‘Class-suit workers to get checks by June’s end’

The lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit against the CNMI garment industry informed the federal court yesterday that the disbursement of checks to the workers may be completed by the end of the month.

Attorney Pamela Parker, who appeared in court via telephone along with other off-island counsels for the plaintiffs, told U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Alex R. Munson that the payment process is in place now.

Parker said the disbursement of checks should take place in about three weeks. She also said that if the exact dollar amount in the computation was available yesterday the process would be completed by the end of June.

At the hearing, former judge Timothy H. Bellas, chairman of the Garment Oversight Board, distributed the board’s repatriation program to all counsels present.

Munson set the hearing to determine whether payments have been made to the workers involved in the class-action suit and other related issues.

Attorney Steven Pixley, who appeared on behalf of the defendants along with other lawyers, said they are pleased that it looks like “things are moving along.”

Pixley said it is taking awhile, but plaintiffs’ counsel indicated that they have some problems with the big number of workers involved, which could be as many as 25,000, according to their records.

“So it’s moving along and we’re happy with the hearing today and we want to make sure all the workers get the money that they are due,” he said.

In an interview, Bellas said the main issue for the plaintiffs’ counsel was “the most favored nations” clause in the settlement agreement.

“That issue has been resolved or should have been resolved because that’s been pending for three years,” Bellas said.

“Favored nations means that some of the people who settled the case, their lawyers said, ‘Look, we want to settle with you right away and get this thing over with and stop paying legal fees.’ So what they [garment firms] said is, ‘We don’t want to be penalized because we’re settling early. So we want to settle in as good a position as anybody else who settles in the case.’ So if you agree to those terms and accept settlement then we’ll give you our contribution now,” he said.

Eventually, what happened is these defendants made their contribution and they were concerned about some other defendants settling for a lesser amount, Bellas said.

“And if that happened, then they were supposed to get a refund on the difference between what they paid and what’s the best deal that was made with some other defendants,” he said.

But Bellas said there were no other settlements.

Bellas noted that Munson in the hearing made sort of a preliminary ruling or finding that a dismissal in the case does not constitute a settlement.

Bellas said Munson’s finding allows the most favored nations money to be released.

“So by releasing the money, that was the last problem that plaintiffs counsel have in computing how much money is supposed to go to the workers. …Before, they could not make the computation of how much to give to the workers until they know that this money is included or this money is not included,” he said.

The former judge said one of the law firms based in San Francisco that is representing the plaintiffs is now going to compute how much each worker is entitled to, dividing the money in the trust account.

Bellas said the law firm then would start sending out the checks to between 20,000 to 25,000 workers in several countries—not just China, but also the Philippines, Bangladesh and others.

Bellas said the budget is approximately $7 million, which is the rough figure and based on the report that they submitted.

He said GOB wants the issue to be resolved.

“We said, let’s put this before the judge. Today he [Munson] actually made a ruling—a tentative ruling—that this is a situation where a dismissal doesn’t constitute a settlement and therefore you can feel free to release that money,” he said.