| FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 3, 2002 |
|
|
UFCW Statement on Immigrant Worker Rights [Editor's Note: On March 27, 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Hoffman Plastics v. National Labor Relations Board that a worker illegally terminated for engaging in legally-protected union activity was not entitled to back pay because of his immigration status. Through the inception of U.S. labor law in the 1930s, workers have the right to engage in union activity. Workers who are illegally fired for that activity are due back wages.] Statement of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union April 3, 2002 On March 27, by a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court struck a blow to the rights of workers, democracy and human rights. These are the same five justices who ignored the popular vote and the will of the American people, and put George W. Bush in the White House. Now, under Hoffman, the Court has gutted the long-standing remedy of back pay for illegally fired workers. We now face a 5-4 tyranny that treats American workers with contempt. Now, the punishment for illegal conduct is not based on the actions of the perpetrator, but on the status of the victim. This is justice turned upside-down. The employer that has violated federal law has been turned into the victim and escapes without any real penalty, despite the fact it is undisputed that the employer committed a crude and obvious violation of the labor laws. Congress can and should immediately correct this decision with the passage of very simple language that provides for uniform remedies for workers who are illegally fired-regardless of immigration status. Congress should immediately enact legislation that would provide for the legalization of immigrant workers who are long-term employees and tax payers. All workers, native born or immigrant, must stand united to oppose the exploitation and abuses of any workers. To allow employers to exempt themselves from U.S. labor laws by hiring undocumented workers will only provide an incentive for employers to recruit and import more undocumented workers for economic exploitation. If immigrant workers have no real remedies in the face of an employer's illegal conduct, then employers have an economic incentive to displace native born workers and replace them with undocumented workers. To mitigate the impact of this decision, unions and advocacy groups must understand what Hoffman is and what it is not---and not overplay the decision because by overplaying it, we would be playing right into the hands of the employers. > First: Workers have a right to organize and bargain collectively-that is true whether a worker is documented or undocumented. Hoffman did not change that. Unscrupulous employers are undoubtedly going to overstate the scope of the decision in order to coerce and intimidate workers from exercising their rights. > Second: Hoffman does not say that undocumented workers are not to be paid for time actually worked-for work actually performed. Thus, the decision should not impact the enforcement of the Fair Labor Standards Act or state wage and hour laws. Hoffman does not relieve employers from paying the minimum wage and overtime. > Third: Hoffman does not exempt employers from the National Labor Relations Act. It recognizes that remedies are available for the illegal firing of undocumented workers-namely, cease and desist orders and postings. To make those remedies meaningful, the National Labor Relations Board must step up its efforts to aggressively pursue those remedies and hold employers in contempt for labor law violations. Hoffman is a step backwards and it is an affront to workers. But Hoffman should not be used as an excuse to stop the organization of immigrant workers. Expanded union organizing efforts and political mobilization are the most effective remedies to the abuse of workers. |
|
 |
 |
