status? The CNMI people who became naturalized U.S. citizens earned their citizenship by giving up something. We gave up two-thirds of Tinian. We also gave up more land on Saipan. And as we speak, the U.S. Military continues to bomb Farallon de Medinilah, one of our Northern Islands. I am from the Northern Islands, so I remain especially sensitive to this sacrifice.
When we consider how long the United States has been in existence and the mistakes that were made along the way, I don't think it's fair that the Commonwealth should be severely penalized for her mistakes. On the contrary, the Commonwealth must be helped to rectify such mistakes so that ALL of us could enjoy a quality of life we all richly deserve.
Thank you, Si Yu'us Ma'ase Yan Olomwaay."
************
Post-speech notes:
After my speech, Chairwoman Christensen told me "Perhaps we will take a look at your Labor Bill." She was referring to H.B. 15-38, the Comprehensive Labor Reform Bill that I authored which has been the subject of so much community discussion. That bill passed the House and is now pending in the Senate.
Congressowman Bordallo shared that she got "choked up" when she listened to my speech.
One of the staff attorneys approached me afterwards and told me how much he appreciated what I had to say and that he could tell I "spoke from the heart."
"Chairwoman Christensen, Congresswoman Bordallo, Speaker Babauta, President Mendiola, Distinguished Colleagues and Guests, Good Morning, Hafa Adai, and Tirow! Thank you for this opportunity to share a few thoughts with you.
First of all, many of my constituents question the decision to hold this most important hearing at the courthouse given the limited space there. I realize this might be a bit late now, but wouldn't it have been better to hold this historic hearing at the Multi-Purpose Center where it could accommodate more people?
Chairwoman Christensen, I want you and the Committee to know that the people of the CNMI are not bad people. For all the criticisms that we get, the vast majority of our people do not even own businesses; we don't all employ foreign workers; and contrary to what is consistently reported about the Commonwealth, most of us do not condone labor abuses either. That is not to say that abuses haven't happened here, but to make it seem as though nothing is being done to correct such mistakes is wrong.
On the contrary, so much of what has been reported about labor abuses in the Commonwealth are, in fact, old reports that continue to be regurgitated over and over again. Let me share a couple examples of what I mean by such biased reporting.
How many of you have heard of a documentary called "Behind the Labels:...." that came out a few years ago? The woman who made this so-called "documentary" contacted me while I was working as a hearing officer for the Department of Labor. I'd been told that she was with Oprah Winfrey's Oxygen Network. When I began asking questions about the purpose of her film, she immediately ceased all communication with me. Later on, I heard that the "documentary" was shown at Stanford University, and, as predicted, the film succeeded in reinforcing people's condemnation of the CNMI.
But peer behind the making of "Behind the Labels...." and this is what most fair and decent people would be shocked to learn. The producer/director of this so-called "documentary" hired a couple of my mainland American friends to help her film footage of this "documentary." My friends told me that they quit in disgust over this person's ethics which they came to question during the filming. One of the things they said bothered them about this woman was her blurring of the line between fact-gathering and coaching her interviewee(s). On one occasion, for example, my friends told me that they witnessed an interviewee being coaxed by the producer/director: "It would be better if you didn't smile"; "It would be better if you said it this way;" and "It would be better if you cried." My friends said that the final straw was when she asked them to break the law and break into a warehouse with her so they could snoop around and film it.
Another example is the article about forced abortions that appeared in Ms. Magazine. It was very obvious to us that this tired old story was already written before the author ever even set foot in the Commonwealth. It was crystal clear from reading the magazine article that the writer had an agenda when she arrived in the Commonwealth. Hence, the purpose of the trip was not necessarily to find the truth, but to find supporting evidence -- whether real or not -- to bolster the article's claims.
Madame Chair and Committee members, I worked as a Labor Hearing Officer for over five years and I mediated and presided over quite a number of labor cases. I've seen my fair share of cases up front to be able to say that there are good employers and good employees and bad employers and bad employees. That's nothing unique to the CNMI. However, as a hearing officer, it didn't matter to me whether it was a "local" or "foreigner" breaking the law. I'd like to think that I was firm, but fair.
Now, the original intent of the Nonresident Worker's Act, which I believe we've strayed so far from these days, was to bring in ONLY those guest workers that the Commonwealth needed to supplement the available workforce where needed PROVIDED THAT doing so does NOT impair the wages and living conditions of the Commonwealth's citizens. Madame Chair, I say to you, the wages and living conditions of the citizens of the Commonwealth have, in fact, been severely impaired for a number of years. This observation was shared last year by Ms. Rosemary Cowan of U.S. Labor.
For a long time, the minimum wage was kept low to satisfy our acquired addiction to cheap labor. The wages were kept so low that our returning residents who had gone off to school and returned with their degrees could not afford to take jobs at such low wages. Many of them found it impossible to stay, and many who stayed have now also left the Commonwealth.
