Ex-IPI pit manager files discrimination suit

A former pit manager at the casino of Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the NMI against the casino investor, alleging discrimination.

Stephen Abonita, a Philippine national previously employed by IPI as a casino pit supervisor, has filed a discrimination lawsuit against his former employer, alleging that IPI paid him significantly less than his Caucasian and Chinese fellow pit managers because he is a Filipino. A pit manager typically supervises the operation of the casino floor.

Abonita, through his attorney, Bruce Berline, also claims that IPI required him to work overtime but failed to compensate him for it and retaliated against him for joining protests against the company alongside his fellow Filipinos.

The plaintiff is demanding a jury trial and wants the court to order IPI to pay him back pay, front pay, emotional distress pay, punitive damages, and other relief the court may deem necessary.

According to the lawsuit, the two causes of action in this case are discrimination and breach of contract.

Berline said that IPI discriminated against his client by paying him less than his fellow supervisors and breached his employee contract by requiring him to come into work 30 minutes earlier than his schedule and not compensating him for those hours.

According to the lawsuit, when Abonita was recruited in the Philippines around October 2015, he executed a one-year contract with IPI as a pit manager where he would earn a basic annual salary of $48,000 per year, receive 14 days per year of paid time off, receive one free meal per day, and receive free return transportation to the Philippines upon the expiration of his contract. The October 2015 contract did not include any requirement that Abonita work overtime or state that he was exempt from being paid overtime for any hours that he worked over 40 hpurs in a workweek.

Abonita arrived on Saipan to begin work in or around February 2016 and was allegedly required to work a minimum of 8.5 hours per day at the casino because IPl held a mandatory briefing that started 30 minutes prior to each shift.

“Plaintiff sometimes spent additional time at the end of each shift for meetings that IPI would require. Plaintiff also spent two hours per day (one hour each way) riding the IPI shuttle between his dormitory in San Antonio and the casino site in Garapan. Plaintiff was never compensated by IPI for the additional hours that he worked at the casino or that he spent commuting,” said Berline.

Berline also states that around the same time Abonita started working for IPI, IPI hired a Caucasian pit manager who was being paid $60,000 per annum despite having fewer years of experience under his belt compared to Abonita.

In addition, Abonita’s Caucasian counterpart was given a housing allowance of $700 per month while he was allegedly required to pay $25 a week to live at one of IPI’s dormitories.

Also, Berline said, at times when Abonita had to return to the Philippines due to the expiration of his CW-1 visa, Abonita had to pay for his own airfare despite a clause in his contract stating that IPI would shoulder those costs.

Lastly, following the onslaught of Super Typhoon Yutu, Abonita joined his fellow Filipinos in protest against IPI who was not compensating them, and were trying to repatriate them without pay.

When Abonita was called back to work a few weeks after the protests, IPI allegedly retaliated by not allowing him to go on leave, and telling him that if he wanted leave, he could resign. In addition, IPI allegedly promoted his Caucasian and Chinese counterparts and raised their salaries, while keeping him at the same position and salary despite his experience and years with IPI.