Friday, June 26, 2009
Local
Friday, June 26, 2009
Labor asks alien workers with awards to register
By Ferdie de la Torre
Reporter
In June last year, the Department of Labor encouraged alien workers to collect their administrative awards by filing small claims in the Superior Court.
Now Labor is notifying those alien workers with administrative awards to go to the Labor Hearing Office to register their bond claims.
Acting Labor Secretary Cinta M. Kaipat told Saipan Tribune yesterday that Labor was required to change its practices because of Superior Court associate judge Perry B. Inos' ruling relating to the bond issue.
Kaipat, however, stated that due to some reasons, many foreign workers will still be referred to the small claims court as Labor has been doing in the past.
Last March, Inos ruled that Labor has exclusive jurisdiction over alien workers attempting to collect on labor bonds and that the courts do not have the authority to enforce these bonds. Inos dismissed for lack of jurisdiction the consolidated small claims filed by 11 Chinese workers against two bonding companies.
The issue stems from a Labor advice to alien workers to file small claims in the Superior Court to recover the awards granted them by Labor against their employers.
Inos noted that the primary reason the workers are unable to recover the awards granted them by Labor is because Labor has thus far not attempted to enforce the insurance companies' obligations under the labor bonds.
Last Monday, Labor placed a one-page notice in this paper, notifying 129 alien workers who were awarded money damages by Labor but have not been paid to visit Labor's Complaint Intake Section.
In the notice, Labor asked the complainants to fill out a declaration affirming that payments have not been paid to them.
The workers were advised to bring a copy of their administrative orders and their entry permit card. The complainants are given until July 20, 2009, to report to the Complaint Intake Section.
Labor said awards in some of these cases may be covered by labor bonds.
When asked by Saipan Tribune about the notice, Kaipat said that Labor was not a party to the case in which Judge Inos issued his opinion so the department did not have a chance to explain why their policy of using the small claims court is the most effective and efficient way to get bond claims resolved.
“We also did not have a chance to appeal. Labor is hopeful that when the courts have a case in which Labor is a party and can present its view, the rule will change,” Kaipat said.
The acting Labor Secretary, however, stated that for now the department must abide by Inos' ruling.
She said two more of the same notices will be issued over the summer.
Labor divided up the entire list so that their staff is not overloaded with many people trying to register at once.
Kaipat explained that a bond claim is entirely separate from a labor case.
“For that reason, a new proceeding must be started. In this new proceeding, under Judge Inos' ruling, the director of Labor brings a claim on behalf of the worker against the bonding company,” she said.
In order to do this, Kaipat explained, the Labor director needs a sworn statement from the workers that the awards have not been paid. When a worker registers the bond claims, she said, a notice is provided to the bonding company, and a hearing is held. Kaipat said the director presents the worker's sworn statement that the award has not been paid, and the bonding company presents any defenses that it has.
“The Hearing Office issues an opinion. Either side may appeal to the Labor Secretary. Once the Secretary's opinion is issued, either party may appeal to the court. Then the bond claim will be in the court, where the department thinks all bond claims should be in the first place,” she said.
Kaipat said the bonding companies are licensed by the Department of Commerce and that only the courts have the power to seize their assets and make them pay awards.
Kaipat cited three reasons why many alien workers will still be referred to small claims court: There is no bond; there is a bond but the worker's claim is covered only partially by the bond; and there is a bond, but the bond does not cover the award at all.
Last year, then federal ombudsman James Benedetto told Saipan Tribune that he refused to turn over to Labor his office's documents regarding the $6.1 million owed to hundreds of alien workers because Labor could provide no assurances that the data would not be used against the workers.
Benedetto said he wants assurances that the records would be used to go after the employers and bonding companies who owe the money, and not the workers.
Robert Myers, lawyer for 127 alien workers, has also filed a class action against Labor and some of its key officials over the same bonding issue.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
No Loopholes Under Labor Law
Opinion
Friday, June 26, 2009
No loopholes under labor law
By JACINTA M. KAIPAT
Special to the Saipan Tribune
I write to respond to the several letters that have appeared in the press about citizens who are unable to find jobs. There are no loopholes under the labor law, as has been repeatedly suggested.
