How to use this Page

The CNMI got a 50cent raise in minimum wage (to $3.55) last July 2007, and is set to have another 50cent raise (to $4.05) this May 26, 2008.

It comes as no surprise that our illustrious governor is trying to put the kibosh on this next incremental raise, and all future scheduled raises (50cents each year through 2015, until we reach $7.25, which will be the minimum wage in the U.S. set for year 2009). He lobbied heavily against the first increase, and effectively insisted on having the minimum wage law include requirements for a study by the Department of Labor on the effect of the raises.

And he is not alone--the representative to the U.S. Congress from American Samoa has introduced a bill to stop the incremental minimum wage increases, which also apply to them.

The U.S. Department of Labor has now issued its report, and the Variety and Tribune have each reported the governor or his spokespeople saying how this report completely vindicates their argument that raising minimum wage in the CNMI is harmful to our economy.

Thanks to Ken Phillips at SOSaipan for a link to the actual report, which I've linked to, also, here.



Ken's comments are also helpful in orienting a reader to the report's "findings."

CNMI Governor Fitial is using the age-old practice of "spin" to argue that the DOL's latest report supports suspension of the minimum wage hike. See, e.g. this Variety news story or this Tribune story.

The spin includes distortions of what the report actually says, what people in the CNMI think about raising minimum wage, and characterization of the report as reaching a conclusion against implementation of the next minimum wage increase.

1. According to the Tribune article, "Increasing the CNMI wage to $7.25 an hour, the report said, is comparable to raising the U.S. minimum wage to $16.50 an hour." NOT TRUE.

First of all, the report actually says "The scheduled increase in the minimum wage to $7.25 (by 2015) will likely affect at least 75 percent of wage and salary workers in the CNMI. By comparison, in order to directly affect 75 percent of U.S. hourly workers, the minimum wage would need to be raised to $16.50, the 75th percentile mark for wage and salary workers who are paid hourly rates."

What this means is that the CNMI has a much larger segment of its working population suffering from the low minimum wage than the U.S. does. In the U.S., minimum wage is truly a "floor" and many workers obviously earn more than the minimum, which is why it would take such a much larger increase to effect 75% of them. This is not an argument AGAINST raising minimum wage here, but only highlights the urgency and desperation of why we need these incremental raises.

Second of all, the report is comparing apples and oranges--or really today and many years hence. The CNMI is not facing a raise to $7.25 this year. We are facing a raise to $4.05 this May. NOTHING in the report tells us what that is comparable to in the U.S.


2. The governor reports a "broad concensus" against raising the minimum wage to the next level here. Jeff Flores has already spoken out here that he disagrees, and doesn't believe people here are uniformly against raising minimum wage.

It's time to show that the Governor is misstating the facts about what the people in the CNMI want. Every worker here who earns minimum wage of $3.55 who is in favor of raising their minimum wage to $4.05 should contact Mr. George Miller or any of the representatives on the House Committee on Education and Labor. Any other person, whether you earn minimum wage or not, who feels it's important to raise the CNMI minimum wage to $4.05 this May, can also express their views to the committee members. You can see the full committee roster here. Or you can just write or call: Democratic Staff, 2181 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515, (202-225-3725).

3. The DOL report includes statements about the past that are informative, but nothing it says about the present effect of the minimum wage here or the likely effect another raise may have is at all reliable. The report itself denies reliability.

It notes that there are many adverse economic factors. In discussing the garment industry, the report says that lack of data make it impossible to distinguish among the various adverse factors as to which are having the greatest impact. (page 31)

Although the report paints a bleak picture and talks about how difficult having a raise in minimum wage is when times are tough, it also suggests that the tourism industry may rebound. If it had applied its own logic to this statement, this might suggest room for absorbing the impact of the minimum wage hike.

But most telling is this: "The CNMI does not yet have in place macroeconomic data collection and accounting-systems technology capable of generating information on total output and its components on a monthly or quarterly basis. As a result, there is not a way to provide objective measures of productive capacity, capacity utilization, employment, wages or unemployment rates...In the absence of complete and accurate macroeconomic data, there is no objective method to guage the level of aggregate economic activity, the level of employment it supports, or other important measures such as total personal income, consumption, savings and other metrics that explain the well-being of the population and the average citizen...The lack of such data are especially a barrier to assessing the current and future impact of the recent and scheduled increases in the minimum wage."

In other words--they're just guessing, and can't say anything objective.

The Governor's spin is nothing but more twist against what is fair and just--a living wage for workers.

