Previous Story
‘Labor’s proposal in denial case unduly harsh’
|
Posted on Jun 05 2005
A nonresident worker was allowed to stay in the Commonwealth, as a hearing officer denied the Department of Labor’s recommendation for the worker to be sent back home over a minor delay in the filing of his employment application.
Labor hearing officer Jerry Cody maintained that it would be “unduly harsh” to order worker Pei Ren Zhe to depart the CNMI based on the four-day delay.
In an administrative order, Cody instructed Pei and his employer, M&H Corporation, to pay a fine of $100 each. Cody said the Division of Labor should resume processing Pei’s employment application as soon as the sanctions are paid.
The stemmed from an appeal filed by Pei and M&H Corporation requesting the Hearing Office to reverse The Division of Labor’s denial of their application.
The division turned down Pei’s papers because it was filed four days late.
At the hearing, the appellants testified that Pei approached the employer in mid-February 2005, seeking employment as an electronics repairer. The parties discussed the employment over a period of days, but the worker never mentioned he had an impending transfer deadline.
After the employment was offered, the employer gave the paperwork to a processing agent to prepare the application. The employment contract and supporting documents were signed by the parties on March 3, 2005, and filed the following day.
Department representatives recommended that the denial be affirmed and Pei be repatriated. Cody disagreed.
“This position seems at odds with the department’s position in many prior cases in which the department recommended that minor filing delays should be excused. In those cases, based on particular facts, the department recommended—and the hearing office agreed—that transfer applications filed late by only several days should be excused and processed, provided that a monetary sanction was paid,” said Cody.
The hearing officer further cited an order issued by Labor Secretary Joaquin Tenorio on Sept. 20, 2004 allowing the processing of a transfer application that had been filed 29 days late—after the 15-day deadline imposed by Public Law 12-11. (Agnes E. Donato)
