 Saipan
workers' class action lawsuit will proceed to trial October 29, 2001,
Federal Court Judge Rejects Motion to Dismiss Landmark Sweatshop Class
Action Against Saipan Garment Factories, The Gap, Target and Other Retailers First
Case to Hold Retailers Accountable for Factory Sweatshop Abuses Will Proceed to
Trial In a closely-watched human rights case, a U.S. District Judge in the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands today upheld the complaint in a class
action lawsuit alleging sweatshop conditions on the Western Pacific Island of
Saipan. This ruling allows the case to proceed to trial. According to the
complaint, the more than 13,000 garment workers in Saipan often work 12-hour days,
seven days a week, in unsafe, unclean conditions that violate U.S. labor laws
and international treaties. In a 55 page decision, U.S. District Judge Alex R.
Munson held that these allegations, if proven at trial, were sufficient to establish
liability of both the factories and retailers for engaging in a "conspiracy"
to use indentured labor in violation of racketeering laws. "We won
another important round today," said Al Meyerhoff of Milberg Weiss Bershad
Hynes & Lerach LLP and a lead attorney for the plaintiffs. "The Saipan
workers are going to get their day in court. This case is going to trial,"
continued Meyerhoff. Directly addressing the plaintiffs' claims that the
Saipan's sweatshop industry is dependent on indentured foreign labor, the court
stated: "When the labor is tied to a debt owed to the employer and
the employer physically coerces the worker to labor until the debt is paid or
the consequences of failing to work to pay off the debt are so severe and outside
the customary legal remedy that the worker is compelled to labor, a condition
of peonage results, and this is the essence of plaintiffs' allegations." One
of the primary claims in the lawsuit is that the Saipan garment industry employs
foreign workers, primarily young women from the People's Republic of China, who
were required to sign "shadow contracts" waiving their basic human rights.
These workers were also allegedly forced to pay "recruitment fees" as
high as $7,000 just to come to the U.S., creating an indentured status that has
been illegal in the United States since the civil war. In seeking to be
dismissed from the suit, the retailers claimed they could not be legally responsible
for the actions of factory owners since they were just "customers." The
federal court granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss
the action, upholding the RICO claims but disallowing certain other claims such
as for violations of the Alien Tort Claims Act. However, the dismissal of those
claims was "without prejudice" to plaintiffs' amending the complaint
to include more detail or allegations of "state actions" involving the
People's Republic of China. "Since China's role in violating of human
rights on American soil is manifest, we should have little difficulty adding state
action allegations," said Michael Rubin of Altshuler Berzon Nussbaum Rubin
& Demain and a lead attorney for the plaintiffs. "China even owns several
of the factories," continued Rubin. Since the case was filed in 1999,
nineteen retailers have settled the claims against them and agreed to adhere to
a rigorous system of independent monitoring at the Saipan factories of contractors
who produce their clothes. The settlement provides for a multi-million dollar
fund and requires that in future supply contracts, retailers will ensure that
their factories comply with strict employment standards, including guaranteeing
overtime pay for overtime work, providing safe food and drinking water, and respecting
employees' basic human rights. Unfortunately, the factory owners, together with
The Gap, Target, JC Penney, Levi-Strauss and others have blocked the other retailers'
settlements by using delay tactics in the courts. Earlier this month, in
a separate but related action solely against the Saipan factory owners for requiring
"volunteer work" to meet production quotas in violation of American
overtime laws, Judge Munson ordered that some 20,000 current and former garment
workers in several countries be provided notice of their right to submit claims
for back wages. And the complaint in a California state court case against The
Gap and other retailers for alleged false advertising and fraud in claiming only
to sell "sweatshop free" goods has also been previously upheld. The
defendants include many major U.S. retailers and dozens of largely foreign factory
owners, including Hong Kong billionaire, Willie Tan, head of Tan Holdings. The
plaintiffs are represented by the San Diego firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes
& Lerach LLP and the San Francisco firm of Altshuler Berzon Nussbaum Rubin
& Demain. ### For background information, visit Sweatshop Watch
at
http://www.sweatshopwatch.org/marianas | 