Add a Comment

I'm still tracking through the new labor law, and I'm still on the purposes. (Part 1 is posted at Post # 160.) There are some good statements in the purposes with which I agree, and a few more subtle assumptions with which I disagree.

On the good side, these statements:

"...a minimum wage rate may not be sufficient to attract citizens and permanent
residents to take a job for which they are qualified."

And this:

"Wage rates will not rise so long as cheap foreign labor is available."

And this:

"The Commonwealth has the responsibility to provide fair employment conditions
for foreign nationals, to use their labor for the purposes of economic growth
and stability for which it was intended, and to regulate labor practices in
order to protect against potential abuses."

But then the law seems to eschew the most obvious means of addressing these issues: 1) a higher minimum wage; 2) a real and enforced moratorium / limit on the number of foreign workers in the CNMI; and 3) application and enforcement of all federal labor laws; promotion of unions; and, most importantly, treatment of all workers equally.

The purposes section promotes the idea that locals need to have less competition to get the jobs they "should" have, and those jobs should be the ones for which they are "educated"--the management and professional jobs.




Some of the problems in this part of the purposes section:

"The Commonwealth's goal is to establish a regulatory environment so that jobs
are available for its qualified high school, college, and graduate school
graduates."

The market place generally favors the more educated worker with higher wages, but the under-educated (those who have dropped out of school before getting a high school diploma) can contribute valuable skills and labor to a healthy economy. They should not be ignored. The policy of the government should not continue this prejudice against blue-collar work!




Another problematic statement of purpose:

"If the job is reserved for citizens and permanent residents, then the
competitive economy will cause the wage rate to rise to a level that citizens
and permanent residents find acceptable."

The CNMI Labor Department has failed to classify jobs for the past 25 years, and has allowed employers to hire foreign workers at minimum wage for jobs like accountant and engineer! We do not need to "reserve" jobs for the CNMI local residents to push up the wage. We do not need to perpetuate a two-tiered system of labor-with local workers in designated (high-paying) segments and foreign workers in the other (low-paying) jobs. This type of system invites abuse. The preference for U.S. and permanent resident workers is legitimate and needs to be enforced. But we need to enforce that preference in all job categories, and not create a two-tiered system of labor. We need our work force to work together, not separately.

There is another way of addressing the issue of artificially depressed wages in professional, management, and skilled jobs. Besides increasing the minimum wage-which encourages greater participation by everyone in the labor market, the CNMI Labor Department can set ranges/brackets of reasonable wages that must be offered for certain types of jobs if foreign workers will be used. This is less problematic on an equal protection basis than barring foreign workers outright from jobs. If our minimum wage is 50% of the U.S. minimum, then the range for an accountant's position could be 50% of what accountants earn in the U.S. When the job is advertised, resident workers can see the potential for greater earnings than minimum wage. This doesn't make us competitive or on par with the lure of the U.S., but is does provide for a balanced and consistent wage structure. And this benefits everyone. Many people who live here want to stay and willingly earn less than in the U.S. in exchange for the many beautiful and beneficial offerings the CNMI offers. The resident work force that is attracted to the higher paying jobs in the local economy can get these jobs if they want.



And yet another problem in the statement of purpose:

"The overall guiding policy with respect to foreign national workers is to
provide for a stable work force and protect due process rights without creating
entitlements."

It is that last bit--without creating entitlements--that I find troublesome. Our government has let in a huge number of alien workers over the past quarter century. They are not automatons, robots, who work and earn their pay and have no human life. They are people, with relationships, children, ties to our community. This bit of the purposes ignores the reality that has already occurred from the decisions of our leaders to allow this long-term alien population in the CNMI. Their children are U.S. citizens, born here. The children have entitlements that are shared by all U.S. citizens. These children, upon reaching 21, can petition their parents into the U.S. for green card (immediate relative) status. These children will vote in CNMI elections.

The fear that our local island population will be over-run by a "foreign" resident population is misdirected at the alien population. Our leaders have ensured this result by their decisions of the past, despite warnings, despite encouragements to have moratoriums on hiring foreign workers. It it too late to take back the CNMI from the natural consequences of the decisions CNMI Chamorro and Carolinian elected officials have made.

When I first arrived in the CNMI, we had a "permanent resident" law included in our CNMI code. It was repealed, on much the same thinking as now proposed in P.L. 15-108--the idea that the way to protect a cultural heritage is to deny others equal political status. This does not protect culture of any worthy kind. It only promotes evil.




One last bit before I close this long post:

"It is the intent of the Legislature that this Act shall not apply to persons
admitted to the Commonweatlh as tourists, or to persons employed illegally, i.e.
without the approval of the Department of Labor, or to those persons employing
others illegally in the Commonwealth unless specific provision has been made
herein."