PL 15-108 benefits local applicants
The new labor law fixed very significant problems for local applicants under the old law and extended protections to ensure that local applicants know about and get preference for jobs in the Commonwealth. PL 15-108 provides a new remedy - damages in the amount of six months' wages - in the event that a citizen is passed over for hiring by an employer who renewed or hired a foreign worker. Our Hearing Office mediates these complaints and offers prompt hearings on all complaints. I urge any citizen who thinks that he or she has been to come to the Labor Department and file a complaint. The staff of the Hearing Office will help you fill out the complaint form. Our investigators will go out and gather the employer's records to present at a hearing. PL 15-108 provided this protection specifically in order to guard against the kind of problems about which the letter-writers complain.
Individual problems
In order to try to solve the individual problems at hand as expeditiously as possible, I looked at our records with respect to applications filed by the letter writers to see if we could help with their applications. I found that none of the letter writers save three had used our system-at least under the names that they used when they wrote to the press. (Mr./Ms. Loly A. Sablan and Mr. Kelvin A. Aldan never used our system to apply for a job online. Mr. Greg Magofna used the system once, back in January. Mr. Gregorio Cruz and Mr. Willie Brundidge, Jr. have used the system many times.) I looked at our complaint files to determine if any of the letter-writers had used the protection that PL 15-108 offers citizens in cases where a foreign worker has been hired or renewed over a qualified citizen. None had except for one.
No waivers
There are no waivers of the workforce participation requirement or the job preference requirement under PL 15-108. All waivers were abolished. Waivers were granted based on subjective standards. Under prior law, there were hundreds of waivers granted to employers that allowed them to hire foreign workers when they were not in compliance with our workforce participation requirements or our job preference requirements. Those who long for the “old days” remember a time of full employment when these waivers did not matter much because citizens were employed by the government or private- sector jobs were available.
Advertising renewals yields jobs for citizens
The letter-writers ask why we require employers to advertise jobs where the employer hopes to renew a foreign worker. The simple answer is that advertising renewals helps create jobs for locals. During the 12 months after April 2008, approximately 600 locals took jobs that were intended as renewals for foreign workers. In the past, there have been renewals of foreign workers where no local applicant was available. But now, for example, Tony Pellegrino's training program is producing local applicants with carpentry, plumbing, electrician and other skills that were not in the job market before. When a renewal in one of those categories comes up, we are now training local applicants with the skills to claim these jobs and they are successful in doing so.
Incentive exemption
The letter-writers ask why we have an incentive exemption, and they blame the exemption for shutting locals out of jobs. The answer is that we have the exemption in order to encourage businesses to hire locals and the exemption actually creates good jobs for locals; it does not shut locals out. This came about as a result of a year-long study led by the Public Auditor's Office, which recommended that the Legislature ultimately adopt this Incentive Exemption as it opens up those jobs paying more than the minimum wage to qualified locals. In order to give businesses that hire local workers in good jobs some competitive reward, PL 15-108 allowed a limited incentive exemption. The incentive exemption can be claimed only when an employer has reached the performance benchmark in hiring locals well above that required by the workforce participation provision.
Phasing out of the incentive exemption
The Legislature gave the Labor Department the regulatory power to phase out the incentive exemption, and the Department has been doing that over time since PL 15-108 was enacted. Four months ago, the Department began a consulting process with respect to further proposed changes in the exemption. It is very important that labor regulations not cause businesses the kind of increased costs and burdens that contribute to closures. If we do that, we lose jobs forever. After taking into considerations the comments we got in the informal consultation process, in May, the Department proposed regulations that would increase the performance benchmark to 50% (from 35%) U.S. citizen employment in designated job categories in order to qualify for the exemption, and that would limit the job categories to which the exemption applies. Those regulations go into effect on July 1, 2009. This change will cut back the exemption.
Small business exemption
The letter-writers complain about the small business exemption, which allows businesses with fewer than five employees relief from the job preference requirements. At the time PL 15-108 was enacted (and today), the concern of the Legislature was that small businesses both fail more quickly, thus eliminating jobs, and are the engine of recovery from an economic depression because they start up more quickly when the economy turns around. The Legislature wanted to encourage small businesses. For the same reason, legislators in the House have recently proposed allowing small businesses relief from the gross receipts tax.
