|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Supreme Court Removes Labor Rights for Undocumented Workers |
Current rating: 0 |
by the Supreme Court
(No verified email address) |
30 Mar 2002
|
The Supreme Court's decision means that any
undocumented farmworker caught talking to a FLOC labor organizer can be fired on the spot no questions asked with no possibility of severance, back-pay, or repercussions for the employer's having hired him or her "illegally." Almost all farmworkers outside of the Federal H2A program are undocumented. |
The Arizona Daily Star
Thursday March 28 02:53 AM EST
Court limits job actions by entrants
By Staff Writer, STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Punishments for employers are restricted
WASHINGTON - A Supreme Court ruling Wednesday that restricts the rights of illegal entrants to sue employers who mistreat them for restitution will leave millions of undocumented workers in the U.S. more vulnerable than ever to exploitation, say immigrant rights advocates.
In a 5-4 decision that split the Supreme Court along ideological lines, the court ruled that a plastics company owed nothing to Jose Castro, a minimum- wage worker at the Hoffman Plastics Compound Plant in Paramount, Calif., who was
fired after handing out union cards to fellow employees.
The decision reversed a 5-4 vote of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which had earlier sided with Castro. And it ignored an amicus request filed by Arizona, California, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, West Virginia and Puerto Rico urging the Supreme Court to uphold the Appeals Court decision.
The Bush administration had also argued that without the threat of punishment for employers, some of the millions of undocumented workers in the United State might be exploited.
"Awarding back pay to illegal aliens runs counter to policies underlying" federal immigration laws, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote in the court's opinion.
Tucson attorney Isabel Garcia, co-chairwoman of Derechos Humanos, an organization that advocates for legal rights for illegal entrants in the United States, said contrary to Rehnquist's opinion, "this case doesn't run counter to
immigration law; it runs counter to the Constitution."
"It clearly puts immigrants in a position of being exploited and not being able to exercise what is truly their right in this country, a right to grieve, a right to unionize, the basic freedoms associated with the freedom of speech,"
she said.
Wes Bramhall, president of the Tucson-based Arizonans for Immigration Control, said as a 55-year member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, a worker, legal or illegal, should get paid for his labor.
But he agreed with the Supreme Court that such workers are not entitled to additional restitution, including back pay.
"If the man did his work, he should be paid," he said. "He should definitely be deported after, but he should be paid, and that's my personal opinion. But I don't think he should be paid for time he didn't work."
The decision also highlights an ongoing contradiction in U.S. society, said Florencio I. Zaragoza, president of Fundacion Mexico, a Tucson-based nonprofit that educates and advocates better understanding and treatment of undocumented immigrants and workers.
"The contradictory thing is that at the same time that the U.S. accepts the taxes and benefits generated by the labor of these workers, they deny them labor rights and impose economic obligations," he said.
The National Labor Relations Board has been allowing wronged undocumented workers to collect back pay since 1995. The board makes sure that employees are not punished for engaging in union activities and protesting employment conditions. The chief tool is requiring back pay, or restitution.
"This decision has ominous implications for the enforcement of labor laws across the board," said William B. Gould IV, the board's 1994-98 chairman. "It will bring into our borders more exploitable low-wage workers."
As many as 7 million undocumented workers have jobs in the United States, the court was told. Six states with high immigration populations had argued that punishments are needed to protect workers.
In a brief filed by attorneys general in each of those states, they argued:
"If the federal government is prohibited from awarding back pay remedies to undocumented workers, employers who hire such workers will be able to violate the National Labor Relations Act with impunity - a result that will have particularly unfortunate consequences in industries with a significant
proportion of undocumented employees."
The Supreme Court has held that undocumented workers are protected by federal labor laws. Justices said in this case that did not entitle them to back pay "for wages that could not lawfully have been earned and for a job obtained in
the first instance by a criminal fraud."
Castro had a minimum-wage job operating a plant blender at Hoffman's plant in Paramount, Calif. He and three other employees were laid off in 1989 after they supported efforts to unionize the plant. He did not speak English, nor did half
of the other plant workers, according to court records. The labor board said Hoffman owed Castro about $67,000.
Hoffman can be subject to "significant other sanctions" including a requirement that it prominently post a notice to employees about their rights, Rehnquist said in the decision.
"That's meaningless. That's simply a slap on the wrist," said Gould, who now teaches labor law at Stanford University.