The CNMI government is painfully aware that we have a human trafficking problem. Despite their repeated efforts to cover up current abuses and their insistence that the problem is a thing of the past, we keep seeing this. Especially in the sex industry--today's story is Club Jama. We've had the Red Heart Lounge, and the StarDust and Star Light nightclubs and others--all in the last two or three years.

When girls and women are trafficked into the CNMI they are almost always brought in as tourists, and then forced to dance naked or prostitute, kept locked in barracks or escorted everywhere they go.

Before P.L. 15-108, these girls and women could file labor complaints. And the Labor Department was fairly good at investigating. Now trafficking victims can't get this help. I think this is just another means the CNMI government is using to hide the reality of human trafficking in the CNMI. Workers, whether lawfully employed or tricked into unlawful employment, or foolish enough to agree to unlawful employment, are still laborers and deserve the protection of labor laws. It's not enough that the government may take up the case for the trafficking victims. They need easy access to a complaint mechanism that other workers have, too.



I'm not impressed by the purposes of P.L. 15-108. A law built on this foundation cannot be a good labor bill for the CNMI.

jmho.

Display Comments Add a Comment

Donald (sorry for earlier mistake) Cohen hints at it in his letter today. Anthony Pellegrino included it in the assumptions made in his column earlier this week. We hear it all of the time--islanders, that is, the Chamorros and Carolinians of the NMI, don't want to do the work that has been handled by the foreign workers, because they're lazy!

I beg to differ.

This is a stereotype like the "shiftless Negro" of last century, or the siesta-taking Mexican--both prominently featured at times in America. It's a false icon that has worked its way into the dialogue and needs to be challenged.

I've been here 23 years. I know people in most segments of the community. I work with Chamorros and Carolinians in my office on a daily basis. They're not the exception. They represent the excellent quality of workers that exist in the local community. And although I work in an office, it's not all paper work. There are times when we all pitch in to haul water, clean the office, repair our dilapidated surroundings. In the past we've moved locations. And everyone, especially our local staff, has worked hard at these jobs, too.

We've all seen islanders sweat and endure hours and hours of hard work on their local farms, or preparing for fiestas and other events. This is real work. We know Chamorros and Carolinians who have moved in droves to the mainland U.S.A. for better jobs.

There is no lazy gene in the local talent pool. When the motivations are there, islanders work as hard as anyone else.

The problem is the issue of motivation. What U.S. citizen wants to work for a mere $3.55 / hour? (And that represents a raise from the $3.05 that prevailed as minimum wage until July 2007!) If islanders value their work at a higher rate than $3.55 / hour it doesn't make them lazy; it just means that they are fortunately not as desperate as the impoverished foreign contract workers who will accept any low pay. If the local islanders are moving to the mainland for jobs (which they are), they're not expecting to laze about. They're working hard, but getting higher pay that their work deserves.

I've heard complaints from Saipan employers about their local staff taking off for funerals and family needs. I've known locals who gave up their jobs for these types of reasons. All to whom I've spoken at these times seem ignorant about the federal law, the Family Leave Act. We could do with some better education on this law and the protections it affords. We could use a local law that extends this act to all employers, including the small ones. Then there would be fewer problems with these personal issues.

Just because foreign workers have fewer rights, less status and are more vulnerable, they complain less. That doesn't mean the local worker is a bad employee.

Of course there are some who will not work no matter how high the pay or good the opportunities. These people exist in all cultures. But they are a small minority.

So let's stop assuming that Chamorro and Carolinians do not want to do the hard work, the construction jobs, the farm work, the cleaning and service jobs. And let's stop pretending that it's all about "training." There is some training needed, especially for construction, but that can be met with voc-ed classes and on-the-job training the same as in the mainland.

We don't need special rules to get locals into the workforce. We don't need special opportunities and more expensive "training."

What is lacking is "motivation." And motivation could be instantly supplied with a higher minimum wage, one comparable to that in the mainland U.S.A., exactly what has lured hundreds and possibly thousands of locals to the mainland in the past few years.

What we have instead of sufficient motivation is this foolish, slow adjustment of minimum wage that is designed for failure. It's designed to cost employers just enough to cause problems and not provide enough boost to workers to make a difference--so that it can be shut down and stopped, and the further increases can be scuttled. And it is designed so that suppressed wages at the horribly low amounts can be continued.

With higher wages in the private sector, the local population will step up and WORK! Employers will be less tempted by cheap foreign labor, which won't be as cheap any more. Those foreign workers who remain in the CNMI will be treated better, too, at least economically, with higher wages. And everybody will win. Those earnings, in whole or in part, can be spent here, or saved here, and help restore our economy.