I was one of those who left the Commonwealth in search of a higher education. I was gone almost 20 years and returned only after I obtained my law degree. Let me be clear about this. All of us appreciate the contributions that the guest workers have made to the CNMI. I, for one, love the diverse, multi-ethnic rainbow of friends that go out every weekend with me as members of Beautify CNMI to enhance our environment and quality of life. Most importantly, I am grateful for their contributions to building the CNMI economy and for the many services provided to the Commonwealth.
Nevertheless, as Senator Mendiola mentioned earlier, there is a huge concern in the CNMI community about the impact of grandfathering in thousands of workers and their immediate relatives without studying the short and long-term impact on our small island communities. I, too, share his concern about this issue. I say this because the Legislature continues to be bombarded with funding shortages for our public school systems and community college. We never have enough money to hire teachers for our ever-expanding student populations. The crowded classrooms get more and more crowded. Demands to build more classrooms are heard constantly and existing buildings are falling apart. And let us not forget the heavy demands put on our poor infrastructures which continue to plague us.
Add to all this the reality that CNMI citizens now have fewer job prospects in the private sector because of the state of the CNMI's economy and the impact of many businesses folding. This translates into fewer taxes paid and an ever-shrinking ability of this Government to afford to pay for basic essential needs and services.
Now, as to those long-term foreign workers who are vying for U.S. citizenship, if that's what they want, I say "go for it." But why do they feel compelled to stand on CNMI soil and paint such an ugly picture of our home and our people to get it? Is this the only way to get an improved status? The CNMI people who became naturalized U.S. citizens earned their citizenship by giving up something. We gave up two-thirds of Tinian. We also gave up more land on Saipan. And as we speak, the U.S. Military continues to bomb Farallon de Medinilah, one of our Northern Islands. I am from the Northern Islands, so I remain especially sensitive to this sacrifice.
When we consider how long the United States has been in existence and the mistakes that were made along the way, I don't think it's fair that the Commonwealth should be severely penalized for her mistakes. On the contrary, the Commonwealth must be helped to rectify such mistakes so that ALL of us could enjoy a quality of life we all richly deserve.
Thank you, Si Yu'us Ma'ase Yan Olomwaay."
************
Post-speech notes:
After my speech, Chairwoman Christensen told me "Perhaps we will take a look at your Labor Bill." She was referring to H.B. 15-38, the Comprehensive Labor Reform Bill that I authored which has been the subject of so much community discussion. That bill passed the House and is now pending in the Senate.
Congressowman Bordallo shared that she got "choked up" when she listened to my speech.
One of the staff attorneys approached me afterwards and told me how much he appreciated what I had to say and that he could tell I "spoke from the heart."
Friday, April 6, 2007
Meeting With Congressional Staffers
Here's an article that appeared in the April 6, 2007 edition of the Saipan Tribune regarding our meeting with the Congressional Staffers yesterday.
Here's more info on the staffers' visit as reported by the Marianas Variety.
Here's more info on the staffers' visit as reported by the Marianas Variety.
Friday, March 9, 2007
Understanding The Path Of A Labor Complaint
Brief Background Info
I worked as an Administrative Hearing Officer (Administrative Law Judge) for the CNMI Department of Labor from October 1999 until shortly before I assumed office in January 2006. As a Labor hearing officer, I adjudicated hundreds of labor cases on Saipan, Tinian, and Rota. Although it has been over a year since I left my old post at the Department of Labor, I thought that with Labor and Immigration being such hot topics these days, that it might be useful to give some insight into the workings of the CNMI Department of Labor. I will note, however, that many proposed changes are in the works, including a major overhaul of the CNMI's Nonresident Workers Act that I have been working on with a Task Force for well over a year, but this gives a good overall view of what the system is now.
Path of a Labor Complaint
When a complaint is filed with the Department of Labor, the case is assigned a case number and then forwarded to the Administrative Hearing Office for mediation. If mediation is successful, then the parties sign a settlement agreement that is approved by the mediator. If the mediation is unsuccessful, then the case is forwarded to the Enforcement Unit for investigation.
In the meantime, if the parties cannot resume their employment relationship while awaiting the final disposition of the case, then the mediator authorizes a Temporary Work Authorization (TWA) at or right after the mediation. The TWA document authorizes the employee to seek a temporary employer while awaiting adjudication of his/her case. The TWA does NOT authorize the employee and prospective temporary employer to engage in employment yet until all the proper paperworks have been filed.
Once the employee finds a temporary employer, then the employer is required to file the temporary employment application with Labor. After Labor approves the temporary employment arrangement, then the parties may engage in lawful employment. The employment is valid for 90 days and is renewable in 90-day increments for as long as the case remains pending.
Meanwhile, Labor investigators are required to quickly investigate the case and issue a determination. The determination lays out the investigator's findings. The Labor investigator then sends the case to the Hearing Office and then awaits notification of the hearing.