Maurice Baskin, Hoffman's lawyer, said the court used common sense in determining that "employers should not be required to make windfall payments to illegal aliens."
Dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer said the back- pay penalty
"reasonably helps to deter unlawful activity that both labor laws and immigration laws seek to prevent."
Joining Breyer were Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The decision was criticized by immigrant and women rights groups.
"Even though we pay lip service to the idea that there are basic human rights, we are willing to relax those human rights for a group of folks we wish were not in the country," said Martha Davis, legal director for the Legal Defense and Education Fund of the National Organization for Women.
The case is Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. National Labor Relations Board, 00-1595.
|
Comments
|
I found out about this through a midwest USAS listserv |
by Nick Berveiler
naberve (nospam) ilstu.edu (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
30 Mar 2002
|
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 14:38:38 -0500
From: Morgan Guyton <mguyton (at) floc.com>
Subject: SUPREME COURT REMOVES LABOR RIGHTS FOR UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS
THIS IS CRAZY! The Supreme Court's decision yesterday means that any
undocumented farmworker caught talking to a FLOC labor organizer can be
fired on the spot no questions asked with no possibility of severance,
back-pay, or repercussions for the employer's having hired him or her
"illegally." Almost all farmworkers outside of the Federal H2A program
are undocumented. This is a very damaging direct assault on everything
we are doing!!!
Our union president Baldemar is writing a call for you to participate in
the Mayday Mobilization for Immigrant Worker Justice which he will send
you shortly. I hope you read it. With this ruling and the momentum of
the Bush administration, Mayday becomes more desperately important than
ever. A pesar de todo, hasta la victoria. - Morgan Guyton
La Jornada
Mexico City, Mexico
Thursday, March 28, 2002
United States Supreme Court Removes Labor Rights for Undocumented
Workers
Workers now officially unprotected against abuses of employers
Conditions will be "like slavery" say unions
JIM CASON AND DAVID BROOKS, WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENTS
[Unofficial, bad translation by Morgan Guyton]
Washington, March 27:
The United States Supreme Court decided today that undocumented workers
do not have the right to free association in unions nor protection
against employers that violate their labor rights. The judgment sets
the precedent that if a business fires a worker for either union
activities or at management's personal discretion for any reason, the
worker does not enjoy the legal protection established by law because of
his illegal immigrant condition. With this, all the undocumented
workers in farm fields, factories, restaurants, and hotels in the
country from this point do not have the right to demand lost wages or
any other restitution from employers that violate the law by firing or
punishing them for exercising their basic rights.
The Court made a divided decision, 5 to 4, resolving the case of
undocumented worker Jose Castro, fired along with three other employees
from the Hoffmand Plastic Compound in Paramount, California, in 1989,
for supporting efforts to unionize the plant. The National Labor
Relations Board, the federal agency in charge of resolving violations of
labor law and that supposedly guarantees protections to workers against
employer repercussions for union activities or protesting employment
conditions, found the rights of Castro had been violated and ordered
that he be paid his back wages. The lower courts upheld the NLRB ruling
but the Supreme Court today reversed those decisions.
The AFL-CIO declared its disillusionment over the Supreme Court ruling.
"By permitting employers to victimize illegally undocumented workers
without any economic consequence, the Court judgment undermines the
living standards and work conditions of
all Americans, citizens or not."
The decision "devastated" Arturo Rodriguez, president of the United
Farmworkers of America (the union founded by Cesar Chavez), who said
that this decision is "devastating" for undocumented workers, that are
now left "without rights, without legal protection, without egalitarian
treatment under the law."
In a telephone interview with La Jornada, Rodriguez pointed out that
employers will now seek to employ more undocumented workers knowing that
they do not have legal protection of their labor rights. "This
eliminates for workers the right to confront their bosses... This puts
them almost in conditions of slavery, not having the resources to defend
themselves. This decision represents a threat no less grave than
proposition 187 for the immigrant community." he said.
Eliseo Medina, executive vice-president of the Service Employees
International Union (SEIU), declared it "a bad day for justice in the
United States when the Supreme Court has thrown out basic protections of
immigrants in their place of work." He emphasized that unions will
continue to defend every immigrant worker, legal or undocumented, in
spite of this judgment.
With that and in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court has maintained
in the past that undocumented workers do enjoy the protection of federal
labor laws, today's decision took away the protection to organize and
defend their labor rights.