So please, everyone--including our elected leaders here, and our community and federal leaders-- stop assuming that locals do not want to work in real jobs. Stop assuming we need labor laws that grant special privileges to our local population. Our elected leaders especially need to stop pushing for desk jobs and management positions for locals. Let's honor all work--not just with "labor day" and recognition that the leader of our Christian community was himself a carpenter. Let's honor it with a living wage and the courage to treat people who have blue collar jobs as important, contributing members of our community.

We have a diverse community, and a range of talents, skills and interests even among our local populations. Let's embrace this diversity. Let's provide the motivation for work by everyone, in whatever jobs are needed to be done. That motivation would be higher wages, decent wages, a "living wage."

And then let's see who is "lazy."

Display Comments Add a Comment

P.L. 15-108 is 71 pages long. So I'm going to comment on bits and pieces of it, as I plow through it. These are my initial thoughts. I may revise them as I get to other sections of the law. I may re-think my positions and analysis as information or other comments come to light.

And because the bill is 71 pages long, I won't comment on everything. I haven't formed any strong feelings based on the coverage yet. I've been somewhat amused by all of the back-and-forth debate, wondering how much of it is just over-reaction and how much is warranted.


So here goes--my first foray into P.L. 15-108:

I got to the bottom of page 1 without screaming. Already I didn't like what I was reading. The law begins as most laws do with a statement of "findings" and "purposes." These are often instructive in how the language of the law should be interpreted, so I like to read these.

But this one starts with a purpose of achieving more employment for resident workers. That would be good. But I didn't like the "finding" written into the law that Chamorros and Carolinians should get even more preference than U.S. citizens and U.S. Permanent Residents for training and hiring. I think the notion that such preference is desireable goes against the fundamental freedoms of our U.S. and CNMI Constitutions that provide for equal protection.

And I didn't like the inference that locals should be groomed for management only jobs. I'm not fond of the prejudice against blue-collar work. It crops up again and again here. I don't think it makes economic sense. It runs directly counter to what economists (quoted in our local papers from sources like Wall Street Journal and other reputable business-oriented publications) are saying is the bedrock of an economy that can grow and thrive. And I find the prejudice against blue-collar work morally offensive.

So by the bottom of page 1, I'm not liking this bill much.

At page two, I found this:

The Covenant envisioned the employment of foreign nationals in the Commonwealth in order to create an economic base that would provide the citizens of the Commonwealth the economic opportunities and standard of living that their counterparts on the mainland are able to enjoy because of the vast area and large population from which communities on the mainland may draw employees.

What does this mean? It sounds to me like we get rich off the backs of cheap foreign labor. And we don't dirty our hands with the work ourselves. And that's our glorious vision for the CNMI.

And this purpose is "esteemed" because it's written into our Covenant. It's a bedrock principal!


I've read the Covenant. I've read the committee reports that constitute the legislative history of the Covenant. No where is there any such purpose stated.

The Covenant provided for local control over immigration in order to avoid problems with too many foreign nationals coming into a small community. The worry was not that we needed labor to sustain our industry; we could get that with U.S. controlled immigration. The worry was that the U.S. controlled immigration would not be responsive to our small, local issues and would allow foreign labor to overrun the island and change its character.

How do I know this? I wasn't here then, but as I've said, I read the reports. None of the reports--the House Committee Report (#94-364), the Senate Committee Reports (#94-433, 94-596), the Marianas Political Status Commission Memorandum, the Administration Memorandum, all assembed in a handy Section By Section Analysis prepared by Herman Marcuse of the Department of Justice--mention anything about providing cheap foreign labor so the locals could use them to raise their standard of living. The only comment about the reason for local control over immigration is this, from the Senate Committee Report, echoed in the Administration's Memorandum:

The Immigration and Naturalization Laws (subsection (a) [of Covenant sec. 503]. The reason this provision is included is to cope with the problems which unrestricted immigration may impose upon small island communities. Congress is aware of those problems. See, e.g., Alien Labor Program in Guam, Hearing before the Special Study Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, 93d Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 19-25.

The vision of the CNMI's founding fathers was local control of immigration to limit the numbers of foreign workers. How badly did we screw up? Our government let in unlimited numbers of foreign workers, and we are overrun. And now our local population is a minority in its own place. That was exactly what the Covenant was supposed to protect against, but didnt work out.

So the "vision" now espoused in this latest law, because we can't admit that we made mistakes and didn't live up to the real vision, is one that our Legislators have concocted, not one that was built into our Covenant.

