Court upholds local autonomy • Dismisses garment workers’ complaints on violation of local labor law

The US District Court, recognizing the sensitiveness of issues relating to local control of labor and immigration, has declined jurisdiction over complaints that deal with violation of the CNMI labor laws.

District Court Judge Alex Munson has dismissed at least seven claims in the class action suit filed 23 anonymous plaintiffs, saying such claims involved complaints that should be litigated in a local court.

According to Munson, complaints on alleged violations of the CNMI Minimum Wage and Hour Act and the Nonresident Workers Act should be heard in a local court.

Munson said the existing political tension between Washington and Saipan “presents exceptional circumstances” that compelled the court to decline jurisdiction over the local claims.”

“This case involves several substantial issues of state law which are the current focus of scheduled hearings in both the US Congress and the CNMI legislature,” Munson said, referring to proposals to extend the application of federal labor and immigrations laws to the Commonwealth.

Munson’s remarks were contained in an Aug. 6 order, in which he granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs local claims.

The class action suit has categorized plaintiffs into two groups. One group consists of those whose complaints are covered by local labor laws, such as failure to pay the mandated minimum wage, and breach of contract.

The second group refers to those whose complaints involved alleged violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act such as failure to pay overtime premiums and taking of illegal deductions from wages.

Named defendants in the class action suit are 22 garment companies which are represented by a battery of prominent lawyers on Saipan.

The plaintiffs had argued that the federal court had “supplemental jurisdiction” over local claims because their complaints “arose out of [their] employment relationship with defendants and thus shared a common nucleus of operative facts.”

Munson, however, disagreed, saying that “the state law claims in the case at bar substantially predominate over the single federal claims.”

“Pursuant to the Covenant, immigration and labor matters are primarily regulated by the CNMI government,” Munson said.

The takeover proposals in Washington D.C., Munson added, directly affect the CNMI laws on employment of nonresident workers and “form the basis for the core issues in this litigation.”

The motion to dismiss local claims was among the many pleadings filed by garment companies in the federal court.

Munson heard last week the companies’ request that their cases be tried separately. The court has yet to act on this motion.

In an earlier ruling which was based on another motion by the garment companies, Munson dismissed the garment workers’ anonymous complaint saying they had no sufficient claims to support anonymous proceedings.

This order is on stay until the court hears the rest of the motions on Sept. 8. (MCM)