Previous Story
Court urged to enforce 1997 labor order
|
Posted on Jul 31 2004
A nonresident worker on Friday asked the Superior Court to order his former employer to comply with the Department of Labor’s decision on his 1997 labor complaint.
Abdul H. Mollah, a Bangladesh national, said his former Tinian employer Reynaldo M. Cing has yet to pay him any amount, as directed by the Labor hearing office in its Feb. 11, 1998 order.
The Labor Department had awarded Mollah $1,000 for unpaid wages, $800 for liquidated damages, and $828 for attorney’s fees. Cing, however, “has failed and refused and continues to fail and refuse to pay” Mollah any amount, necessitating the court’s action to enforce the Labor order.
Mollah urged the court to force Cing to pay the awards, plus interest at a statutory rate of 9 percent.
Records showed that Mollah worked for Cing as a farmer between Nov. 4, 1996 and March 30, 1997 under a temporary worker authorization, after both parties verbally agreed that the worker would be paid $200 monthly.
On Feb. 23, 1997, however, Mollah was assaulted by Tinian resident Jose Borja and received serious injuries to his hand. Scared of another attack, Mollah decided to terminate his employment with Cing and moved to Saipan.
On April 4, 1997, Mollah filed a labor complaint against the employer for unpaid wages. He later amended the complaint to include breach of contract.
At the trial, the worker said he never received any salary for the services he did for Cing, except for the occasional $10 or $5 that the employer gave him when Cing won at cockfights.
Cing refuted this, presenting his houseworker as witness that Mollah had been paid his $200 monthly salary. But the Labor hearing office did not find the witness’ testimony credible. Further, Cing was not able to present any meaningful payroll records and receipts supporting his claim.
In view of this, the Labor Department decided in favor of Mollah in its Feb. 11, 1998 order.
On Friday, Mollah noted to the court that Cing had failed to appeal the order to the Labor secretary within the allowed 15-day appeal period. The order thus became “final and unreviewable administratively and judicially,” he said.