And it's an awful vision.

With this vision, I see the people of the CNMI standing on the back and necks of the poor foreign workers. While the people of the CNMI enjoy middle class life, the foreign labor eats the dust on the floor.

That's what these words say to me. That's what is hidden in the text of the purposes. That we must have a social stratification, where locals are the owners and managers and foreigners are the peons.

And it's wrapped up in red, white, and blue--saying that this is what they have in the U.S. and we want it too!

And that's another distortion. In the mainland U.S., all people can enjoy the benefits of the large populaton and industry that can be built with it, but all people are entitled to be treated equally, too. The workers in those factories are U.S. citizens who organize into unions and bargain for better wages and benefits. The owners can't deport them when they complain.

The stated purpose of P.L. 15-108 is designed to keep foreign workers in subjugation to us.

Is there some other reading of this purpose? Is it just a neutral saying that we need foreign workers because we don't have enough local labor force to maintain industries?

I don't think so, because then it would say that we are employing foreign workers to help us create an economic base, where all people in the CNMI could enjoy a better standard of living.

The specific design of this purpose puts the workers on the economic base side and the locals on the enjoying a better life. There's no shared work and no shared benefit. That's by design.

As a purpose for a law that governs how we live, we should be striving for a higher, more ethical way of life. This island if filled with "Christians." Christ argued for a living wage, not exaltation of locals over foreigners. Not special preferences at the expense of others. Christ was a blue collar worker--a carpenter.

We have a long way to go, and a lot of wrong thinking to overcome. Our legislators and Governor should hang their heads in shame for allowing this purpose to be included in P.L. 15-108.





As a small side note: I'm sure someone will say why didn't I address these comments when the bill was being considered. The simple answer is, I can't unless I receive a specific written invitation directed to me (and not the general public or general bar association, etc.). I work for an organization that has regulations prohibiting comment to influence legislation, unless specifically solicited. (And even when I receive a request, I'm sometimes too busy to put my professional time into it. This blog, I do on my own time.) Once a law is passed, it becomes fair game and I'm free to comment.

As another small note: It shouldn't take a comment from me for our Legislators to see how offensive these findings and purposes are. Or to read the Covenant and the historical documents and see what was really said, what the true purpose was.

Display Comments Add a Comment

*****  

Add a Comment

Angelo has another thought-provoking post at his blog, this time on the Filippino Consul General's argument against the boycott of Herman's Bakery. Shut-UpPinoys


Here's my own take on the matter.

The background
Herman's Bakery is the business run by a family corporation, headed by Juan Tenorio Guerrero, a/k/a Juan Pan. Other Juan Pan businesses include Western Union and MITA travel.

Juan T. Guerrero (Juan Pan) has been president of the Chamber of Commerce, head honcho of the Red Cross, a former Congressman in the CNMI Legislature, Executive of the year, and an otherwise well-recognized and respected community leader in CNMI and Guam. Herman'sHistory

But he's taken a stance against federalization , and opposed the wage hike as well. In fact he said these would be a disaster for the CNMI. PanPredictsDisaster


The call to action
For his opposition to the rights of workers, especially the alien workers, and his opposition to possible improvement in the CNMI through federalization, now there is a call for action against his businesses. A boycott. A boycott of Herman's Bakery products (which are available retail, but also used at KFC and other places), his Western Union business, MITA and any other Juan Pan business.

The call is being sent around by text messaging. (Love technology!) And it's making some waves, getting a little press coverage and prompting a call to Juan Pan himself, while he was in D.C. talking about how the CNMI doesn't need U.S. takeover of immigration and labor.


Juan Pan's response
Juan Pan, when learning of the call for the boycott, tried to paint himself as only a messenger. He said that he is just delivering the message of the Chamber of Commerce because he is its president. And that he has a right to express his own opinions, too. Don'tShootTheMessenger

What? This is a ridiculous response.

Juan Pan fully supports the Chamber's position against federalization. He's been a mover and shaker in the CNMI's effort to stop federalization, speaking out on it, predicting disaster, joining in the meetings. If he had serious qualms about the Chamber's latest position, he could have argued against it at some point. He could have begged off being the "messenger" and let someone else deliver the Chamber's position. His decision to be the one to testify is evidence of his commitment to the opposition to federalization.

And then there's the Chamber's position against grand-fathering in long-term residents. They want to say that all the years people have lived in the CNMI as alien workers doesn't count. That everybody starts over, starts on the date of the new law, assuming one is passed.

