Uniform application of the labor law

Allow me to share what we, the majority of the guest workers, feel about the response of the Department of Labor to Reps. Tina Sablan and Edward Salas. I feel that our feelings and sentiments merit attention, particularly because we are the issue.

On income requirements under Section 4926 of Public Law 15-108, DOL did not give any direct answer. Although the law sets annual wage requirements, the rules and regulations also state that “alternatively, a foreign national worker may provide equivalent assurance that one’s immediate family will not require social services from the Commonwealth government due to lack of income or support during their period of stay in the Commonwealth.”

For one, I have a question on how DOL interprets the law as far as how much is the income requirement. What the law states is that the annual wage should be equal or greater than150 percent of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Guidelines for the State of Hawaii (http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/07poverty.shtml). This Hawaii poverty guideline is not one arbitrary amount but is a bracket, depending on the number of persons in a household. For example, two persons (which assumes a wife and husband) who earn a combined $15,750 times 150 percent equals $23,625. However, if you ask DOL how much the income requirement is, they normally say $29,000 or so. They do not compute based on the Hawaii poverty guidelines.

On the waiver for the income requirements, DOL needs to apply the law uniformly. We are aware of an application for 706E using the “alternative way” which was approved with no hassle at all, which is odd considering the fact that the husband and wife are not legally married, which the law requires. Is this a case of accommodation because someone powerful had to be accommodated as a favor? I can also name names if it has to come to that point to prove that to some extent, what they do is capricious.

On unpaid wages, instead of arguing at this point to prove who is responsible for enforcing the judgment, I would like to beg for DOL’s assistance. There are guest workers who are willing to leave the CNMI once they receive their money. From what I gather from talking to them, especially in the case of Chinese guest workers, because they do not speak English well, they hesitate to pursue filing in small claims court. I believe that the best solution is for DOL to order the bonding companies to pay. We laud Rep. Tina and Ed for their sincere sympathy for the guest workers and for their efforts help us get better status and fair treatment.

At the same time, I challenge Cinta Kaipat and Secretary San Nicolas to a dialogue with the guest workers and not only with a select few. Enough of the war in the media! P.L. 15 -108 has a lot of gray areas that tend to confuse people, thus possibly their decisions may be subjected to appeal. I hope DOL will interpret the law with consideration to guest workers who have been here in the island, giving their sweat and blood and living the best years of their lives to contribute to the economy of CNMI.

Irene Tantiado
Capital Hill, Saipan