‘Worker’s termination justified for refusing to return to work’

The Department of Labor has found the termination of an alien worker justified after he refused to return to work despite the company’s several attempts to get him back to his job.

However, Labor administrative hearing officer Herbert D. Soll found the employer, TKL Enterprises Inc., liable to pay the worker, Rasalingam Kanagasabai, $189.34 for improper salary deductions plus an equal amount of liquidated damages or for a total of $378.68.

“These findings, coupled with the fact that the complainant prevailed in a portion of his claim against the respondent, justifies allowing him a period of time to find another employer,” Soll said.

He allowed Kanagasabai to seek another employer within 30 days.

According to Labor records, Kanagasabai began working for American Joint Partners in 2001. He was renewed each year until 2007 when there were some changes in the company’s management.

Apparently TKL Enterprises Inc. purchased the business of American Joint Partners, but in any event the same work that was performed by the employees for American Joint Partners was performed for TKL.

The complainant worked beyond the validity of his permit and he admits receiving his wages until March 2007 when he complains that wages were not paid.

He testified that he worked without receiving wages from March 8 to June 18. On that day, he claims that he insisted on receiving the unpaid wages for the previous three months and the stock manager told him not to work any longer after they argued about wages.

The complainant states that he considered the result of the spat with the stock manager to be a termination. He did not return to work after June 18, but he admits that several TKL employees visited him at his home.

The company’s version of the transactions leading to the alleged termination is different from the account of Kanagasabai.

The respondent’s two employees testified that the complainant was given $300 to purchase auto parts for use on a company vehicle that he was repairing. Kanagasabai was asked to supply receipts for the money and he failed to do so.

One employee testified that she withheld a net salary payment of $189.34 because of the unaccounted auto parts advance.

The company’s employees admit that the withheld wage payment has not yet been paid.

In his administrative order issued on Monday, Soll accepted the testimony of the employees as factual and the balance of the claim of the complainant is rejected as being untrue.

Soll said when the complainant did not return to work, several of the employees of TKL visited him and found him in an intoxicated state.

“His welfare was of concern to the visitors, but additionally there was an official reason to visit and that was to get him to return to work,” Soll said.

The hearing officer determined that the evidence supports a finding that Kanagasabai was not terminated on June and that he did not intend to return to work.

Soll said the complainant was terminated as of July 2, 2007, after several attempts to get him to return, and the termination was justified.

Soll said it appears that the complainant’s involvement in the car repair was an activity outside of his regular work duties.

“Any advance of money made to him for the purchase of auto parts was not in the normal course of his employment and cannot be mixed with the hourly wages that an employee has the right to collect,” he noted.