And this position, against grandfathering in our long-time resident aliens, is just nasty. Immoral. Cowardice.


the RP Consul General's mistake
The RP Consul General urged everyone to ignore the boycott because it would hurt the workers employed by Juan Pan. It's a "pressure tactic" and that makes it blackmail. And so it would be wrong.

But if you employ that logic, it would mean we could never protest anything. The Boston Tea Party (which is one of the most outrageous acts of vandalism and theft to ever be perpetrated in the name of a cause) would be reduced to nothing more than a crime, not an eloquent demand for freedom. The Emancipation Proclamation and the entire Civil War, fighting against slavery, would be wrong because slave-owners would react, and those poor slaves would have no homes, no place to work, nothing--but freedom. The Resistance against Hitler would be wrong, because trying to undermine his power and pressure him into not torturing and killing Jews would be-well, blackmail. And the German law could be used against your family and other innocents.

Obviously, the RP Consul General's argument is baloney.

Boycott--it's not wrong, it's a right.
There is nothing wrong with concerted effort to boycott. It's a tactic that recognizes how economic endeavors are intertwined with the political. And when you can't make direct progress on the political front, you need to refocus on the economic. There have been some successful boycotts. BoycottPepsiforBurma , TheMontgomeryBusBoycott , and the original boycott, aimed at landreform in Ireland.

So, if you support federalization, the wage hike, and recognition of aliens' long-term residence in the CNMI as a basis for rights, then boycott the Juan Pan businesses.

As for me, I support those things. I'm not a big fan of the U.S. and its handling of immigration at all, but I've come to the conclusion that the CNMI can't make things better on its own because our leaders are all like Juan Pan--getting rich from cheap foreign labor, and thus forgetting the higher moral values in support of equality and liberty, living wages for all and an end to poverty, justice and universal brotherhood that they had instilled by their faith, by their community, and just by living.

Display Comments Add a Comment

H.B. 15-38. AvailableHere . It's called the Commonwealth Employment Act of 2007, but it's all about alien labor. I haven't been invited to comment on it in my official job, so I can't submit these comments to the Legislature. But as a citizen and human being, I can speak my mind here.

I've made it through the first 10 pages of 63. The bill is long enough to suggest that it took some sincere effort. And I appreciate that.

But from what I've read so far, I already feel sick to my stomach from it.

This bill can't be good because it is based on assumptions that are wrong, assumptions that start with a view of our economic woes through the wrong end of the scope, assumptions aimed at rooting out the evils caused by those d___ foreigners we bring in to work for us, assumptions that are foolish and immoral.

Here are some things in the "findings and purposes" section that rankle:

PAGE 1.
"The employment preference for citizens and permanent residents is implemented by clarifying and improving provisions of the current law, such as limiting public sector jobs to citizens and permanent residents...requiring that employers provide jobs to citizens and permanent residents ...at least 20% of the work force, and restructuring the moratorium on new hiring of foreign nationals..."

WRONG. #1. This law will not help get locals into the labor force. Locals and permanent residents will continue to rush to the mainland where they can earn $7.25 per hour or more. What will get them into the local labor force are higher wages and better working conditions. Until employers are FORCED to provide these, no amount of law or administration is going to improve the preference for hiring locals. Locals don't want the bad jobs, and cheap foreign laborers complains less, are easier to dupe and scare into obedience, and are still readily available.

WRONG. #2. Employers must hire locals in numbers that make up at least 20%?!! That's the ratio of local workers to foreign workers we are aiming for? Four foreign workers for every local? Do you think locals want to work in those conditions? Do you think our US. citizens and permanent residents want to be the outcast, the minority, at work on our islands? Better to head to the US. Our Chamorros, Carolinians, Chuukese, Palauans, etc. will be a minority there, but they'll earn more and get full rights.

WRONG. #3. Restructuring the moratorium is a load of waffle. Set a moratorium and enforce it. Stop cheating.

STILL ON PAGE 1.
"This employment preference is promoted by effective job referral services...effective advertising...and effective training to qualify citizen and permanent resident employees for jobs that require special skills."

WRONG. #1. What makes you think that we can have effective job referral services with a new law. We have a law. We have a job referral office. It doesn't work. The problem is not that workers aren't signing up for jobs. The problem is not that referrals aren't being made. The problem is that employers WANT TO HIRE ALIEN WORKERS. We don't need to fix the government office or train the workers. We need to force an attitude change on the employers. WE NEED TO TAKE AWAY CHEAP FOREIGN LABOR. Otherwise, there will never be good jobs for our local people in the CNMI.

