Previous Story
Lawsuit vs. garment firms alleges labor violations
|
Posted on Jan 15 1999
Twenty three foreign garment workers yesterday filed a civil action in federal court against 22 local garment manufacturers alleging violations of federal and local labor laws.
The suit, filed by Timothy Skinner, resident attorney for the law firms of Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach and Altshuler, Berzon, Nussbaum, Berzon and Rubin, alleged violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, the CNMI Nonresident Workers Act, the CNMI Minimum Wage and Hour Act and other laws for nonpayment of overtime premiums and minimum wage.
The garment firms produce clothing for some of the nation’s leading fashion companies and clothing retail outlets.
The garment workers were not identified for fear that if their true identity is revealed, they will face physical violence, immediate deportation to China or their country of origin, likely arrest upon arrival in China or their country of origin and an order by China and other authorities accelerating the repayment of debt incurred for recruitment fees.
They also fear that their families may face similar threats of physical and economic retaliation if their identity is revealed, the complaint explained.
The plaintiffs brought the action on their own behalf and on behalf of a class of at least 25,000 similarly situated nonresident garment workers who are, or have been, employed by the garment manufacturers.
Named as respondents are Advance Textile Corp., American Investment Corp., American Pacific Textile Inc., Concorde Garment Manufacturers Corp., Diorva (Saipan) Ltd., Global Manufacturing Inc., Grace International Inc., Hansae (Saipan) Inc., Joo Ang Apparel Inc., L&T International Corp., Mariana Fashions Inc., Marianas Garment
Manufacturing Inc., Michigan Inc., Micronesian Garment Manufacturing Inc., Neo Fashion Inc., N.E.T. dba Suntex Manufacturing Corp., Pang Jin Sang Sa Corp., Sako Corp., Top Fashion Corp., Trans-Asia Garment Forte Corp., United International Corp. and US CNMI Development Inc.
A similar case which was filed in a California court this week came close to being thrown out by the judge who asked attorneys for plaintiff what irreparable harm did consumers suffer from by buying, i.e., Nike shoes?