Phasing out of the small business exemption
The Legislature gave the Labor Department the regulatory power to phase out the small business exemption, and the Department has been doing that over time since PL 15-108 was enacted. Last year, I issued a notice that required all retail businesses that accept food stamps to have at least one U.S. citizen employee. This opened up about 100 jobs for U.S. citizens. This year, we have increased the requirement so that all small businesses of any kind must have at least one full-time U.S. citizen employee. This change will cut back the exemption.
Standards
One important feature of PL 15-108 was to eliminate discretionary waivers and require that exemptions be based on objective standards set out in regulations. The Director of Employment Services enforces standards rigorously. An employer either qualifies for an exemption or does not. We do not do favors for anyone. All employers are measured by the same standards. The system is fair and effective in meeting competing interests of preserving businesses and jobs and, at the same time, ensuring citizen access to available jobs.
Enforcement
The Director of Employment Services and the Director of Labor have effective processes in place to enforce the requirements of PL 15-108 that provide U.S. citizens preference for available jobs. Citizen complaints are investigated and those who violate the law are prosecuted under agency cases brought by the Director of Labor. The Hearing Office deals quickly with any complaints from citizens that a foreign worker has been hired over a qualified citizen. Whatever may have been complaints about enforcement in past Administrations, these people are dedicated civil servants doing their jobs well.
It is not possible to satisfy everyone. Some citizens will not find jobs for reasons that employers find compelling and that are not prohibited by law. Anyone who has hired any kind of employee, even a houseworker, knows that there are certain important traits that employers want to see in employees. The Labor Department is doing a good job in assisting U.S. citizens to find and take advantage of the job opportunities available to them that they are qualified for. We have come a long way over the past three years, and we continue to look for ways to improve. I welcome citizen comments. My e-mail address is depsec2@gmail.com.
Jacinta Kaipat is the Deputy Secretary of the CNMI Department of Labor.
Friday, June 26, 2009
No loopholes under labor law
By JACINTA M. KAIPAT
Special to the Saipan Tribune
I write to respond to the several letters that have appeared in the press about citizens who are unable to find jobs. There are no loopholes under the labor law, as has been repeatedly suggested.
PL 15-108 benefits local applicants
The new labor law fixed very significant problems for local applicants under the old law and extended protections to ensure that local applicants know about and get preference for jobs in the Commonwealth. PL 15-108 provides a new remedy - damages in the amount of six months' wages - in the event that a citizen is passed over for hiring by an employer who renewed or hired a foreign worker. Our Hearing Office mediates these complaints and offers prompt hearings on all complaints. I urge any citizen who thinks that he or she has been to come to the Labor Department and file a complaint. The staff of the Hearing Office will help you fill out the complaint form. Our investigators will go out and gather the employer's records to present at a hearing. PL 15-108 provided this protection specifically in order to guard against the kind of problems about which the letter-writers complain.
Individual problems
In order to try to solve the individual problems at hand as expeditiously as possible, I looked at our records with respect to applications filed by the letter writers to see if we could help with their applications. I found that none of the letter writers save three had used our system-at least under the names that they used when they wrote to the press. (Mr./Ms. Loly A. Sablan and Mr. Kelvin A. Aldan never used our system to apply for a job online. Mr. Greg Magofna used the system once, back in January. Mr. Gregorio Cruz and Mr. Willie Brundidge, Jr. have used the system many times.) I looked at our complaint files to determine if any of the letter-writers had used the protection that PL 15-108 offers citizens in cases where a foreign worker has been hired or renewed over a qualified citizen. None had except for one.
No waivers
There are no waivers of the workforce participation requirement or the job preference requirement under PL 15-108. All waivers were abolished. Waivers were granted based on subjective standards. Under prior law, there were hundreds of waivers granted to employers that allowed them to hire foreign workers when they were not in compliance with our workforce participation requirements or our job preference requirements. Those who long for the “old days” remember a time of full employment when these waivers did not matter much because citizens were employed by the government or private- sector jobs were available.
