May 9, 2002

Counteracting the U.S. Supreme Court, a coalition of labor and civil rights groups is pushing state legislation that would fine employers who short undocumented workers on their pay.

The bill was introduced by state Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, in response to the high court's 5-4 decision in March that said undocumented workers are not entitled to back pay even if their employers committed labor law violations.

"It's the law of the land, but in California we can respond where we can with respect to protecting immigrants and all workers on this issue," Romero said following a press conference Wednesday in Capitol Park.

Romero's SB 1818 had been scheduled for its first hearing Wednesday in the Senate, but it was postponed when some lawmakers refused to cross a picket line posted against a nonunion contractor painting the Capitol.

The bill would allow a court or administrative agency to impose a civil penalty no less than the back pay award in cases in which employers violated minimum wage, overtime or other labor laws and also if companies don't comply with government, civil and health and safety codes. The fine money would go to compensate the affected workers.

In Hoffman Plastics v. the National Labor Relations Board, the Supreme Court ruled March 27 that workers in the country illegally are excluded by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 from collecting back pay even if their federal labor law rights are violated.

The justices took up the case on appeal after the NLRB ruled that Hoffman Plastics of Paramount illegally fired a worker for supporting a union and owed him three years' back pay.

Since the ruling, labor, immigrant and civil rights groups have argued that the ruling paved the way for unscrupulous employers to take advantage of workers who are in the country illegally, which backers of Romero's bill hope her legislation will rectify.

"The purpose of the bill is to ensure there is an alternative out there for courts and administrative agencies if there is a determination made that Hoffman applies and someone is ineligible for a back-pay award," said Mark Schacht, an attorney with the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation who drafted the bill for Romero.

Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor Federation, said the Supreme Court decision "really was a message to employers that they could get away without paying workers the wages they earned.

"We know there are a lot of employers who exploit low-income immigrant workers in California," Pulaski said. "Now, to intimidate them, silence them and not pay them, we know it will happen much more frequently. This is a serious issue of exploitation."

California agriculture and restaurant groups, whose industries are believed to rely heavily on illegal immigrants to harvest crops and work in kitchens, declined to discuss the bill until they could analyze it further.

A Los Angeles spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which seeks to restrict immigration into the United States, expressed no opposition to the basics of the measure. Spokesman Ira Mehlman said the workers should be paid for their work, but they should then be deported and the employers who hired them sanctioned.

"Pay them and then get them out," Mehlman said.

Mario Blanco, an lawyer with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said some employers are hiding behind the Hoffman edict in fighting lawsuits accusing them of violating minimum-wage laws.

"We've gotten form letters from employers saying, after this decision, 'We hope you dismiss your case,' " Blanco said.
By Andy Furillo -- Bee Staff Writer

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/2568666p-3074000c.html