ORIGINAL
Niega la Corte de EU derechos laborales a
indocumentados
Quedan desprotegidos frente a abusos de
empresarios
Sus condiciones serán "casi de esclavitud": sindicatos
JIM CASON Y DAVID BROOKS CORRESPONSALES
Washington, 27 de marzo.
La Suprema Corte de Estados Unidos dictaminó hoy que los
trabajadores indocumentados no tienen el derecho de libre asociación
en sindicatos ni protección contra empresarios que violan sus garantías
laborales, lo que motivó protestas de órganos gremiales. El fallo
sienta el precedente de que si una empresa cesa a un trabajador por
actividades sindicales o para resguardar sus intereses patronales, éste
no goza de la protección legal establecida por las leyes en la materia
a causa de su condición migratoria "ilegal".
Con ello, todos los trabajadores indocumentados en campos, fábricas,
restaurantes y hoteles de este país no cuentan desde ahora con el
derecho de demandar salarios caídos ni otra restitución de empresas que
violan la ley al cesarlos o castigarlos por ejercer sus derechos
básicos.
La Corte emitió la decisión dividida, de cinco contra cuatro de los
jueces, resolviendo el caso de un trabajador indocumentado mexicano,
José Castro, cesado junto con otros tres compañeros por la empresa
Hoffman Plastic Compound en Paramount, California, en 1989, por
apoyar esfuerzos para sindicalizar la planta. La Junta Nacional de
Relaciones Laborales, agencia federal encargada de resolver violaciones
de la ley laboral y que supuestamente garantiza protección a
trabajadores contra repercusiones empresariales por actividades
sindicales o de protesta contra condiciones de empleo, encontró que los
derechos de Castro fueron violados y ordenó que se le pagara, como
restitución, salario caído y que fuera recontratado. Los tribunales
apoyaron la orden de la junta, pero la Suprema Corte revirtió hoy estas
decisiones.
La central obrera AFL-CIO declaró que está desilusionada con el fallo de
la Suprema Corte. "Al permitir a los empleadores victimizar de forma
ilegal a los trabajadores indocumentados sin ninguna consecuencia
económica, el fallo de la Corte socava las normas de vida y las
condiciones de trabajo de todo estadunidense, ciudadanos y no
ciudadanos", declaró John Sweeney, presidente de la AFL-CIO.
Decisión "devastadora" Arturo Rodríguez, presidente del United
Farmworkers of America (sindicato de jornaleros fundado por César
Chávez), expresó que esta decisión es "devastadora" para los
trabajadores indocumentados, ya que los deja "sin derechos, sin
protección legal, sin trato igualitario de la ley". En entrevista
telefónica con La Jornada, Rodríguez señaló que los patrones ahora
buscarán contratar a más indocumentados sabiendo que no gozan de
protección legal de sus derechos laborales. "Esto elimina para los
trabajadores el derecho de enfrentar a sus patrones... los sitúa casi
en condiciones de esclavitud, ya que no tienen recursos para
defenderse. Esta decisión representa una amenaza igual de grave a la
proposición 187 para la comunidad inmigrante", afirmó.
Eliseo Medina, vicepresidente ejecutivo del Sindicato Nacional de
Servicios (SEIU), declaró que "es un mal día para la justicia en
Estados Unidos cuando la Suprema Corte le quita a los inmigrantes las
protecciones básicas de su lugar de trabajo". Hizo énfasis en que los
sindicatos continuarán defendiendo a todo inmigrante trabajador, legal
o indocumentado, a pesar de este fallo.
Con ello, y a pesar de que la Suprema Corte ha mantenido en el pasado
que los indocumentados sí gozan de la protección de las leyes
laborales federales, la decisión de hoy retira la protección para organizar y defender los derechos laborales.
|
|
Re: Supreme Court Removes Labor Rights for Undocumented Workers |
by Tony
antonga (nospam) lycos.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
28 Jan 2006
|
I believe that if the employeer diduct taxes on an illegal worker that gets minumum wages and never gets any benefits for his hard labor,
deserves some attention. These deductions go one way only (to the state and federal) and help cover legal workers that in turn have rights for Social Security benefits.
What really happens is that these illegals are helping the legals, that do get a better job and respect. Don't forget that some many jobs are available to illegals just because no American desires to work for low wages,hard and unsafe conditions in this country. Illegals do support America and deserve our respect!
Tony |
|
