Two alien workers arrive clueless about their jobs

Two alien workers arrived on Saipan to work but they didn’t even know what their job was going to be, including one who was hired as a manager.

Labor administrative hearing officer Barry Hirshbein ordered the workers—Cai Hua Gan and Feng Ying Yao—to depart the CNMI within 15 days after the repatriation ticket is delivered to Labor by their employer of record.

Hirshbein also permanently barred Gan and Yao from working as nonresident workers in the CNMI.

The hearing officer ordered the employer, Central Pacific Corp., to pay Gan $3,000 for three months plus $3,000 in liquidated damages for a total of $6,000 (less the withholding tax on $3,000).

CP Corp. was also directed to pay Yao $1,586 for 13 weeks plus $1,586 liquidated damages for a total of $3,172 (less withholding taxes on the $1,586).

For violations of labor laws, Hirsbein sanctioned CP Corp. to pay $2,000 and permanently barred the company from employing or utilizing any nonresident workers in the Commonwealth.

If CP Corp. makes all payments required it may petition the hearing officer for modification of this provision, he said.

Hirsbein said CP Corp. entered into the contracts without intention to actually employ Yao or Gan.

He said Yao and Gan submitted false information rendering the contract voidable.

“Complainants have unclean hands and should not be rewarded for their fraud, violations of law and inaction. On the other hand, respondent should be held accountable,” the hearing officer noted.

“The complainants’ blind desire to enter the CNMI rendered them easily victimized. Their misconduct in this case, however, does not entirely vitiate respondent’s obligation to pay wages,” Hirshbein said, adding that it is equitable to award Gan and Yao three months wages and liquidated damages.

Gan and Yao had testified that they have friends and relatives working in the CNMI. In May 2004, while in China, Yao paid a friend 32,000 RMB (about $4,000) to arrange for work in Saipan. In March 2004, while in China, Gan met with Sun Qaolan and paid her the same amount. Sun was the principal officer of Sun Mei Corp. on Saipan.

While in China, the two were both presented with contracts, which they signed. The contracts were in English and neither understood what they were signing.

They had no idea of who they were agreeing to work for, the amount of their salary or the type of work that they would be performing. Both expressed belief that they would be working as garment workers and believed that Sun would be their employer.

When questioned about her nonresident worker affidavit and contract, Yao was surprised to learn that she had agreed to be hired as a commercial cleaner. Gan did not know that she was hired as a manager.

Yao and Gan worked for Sun after they arrived on Saipan (Yao for one month and Gan for three months). Both claimed that they were not paid any wages for their work. When they demanded payment Sun told them that they were not her employees.

They claimed that they learned at that time that CP Corp. was their official employer. The two testified that they went to respondent CP Corp. and demanded work but none was provided. Yao and Gan claimed that respondent introduced them to Top Fashion and they worked for that employer for about two weeks. Both also admitted that they worked for another company around March and April 2006.

In April 2006, Gan was arrested by Immigration officials while working for that employer. In May 2006, both filed labor complaints against respondent claiming no work provided. The two appeared at the Oct. 12 hearing, while no CP representative showed up.

Hirshbein said that, despite the fact that this matter proceeded by default, the complainants’ credibility is “very strained.”

The hearing officer pointed out that the two cannot simply sign an agreement and later claim ignorance when things do not go as hoped.

The two stated that, once here, they didn’t know where to go for help. “This claim is difficult to accept,” Hirshbein said.

He said the complainants submitted false information to Labor when they signed their contracts and affidavits. In addition, he said, the two violated several provisions of the Nonresident Worker Act.

Transfer relief is not warranted in this case, he said.

The question of unpaid wages presents a very difficult question, Hirshbein said. He said the two worked for three different employers, none of whom were their employer of record.

Hirshbein said CP Corp. violated the Labor law that provides that “no employer or nonresident worker shall execute any contract, make any other agreement, or change any existing contract…without the approval of the chief.”