Advertising renewals yields jobs for citizens
The letter-writers ask why we require employers to advertise jobs where the employer hopes to renew a foreign worker. The simple answer is that advertising renewals helps create jobs for locals. During the 12 months after April 2008, approximately 600 locals took jobs that were intended as renewals for foreign workers. In the past, there have been renewals of foreign workers where no local applicant was available. But now, for example, Tony Pellegrino's training program is producing local applicants with carpentry, plumbing, electrician and other skills that were not in the job market before. When a renewal in one of those categories comes up, we are now training local applicants with the skills to claim these jobs and they are successful in doing so.
Incentive exemption
The letter-writers ask why we have an incentive exemption, and they blame the exemption for shutting locals out of jobs. The answer is that we have the exemption in order to encourage businesses to hire locals and the exemption actually creates good jobs for locals; it does not shut locals out. This came about as a result of a year-long study led by the Public Auditor's Office, which recommended that the Legislature ultimately adopt this Incentive Exemption as it opens up those jobs paying more than the minimum wage to qualified locals. In order to give businesses that hire local workers in good jobs some competitive reward, PL 15-108 allowed a limited incentive exemption. The incentive exemption can be claimed only when an employer has reached the performance benchmark in hiring locals well above that required by the workforce participation provision.
Phasing out of the incentive exemption
The Legislature gave the Labor Department the regulatory power to phase out the incentive exemption, and the Department has been doing that over time since PL 15-108 was enacted. Four months ago, the Department began a consulting process with respect to further proposed changes in the exemption. It is very important that labor regulations not cause businesses the kind of increased costs and burdens that contribute to closures. If we do that, we lose jobs forever. After taking into considerations the comments we got in the informal consultation process, in May, the Department proposed regulations that would increase the performance benchmark to 50% (from 35%) U.S. citizen employment in designated job categories in order to qualify for the exemption, and that would limit the job categories to which the exemption applies. Those regulations go into effect on July 1, 2009. This change will cut back the exemption.
Small business exemption
The letter-writers complain about the small business exemption, which allows businesses with fewer than five employees relief from the job preference requirements. At the time PL 15-108 was enacted (and today), the concern of the Legislature was that small businesses both fail more quickly, thus eliminating jobs, and are the engine of recovery from an economic depression because they start up more quickly when the economy turns around. The Legislature wanted to encourage small businesses. For the same reason, legislators in the House have recently proposed allowing small businesses relief from the gross receipts tax.
Phasing out of the small business exemption
The Legislature gave the Labor Department the regulatory power to phase out the small business exemption, and the Department has been doing that over time since PL 15-108 was enacted. Last year, I issued a notice that required all retail businesses that accept food stamps to have at least one U.S. citizen employee. This opened up about 100 jobs for U.S. citizens. This year, we have increased the requirement so that all small businesses of any kind must have at least one full-time U.S. citizen employee. This change will cut back the exemption.
Standards
One important feature of PL 15-108 was to eliminate discretionary waivers and require that exemptions be based on objective standards set out in regulations. The Director of Employment Services enforces standards rigorously. An employer either qualifies for an exemption or does not. We do not do favors for anyone. All employers are measured by the same standards. The system is fair and effective in meeting competing interests of preserving businesses and jobs and, at the same time, ensuring citizen access to available jobs.
Enforcement
The Director of Employment Services and the Director of Labor have effective processes in place to enforce the requirements of PL 15-108 that provide U.S. citizens preference for available jobs. Citizen complaints are investigated and those who violate the law are prosecuted under agency cases brought by the Director of Labor. The Hearing Office deals quickly with any complaints from citizens that a foreign worker has been hired over a qualified citizen. Whatever may have been complaints about enforcement in past Administrations, these people are dedicated civil servants doing their jobs well.
It is not possible to satisfy everyone. Some citizens will not find jobs for reasons that employers find compelling and that are not prohibited by law. Anyone who has hired any kind of employee, even a houseworker, knows that there are certain important traits that employers want to see in employees. The Labor Department is doing a good job in assisting U.S. citizens to find and take advantage of the job opportunities available to them that they are qualified for. We have come a long way over the past three years, and we continue to look for ways to improve. I welcome citizen comments. My e-mail address is depsec2@gmail.com.