Upon receipt of the case, the Hearing Office then schedules a hearing. The recorded hearing is conducted according to the Administrative Procedures Act. Once the Administrative Order is served, the parties have 15 days to appeal the Order to the Secretary of Labor. The Secretary of Labor's Decision is reviewable by the CNMI Superior Court and, ultimately, the CNMI Supreme Court if need be.
The Role of Mediator/Hearing Officer
The hearing officers serve dual roles as mediators as well as hearing officers. In their capacity as hearing officers, the hearing officers conduct hearings in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act. I don't have an exact number, but in my six years at the Department of Labor, I can safely say that I heard hundreds of Labor cases. These range from transfer hearings, compliance agency cases, permit-revocation hearings, health and safety violation cases, labor cases, employment law cases, etc.
This job enabled me to gain a greater insight into the Commonwealth Labor system than perhaps the average citizen. I find this insight to be quite invaluable as I crafted or work to craft new Labor legislation and other important pieces of legislation that I believe are needed.
I worked as an Administrative Hearing Officer (Administrative Law Judge) for the CNMI Department of Labor from October 1999 until shortly before I assumed office in January 2006. As a Labor hearing officer, I adjudicated hundreds of labor cases on Saipan, Tinian, and Rota. Although it has been over a year since I left my old post at the Department of Labor, I thought that with Labor and Immigration being such hot topics these days, that it might be useful to give some insight into the workings of the CNMI Department of Labor. I will note, however, that many proposed changes are in the works, including a major overhaul of the CNMI's Nonresident Workers Act that I have been working on with a Task Force for well over a year, but this gives a good overall view of what the system is now.
Path of a Labor Complaint
When a complaint is filed with the Department of Labor, the case is assigned a case number and then forwarded to the Administrative Hearing Office for mediation. If mediation is successful, then the parties sign a settlement agreement that is approved by the mediator. If the mediation is unsuccessful, then the case is forwarded to the Enforcement Unit for investigation.
In the meantime, if the parties cannot resume their employment relationship while awaiting the final disposition of the case, then the mediator authorizes a Temporary Work Authorization (TWA) at or right after the mediation. The TWA document authorizes the employee to seek a temporary employer while awaiting adjudication of his/her case. The TWA does NOT authorize the employee and prospective temporary employer to engage in employment yet until all the proper paperworks have been filed.
Once the employee finds a temporary employer, then the employer is required to file the temporary employment application with Labor. After Labor approves the temporary employment arrangement, then the parties may engage in lawful employment. The employment is valid for 90 days and is renewable in 90-day increments for as long as the case remains pending.
Meanwhile, Labor investigators are required to quickly investigate the case and issue a determination. The determination lays out the investigator's findings. The Labor investigator then sends the case to the Hearing Office and then awaits notification of the hearing.
Upon receipt of the case, the Hearing Office then schedules a hearing. The recorded hearing is conducted according to the Administrative Procedures Act. Once the Administrative Order is served, the parties have 15 days to appeal the Order to the Secretary of Labor. The Secretary of Labor's Decision is reviewable by the CNMI Superior Court and, ultimately, the CNMI Supreme Court if need be.
The Role of Mediator/Hearing Officer
The hearing officers serve dual roles as mediators as well as hearing officers. In their capacity as hearing officers, the hearing officers conduct hearings in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act. I don't have an exact number, but in my six years at the Department of Labor, I can safely say that I heard hundreds of Labor cases. These range from transfer hearings, compliance agency cases, permit-revocation hearings, health and safety violation cases, labor cases, employment law cases, etc.
This job enabled me to gain a greater insight into the Commonwealth Labor system than perhaps the average citizen. I find this insight to be quite invaluable as I crafted or work to craft new Labor legislation and other important pieces of legislation that I believe are needed.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Youth Summit Meeting
I spent half the day at the Pacific Islands Club (PIC) attending this Youth Summit Meeting that was sponsored by the Youth Congress.
The "ice breaker" -- volunteers competing to see who has the best (corniest?) pick-up line.
The panel, L-R: Larry Cabrera, Heinz Hofschneider, Fred Deleon Guerrero, Howard Willens, Kodep Ogumorro Ulodong, Juan ("Pan") Guerrero, Jed Horey, Edmun Villagomez and Marian Aldan-Pierce. The topics were: Labor and Immigration and Minimum Wage.
See if you can spot me in this photo.
The "ice breaker" -- volunteers competing to see who has the best (corniest?) pick-up line.
The panel, L-R: Larry Cabrera, Heinz Hofschneider, Fred Deleon Guerrero, Howard Willens, Kodep Ogumorro Ulodong, Juan ("Pan") Guerrero, Jed Horey, Edmun Villagomez and Marian Aldan-Pierce. The topics were: Labor and Immigration and Minimum Wage.
See if you can spot me in this photo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
