Thanks to D. Michael Dale for this synopsis:

On Thursday, March 21, 2013, the United States District Court in Philadelphia ruled in C.A.T.A et al v. Solis that the Department of Labor can no longer use the flawed methodology for calculating the H-2B prevailing wage that was adopted by the outgoing Bush administration in its waning hours.  Earlier, the C.A.T.A. court had found the prior rule to be unlawfully adopted and ordered the department to adopt a new methodology promptly.  However, in order to avoid a regulatory vacuum, the court had left the Bush rules in place in the interim.  DOL adopted a new rule that more or less uses the mean wage paid to workers in the job classification and area, which would have increased prevailing wages in the H-2B program by an average amount of $4.38 per hour.  Unfortunately, that rule has never gone into effect because of a Congressional rider placed on DOL's appropriation forbidding the use of the new methodology.  DOL has reverted to using the old rules, and expressed no intention or plan to the court as to how it would bring the program into compliance with the H-2B statute.  The court has now ruled that, 30 months after the Bush rule was declared to be unlawful, DOL cannot continue to use the invalid rule.  The court has given the Department of Labor 30 days to come into compliance.

FILED UNDER: Agricultural Workers | DOL | Guestworkers | Litigation

Univision’s Preimer Impacto profiles the story of Adriana Moreno, a home care worker from Colombia, who was cheated out of her wages.  With the help of NELP and NY-based law firms Getman Sweeny and Abbey Spanier, Moreno has brought a class action lawsuit against her home care agency to recover her pay and bring justice for her and hundreds of her coworkers.

FILED UNDER: Domestic/Homecare Workers | Litigation

Congratulations to AALDEF!

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) announced that Filipina immigrant worker Elizabeth Ballesteros, represented by AALDEF’s Anti-Trafficking Initiative, has been awarded $1.2 million in damages in a human trafficking civil suit against Colonel Arif Mohamed Saeed Mohamed Al-Ali, a former student at the U.S. Naval War College's International Program from the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

FILED UNDER: Immigrant Workers | Litigation

Federal Immigration Program Can Help Young Workers [MyrtleBeach Online]

Courthouse Crowd Rallies Against Raid of Mariachi Locos Restaurants, Threatened Deportations [Akron Beacon]

Post-Recall Failure, Unions Reach Out To Immigrants To Broaden Appeal [CapTimes]

Republican Platform Endorses Arizona Law, Guest Worker Plan [About]

Republicans “Modernize” Immigration Stance [New York Post]

Immigration One of the Few Sticking Points in GOP Platform [Tampa Bay Times]

Ten Key Changes In Immigration Enforcement During Obama Years [Houston Chronicle]

California Farmers Leaving Crops Unpicked Amid Labor Shortage [Huffington Post]

Every 2.5 Days, A Construction Worker Dies In Texas; and What Two Groups Are Doing About It [AFL-CIO blog]

NY Mayor: Fix Immigration to Boost Economy [Chicago Sun-Times]

FILED UNDER: Immigrant Workers | Legislation | Litigation | Low-Wage Workers

Washington, DC – By a 5-3 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court today held in Arizona v. United States that most of the provisions of the state’s controversial anti-immigrant law are unconstitutional.  The Court let stand a provision that requires police officers to verify the immigration status of anyone they arrest, though the Justices left open the possibility of a future challenge to the effect this provision has in practice. 

“Today the Court rejected the extreme view held by its dissenters that states can devise their own immigration policies,” said Christine Owens, Executive Director of the National Employment Law Project.  “The Court based its decision in part on the necessity that our nation speak with one voice on immigration, and the danger that a patchwork system of immigration regulation poses to our foreign policy and our role in the world.  In addition, the Court noted that the federal government is in the best place to evaluate these national priorities, including placing deportation of working immigrants low in its priorities. The Court denied the State of Arizona the ability to make work itself a criminal act.”

FILED UNDER: Immigration | Litigation