Jacinta Kaipat is the Deputy Secretary of the CNMI Department of Labor.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
The Labor-Business Balance
Friday, June 05, 2009
Opinion
Friday, June 05, 2009
By JACINTA M. KAIPAT
Special to the Saipan Tribune
I write to all our citizens who are concerned about finding jobs in the Commonwealth. This is my No. 1 priority in the Labor Department. We need to open available jobs to our citizens in a fast and effective manner, but we have to be careful about how we do this.
In our situation of serious economic decline, the labor-business balance in the Commonwealth is more important than ever. Citizens want a preference for all jobs; they don't want businesses using foreign workers when unemployment among citizens continues to occur. Businesses want a preference for business-friendly policies; they don't want to be burdened with extra costs at a time when the minimum wage is rising dramatically and the market in the Commonwealth, especially for tourist services, is declining.
Each side has a point. First, it is important that our citizens be employed. That is the only way we can keep our talented people from migrating to the States or falling into poverty here at home. Second, it is important that every business survive this economic downturn because businesses create jobs. If businesses fail, then jobs disappear altogether, and there are no jobs to take their place. When that happens, the entire community loses.
As a community, we must do the best we can for each side of the labor-business balance. Our current labor law, P.L. 15-108, which was enacted in 2007, does that.
On the Labor side, to push for citizen employment, the law provides five basic tools:
1. We have a workforce participation requirement of 20 percent. Citizens must hold 20 percent of the full-time positions in every business in the Commonwealth. That percentage will increase to 30 percent by 2012. In addition, in the proposed regulations, we have increased the requirement for small businesses (fewer than five employees) to employ at least one citizen employee.
2. We have a job vacancy announcement requirement. Every job available in the Commonwealth must be advertised so that citizens know what jobs are available.
3. We have a citizen-preference requirement, so that a citizen who is qualified for a particular job must be given preference in hiring over a foreign worker.
4. We have an approved process for jobs that go to foreign workers-new, renewal, or transfer-so that before giving a job to a foreign worker, the first three requirements must be met. Under the Labor Department's new automation system, we are able to give these requests for approval much more rigorous scrutiny.
5. We have a citizen claims provision that, in the event a foreign worker was hired for a job for which a citizen applicant was qualified, the citizen may make a complaint to the Labor Department and, if he or she wins, collects up to six months in wages from the employer who made the hiring decision.
In addition, there are fees attached to the use of foreign labor (application fees, processing fees, and bonding fees), medical, and repatriation expenses that make the use of foreign labor more expensive. These fees are increased from time to time to cover Labor Department costs and contribute to the Commonwealth revenues.
On the business side, the Labor law recognizes that there are costs involved to businesses from limitations on the free-market for labor. When we impose hiring requirements, there are record-keeping costs in connection with compliance. When we require a citizen preference, there are substantial costs involved in losing the experience of the worker who has previously held the job. Training new workers, even if only for a few months, incurs costs. Any regulatory system imposes delays on businesses, and every delay also involves costs. Additional costs are very difficult for any business to absorb during an economic downturn without cutting jobs. To ease the transition to citizen labor over a three-year period, the Labor law provides four benefits to businesses:
1. We are phasing out the moratorium and we have suspended the periodic exit that imposed recording-keeping costs.
2. We have allowed an exemption from the citizen preference (but not the 20 percent requirement) for lower-paying jobs when a business achieves 35 percent citizen employment in high-paying jobs. We have just increased this to 50 percent in the proposed regulations so the exemption will be harder to get. This exemption will continue to get smaller next year.
3. We have allowed more part-time work and two-year contracts temporarily during the economic depression.
4. We have paid for and installed an interactive website so businesses do not have to pay to advertise jobs, and we have paid for and installed a new automation system so delays are now a matter of only a few days rather than weeks or months.
I believe that this balance is a fair one to both sides: citizens who want jobs, and businesses who want to avoid having to close down. The statistics indicate that most of the permanent loss of jobs during the economic depression has fallen on foreign workers. Their numbers have declined from more than 30,000 in 2005 to fewer than 16,000 today. Even after the garment manufacturers closed down, foreign workers continue to be displaced. More than 2,000 departed the Commonwealth just in the last 12 months. We do not have good statistics on citizen employment because the U.S. Census Bureau does not give the Commonwealth and other territories the same kind of data services it routinely provides to States and counties in the U.S. We are hopeful that our Delegate in Congress can do something about this.
