Employees beginning to strike back in the courts and filing suits against employers that knowingly hire illegal aliens to depress wages under federal racketeering laws Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), originally conceived to hammer the Mafia.
According to Dallas Morning News A handful of similar suits have already been filed under RICO, and last month a judge approved a $1.3 million settlement in one of them.
The plaintiffs in the Georgia case – four women who are suing as a class – argue that Mohawk conspired to artificially and illegally depress wages by hiring illegal immigrants. Mohawk has vigorously denied any illegal conduct.
The Georgia case was made possible by a 1996 change to the RICO statute that includes those who knowingly hire illegal workers. It gives workers the right to sue – and for triple damages.
The article also contends that the illegal immigrant workers have used the RICO statute against employers. "In October 2003, the federal government raided dozens of Wal-Mart stores 21 states, including Texas. VictorZavala and other janitors who were detained sued Wal-Mart under the labor statutes and RICO. The alleged systematic violation of immigration, wage, hour and other laws for the "profit and benefit" of the company."
About RICO
RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, Pub. L. No. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922 (Oct. 15, 1970). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title 18 of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 through 18 U.S.C. § 1968.
Under RICO, a person or group who commits any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period and, in the opinion of the U. S. Attorney bringing the case, has committed those crimes with similar purpose or results can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." The act also contains a civil component that allows plaintiffs to sue for triple damages. [Wikipedia]
2 comments:
That's some great news, Robin! Adds some warmth to an otherwise chilly morning, for sure!
here's I think we need to make the distinction. It is really NOT about race or diversity, it is about legality.
What really scares me and I'm starting to see this happen especially in Congress [who we know is out of touch with the nation anyways] is a congressman whose name escapes me at the moment, is pushing to get rid of all All immigration.
That is not the message that we are trying to send out.
I have seen this before we're an issue is taken totally out of context and made into a race issue in which hatred feeds upon.
as Lars Larson has said and I fully agree with him, "I am not against immigration, I am against ILLEGAL immigration."
Post a Comment