WRONG # 2. We can qualify our local population for skilled jobs, but if we allow employers to pay minimum wage for these jobs, because alien workers will accept the jobs at that price, we will never get our local population into the jobs. Accountants at minimum wage. Engineers at minimum wage. Paralegals at minimum wage. Nurses earning far below stateside standards. We will never get our local population into these jobs. W ell, at least not here. And the brain drain will continue and get worse.

STILL ON PAGE 1.

"The Covenant envisioned the employment of foreign nationals ...to create an economic base that would provide the citizens ...the economic opportunities and standard of living that their counterparts on the mainland enjoy..."

WRONG. #1. The Covenant envisioned that the CNMI would strictly limit immigration. The reason for local control was to allow fewer aliens into the CNMI than might come in under U.S. control, not to allow more. We screwed up.

WRONG #2. Are we really going to pass a law that says we're using the poor of the world to enrich ourselves? That's what this says. And it's immoral.


MOVING TO PAGE 2.
"The Commonwealth's...investment in ...education...has produced a local work force...for managerial, supervisory, technical, professional, and other skilled jobs.... foreign national workers must be available to fill the unskilled and lower skilled jobs..."

WRONG. #1. (I'm screaming here.) We are so superior that we continue to think we should "supervise" and "manage" others. We've done such a good job with our government, with CUC, with the state of our roads, our capital assets, our retirement program... This is so wrong.

WRONG. #2. Even if we have some talent (and we do), some educated (and we do), some imaginative thinkers (and we do), as a general policy, we should want only the best for the CNMI. We should always be looking for the skilled, the educated, the professional. WE DO NOT NEED MORE CAR MECHANICS, FARMERS, MAIDS, FACTORY WORKERS, WAITRESSES, STREET-WALKERS, PIMPS AND PROSTITUTES.

These are not the key to a sustainable economy. These are not the people who will make us smart, beautiful, welcomed in the world. We do not need the masses. And we can't sustain them. For Pete's sake, we import food! We import all our fuel! We have limited land. WE DO NOT NEED THE MASSES, THE TEEMING HORDES. We want fewer people, doing more. And that means we need to entirely revamp our thinking about who we allow to enter the CNMI.

If we are truly so smart and educated, we won't be afraid of the competition from other smart, educated people that we let come in. We'll benefit from the exchange of ideas. We can become a mecca of learning, of advanced research and design for oceanography, for the environmental green campaign, for something to help the world. We do not want to become a floating casino, money-laundering off-shore bank, dung-hole of the Pacific.


STILL ON PAGE 2.
"The current economic situation...requires the continued availability of foreign nationals...but also demands that the system...be more efficient and less costly to operate."

WRONG & RIGHT. This says we want cheap labor! We don't want to spend the money on an immigration and labor system that would be fair--just cheap. Well, the cheapest way would be to completely turn over immigration control to the U.S. Then the CNMI wouldn't have to pay for it at all. LET'S DO THAT!



STILL ON PAGE 2.

"The early-intervention mediation...achieves good results in promoting fair employment relationships..."

A THOUGHT. I don't know about this program. To be truthful, I've never heard of it. I wonder how many alien workers know about it. Perhaps it does work, in which case it should be advertised more widely.

ANOTHER THOUGHT. The biggest labor problem alien workers face is not getting paid for their work. When this happens, they are stuck. If they complain, they can be terminated and sent home without the benefits of the employment contract they made. If they don't complain, they may end up working for long periods of time without ever being compensated. They are helpless. This is why Buddi Dhimal set himself on fire--he worked and didn't get paid, and the CNMI government helpfully decided to send him back to Nepal without his pay. This is why the Chinese and other garment workers marched in protest. This is what makes work in the CNMI into slavery.

We can't make employers pay their workers because the employers leave, or have no money or assets that we can reach here. And we have "helpfully" stopped requiring employers to post bonds, if they ever did.

What we really need is a requirement that for every alien worker hired, the employer posts one year of salary and benefits. Then the CNMI government can issue the paychecks to them. When the next year comes, the employer has to post another year's advance payment to renew the contract. If employers don't like it, perhaps they'll hire locals.


STILL ON PAGE 2.

"Economic stability and growth ...require support for the visitor industry and other investments, both local and foreign, that generate new employment opportunities."

WRONG. #1. We don't need to generate new employment opportunities. Who will fill those jobs? More aliens. This system only provides stability for continued dependence on foreign workers.

What we need is to figure out a new economic model, a sustainable economy, that recognizes the limits of our environment and resources, and takes advantage of our natural strengths. We need to generate self-sufficiency, and something to export to help our GNP.

