Sweatshop: Labor and community groups pledge bond for 40 of the immigrants. They have agreed to serve as witnesses against the business’ operators
August 11, 1995|PAUL FELDMAN and PATRICK J. McDONNELL | TIMES STAFF WRITERS
Many of the 72 undocumented Thai immigrants who worked for years in alleged slave-like conditions at an El Monte sweatshop could be released from federal detention as early as today under a court agreement reached Thursday.
At an afternoon hearing attended by 54 of the mostly young and female factory workers, U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia A. Phillips approved an agreement between the U.S. attorney’s office and the federal public defender’s office setting bond of $500 for each of the detainees.
Leaders of a coalition of community and labor activist groups calling itself Sweatshop Watch announced shortly afterward that they have commitments to free up to 40 of the detainees, who have agreed to serve as material witnesses against the operators of the sweatshop. The coalition is seeking additional help from civic and religious agencies to sign bonds for the rest of the detainees.
“They should be released soon, but we’ll believe it when it actually happens,” said Julie A. Su, staff attorney for the Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California. “These people are victims of some of the worst crimes imaginable.”
Meanwhile, one of the two major retail firms identified by state labor officials as being scrutinized for purchasing garments from the sweatshop, filed suit Thursday against the firm they say apparently served as a conduit.
Montgomery Ward announced that it had filed suit in U.S. District Court in Chicago against New Boys Inc. of Los Angeles for allegedly supplying goods in violation of the retail giant’s policy not to employ “slave, prison or child labor, which violates state and federal law.”
That policy is communicated to all of Montgomery Ward’s 1,200 vendors worldwide, said Sarina A. Butler, a corporate spokeswoman for the Chicago-based retailer.
“We will not tolerate conditions identified during the El Monte raid,” declared Bernard F. Brennan, chairman and chief executive officer of Montgomery Ward, the largest privately held retailer in the United States, with almost 400 stores in 39 states. “We have made it clear that Montgomery Ward had no knowledge of this operation and will have no part of such deplorable labor conditions.”
Montgomery Ward is removing all New Boys merchandise from sales floors nationwide, the chain said. The clothing, believed to have been manufactured at the El Monte site, consisted of boys’ knit shirts with the Airtime and Permit labels, the spokeswoman said.
Officials of New Boys could not be reached for comment Thursday.
*
Records seized during last week’s raids at El Monte and a site in Los Angeles linked New Boys to the El Monte operation, according to a source at the U.S. Department of Labor. A ledger found at D & R Fashion–the Los Angeles sewing shop that federal authorities suspect was a front for the El Monte operation–detailed more than $300,000 in checks from New Boys to D & R between June 16 and July 28, the source said.
Seeking to trace the purchasers of the clothing manufactured with virtual slave labor, California officials have subpoenaed the records of another major clothing chain, Mervyn’s, and indicated their intention to subpoena Montgomery Ward. Shipping labels with both firms’ addresses were found on boxes of garments during the raid.
But spokesmen for both retailers have said they could find no direct links to the sweatshop, which authorities said also did business as SK Fashions.
Apparel firms that purchased merchandise from the El Monte operation, an unregistered garment contractor, could be held legally liable for wage violations and may be required to help cover the $5 million in back pay due the workers, according to state Labor Commissioner Victoria Bradshaw.
“I’m very pleased retailers are taking this matter seriously,” said Bradshaw, whose agency spearheaded last week’s raid. “But we’re taking the appropriate steps and moving forward with our own investigation.”
The Thai workers who appeared in court Thursday were discovered inside the El Monte sweatshop by state and local authorities serving a search warrant.
In subsequent interviews, the workers said they had been held in the guarded complex–and forced to toil from 7 a.m. to midnight–for as long as seven years. They were paid less than $2 an hour and were barred from leaving even after repaying debts incurred in coming to the United States, they said.
All have been asked to serve as material witnesses against six factory supervisors charged by federal prosecutors with harboring illegal immigrants and two others accused of transporting them. The charges carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Additional charges, including peonage, extortion, kidnaping and selling into involuntary servitude, are also being considered against the defendants, who are being held without bail.
Since their discovery, the workers have remained in federal detention, spending their days in rounds of interviews with prosecutors, immigration workers and the community activists seeking their release.
The Asian Pacific American Legal Center said Thursday that it would sign bonds for 20 of the workers, and the Union of Needle Trades, Industrial and Textile Employees (UNITE) said it would do so for another 20. Assistance efforts by Sweatshop Watch are being coordinated by the Thai Community Development Center at (213) 739-8455. Bond signatories would be held financially liable if the undocumented immigrants failed to show up for scheduled court appearances.
Steven Nutter, regional director of UNITE, said that more than 20 of the detainees have indicated their willingness to participate in lawsuits to win millions in back pay and civil rights damages. Those laborers would be the first for whom the union would post bond, he said.
Magistrate Judge Phillips, who on Wednesday granted a federal request for $5,000 surety per detainee, agreed to lower the amount after Assistant U.S. Atty. Thomas D. Warren said the government had received adequate assurance from community groups that the laborers “”would remain in the community”” if freed.
Once the $500 material witness bonds are pledged, the Thai workers will revert to INS custody, a process that officials say should result in their speedy release.
INS authorities said that all 72 Thai nationals would probably be released on their own recognizance. The former sweatshop laborers will also be provided with six-month work permits, which can be renewed as long as their presence is necessary for the prosecution, the INS said.
Ultimately, though, most, if not all, of the workers still face deportation.
“Our two priorities right now are, No. 1, ensuring the success of the criminal prosecution, and No. 2, working closely with the Thai community to get these people processed and released,” said Virginia Kice, spokeswoman for the INS, which has been harshly criticized for closing its initial investigation of the sweatshop three years ago. “They’ve been through a very difficult time and we want to do whatever we can to relieve their plight.”
Some may eventually qualify for relief from deportation if, for example, they are married to legal U.S. residents or have been in the country for at least seven years and can demonstrate hardship if forced to return home. But the standard procedure in such cases is for the material witnesses to be sent back once their usefulness in the criminal case ends.
*
Because of the egregious nature of the case, some activists have called on the INS to override its usual process and grant permanent legal status to the 72 workers.
Kice said it was “premature” to speculate on such action.
In an interview Thursday, INS Commissioner Doris Meissner defended her beleaguered agency’s actions, including the decision three years ago to close its initial investigation of the El Monte operation.
“I’m satisfied that we did everything we could, given what was available to us,” said Meissner, who repeated the INS contention that the case was turned over in 1992 to state labor investigators. California officials say they have no record of such a referral.
Times staff writer George White contributed to this story.