WRONG. #2. Not all economic investment is created equal. I am tired of seeing little tire shops along the road--we have enough already. On the other hand, the plastic recycling venture should be applauded and supported and multiplied everywhere. I am not totally against garment factories. I like clothes. But I want all of our businesses to be fair to their employees, zealously considerate of our environment, and basically moral. Not the robber-baron version of enterprise.

WRONG. #3. We need to support the visitor industry, but I fear that this statement in a bill that addresses alien labor means that we have to make exceptions to our good limits and standards on alien labor, exceptions for hotels and tour companies. And I think that's a bad idea. Look around. We have a local population that can fill many of these jobs. Visitors like to see local people when they visit. If there's one place our local population should be, it's in the visitor industry--spreading that island friendliness, creating our own "hafa adai" spirit to rival the aloha spirit of Hawaii.

I'm ready to tackle page 3, but it's late, I'm tired, and this post is already long. I'll come back to it tomorrow or the day after. But for now--let's just say, I think this bill will not take the CNMI in the right direction.

Just a brief summary, observation, here. This bill is aimed at alien workers. We can't change the vast number of impoverished, desperate people in Asia who are willing to come and work for low wages in the CNMI, willing to pay recruiters, willing to cheat and lie their way into the CNMI, just desperate to be willing enough to do anything. We have to stop focusing on our alien workers and start focusing on what we can change. Ourselves. Our own attitudes. That's where the solution to our economic woes lies. And that's where we need to put our energy.

Display Comments Add a Comment

If the new minimum wage went into effect immediately, an hour of work would buy a gallon of gasoline (well, except for taxes paid on the "earnings"). But it doesn't go into effect until July. So for now, an hour of work is not enough, even if there weren't income tax, for this basic purchase.

Display Comments Add a Comment

The minimum wage is going up a whopping 50 cents, to $3.55 per hour, starting in July 2007.

Meanwhile, the U.S. minimum wage rises to $7.25, in a leap of $2.10. Notably, 30 states already have local minimum wages at that rate or higher.

And still our businessmen, like Juan Pan, complain and cry that this raise will hurt "us." Still, on our local news, we hear conjectures and hopes that there are loopholes, that this wage hike will be limited to one year, that the full effect of 50 cents per year until we reach the U.S. level just won't happen to us, won't be forced on us.

What "us" do these concerns purport to address? Not me. Not the fair businessmen and women here who already pay more than minimum wage. And certainly not the vast majority of people in the CNMI who are adversely effected by the wages kept low by a stagnant minimum wage and a ceaseless influx of desperate foreign workers, while prices continue to rise.

And yet it is these loud protests against raising the minimum wage here that make the news, are heard and repeated, are echoed by our Governor, are shown to represent us.

I am deeply ashamed of the CNMI.

The churches are full on Sundays, and the same people who sit in the pews and "pray" are willing to treat their brothers and sisters in God with contempt and disdain. Is it simply too much for us to share our earthly wealth? And why aren't our priests and ministers speaking out more forcefully about the needs of the poor? Don't all major religions include the precept of the need for charity? Isn't Christianity a promise to the poor, where a rich man will have as much chance of entering heaven as a camel of getting through the eye of a needle? Obviously, there are limits to the faith we share, weaknesses in our practice of it.

Instead of taking a chance on offering a living wage, the CNMI, through its loudest voices, insists that even a small pittance added to the miserable wages paid now will hurt us. What about all the employees, the "us" who are hurt by the constantly decreased value of static earnings?

The minimum wage hike that is now law, as it will be applied to the CNMI, is inadequate and is designed (intentionally?) to sabotage future wage increases. It's enough to force some marginal businesses to close, but it's not enough to do much good for people here to increase their spending or boost the economy in that regard.

I'm glad that the U.S. stepped into the long-time breach in fair wages here. I'm glad that there is some wage increase. But I wish that all of us in the CNMI would raise our voices to drown out the greedy, the heartless, and the users who protest this wage raise.

WE WANT A LIVING WAGE FOR EVERYONE. We support this and more raises to the minimum wage. All together now...WE WANT A LIVING WAGE FOR EVERYONE.

Display Comments Add a Comment

Sirens roared past the office.

The report is that a Chinese--actually Nepalese-- man went to the front of CNMI Department of Labor and set himself on fire. Still waiting to hear why. Now I know why, but can't say anything more than that he was frustrated with Labor's failure to help him collect back wages.

There's a discussion about U.S. immigration /takeover-pros and cons- over at Ken Phillips blog, SOSaipan . We've obviously got to do something. First, we can pray for this man's well-being and recovery. Things here are getting totally out of hand.

ed. 11/55 AM.

Display Comments Add a Comment