The system is not perfect. Not every citizen will find the kind of job he or she wants. But on the whole, by maintaining a labor-business balance, we will have more citizens employed and keep more businesses open and operating-providing more jobs are available in this economy. I understand the pain and frustration of those individuals who cannot find the jobs they need. The Labor Department is working hard to make available as many job opportunities as possible. I believe we can work our way through this economic depression more successfully with labor-business harmony and this will benefit everyone in our community.
Jacinta M. Kaipat is the Deputy Secretary of Labor and a former House of Representatives lawmaker.
Opinion
Friday, June 05, 2009
By JACINTA M. KAIPAT
Special to the Saipan Tribune
I write to all our citizens who are concerned about finding jobs in the Commonwealth. This is my No. 1 priority in the Labor Department. We need to open available jobs to our citizens in a fast and effective manner, but we have to be careful about how we do this.
In our situation of serious economic decline, the labor-business balance in the Commonwealth is more important than ever. Citizens want a preference for all jobs; they don't want businesses using foreign workers when unemployment among citizens continues to occur. Businesses want a preference for business-friendly policies; they don't want to be burdened with extra costs at a time when the minimum wage is rising dramatically and the market in the Commonwealth, especially for tourist services, is declining.
Each side has a point. First, it is important that our citizens be employed. That is the only way we can keep our talented people from migrating to the States or falling into poverty here at home. Second, it is important that every business survive this economic downturn because businesses create jobs. If businesses fail, then jobs disappear altogether, and there are no jobs to take their place. When that happens, the entire community loses.
As a community, we must do the best we can for each side of the labor-business balance. Our current labor law, P.L. 15-108, which was enacted in 2007, does that.
On the Labor side, to push for citizen employment, the law provides five basic tools:
1. We have a workforce participation requirement of 20 percent. Citizens must hold 20 percent of the full-time positions in every business in the Commonwealth. That percentage will increase to 30 percent by 2012. In addition, in the proposed regulations, we have increased the requirement for small businesses (fewer than five employees) to employ at least one citizen employee.
2. We have a job vacancy announcement requirement. Every job available in the Commonwealth must be advertised so that citizens know what jobs are available.
3. We have a citizen-preference requirement, so that a citizen who is qualified for a particular job must be given preference in hiring over a foreign worker.
4. We have an approved process for jobs that go to foreign workers-new, renewal, or transfer-so that before giving a job to a foreign worker, the first three requirements must be met. Under the Labor Department's new automation system, we are able to give these requests for approval much more rigorous scrutiny.
5. We have a citizen claims provision that, in the event a foreign worker was hired for a job for which a citizen applicant was qualified, the citizen may make a complaint to the Labor Department and, if he or she wins, collects up to six months in wages from the employer who made the hiring decision.
In addition, there are fees attached to the use of foreign labor (application fees, processing fees, and bonding fees), medical, and repatriation expenses that make the use of foreign labor more expensive. These fees are increased from time to time to cover Labor Department costs and contribute to the Commonwealth revenues.
On the business side, the Labor law recognizes that there are costs involved to businesses from limitations on the free-market for labor. When we impose hiring requirements, there are record-keeping costs in connection with compliance. When we require a citizen preference, there are substantial costs involved in losing the experience of the worker who has previously held the job. Training new workers, even if only for a few months, incurs costs. Any regulatory system imposes delays on businesses, and every delay also involves costs. Additional costs are very difficult for any business to absorb during an economic downturn without cutting jobs. To ease the transition to citizen labor over a three-year period, the Labor law provides four benefits to businesses:
1. We are phasing out the moratorium and we have suspended the periodic exit that imposed recording-keeping costs.
2. We have allowed an exemption from the citizen preference (but not the 20 percent requirement) for lower-paying jobs when a business achieves 35 percent citizen employment in high-paying jobs. We have just increased this to 50 percent in the proposed regulations so the exemption will be harder to get. This exemption will continue to get smaller next year.
3. We have allowed more part-time work and two-year contracts temporarily during the economic depression.
4. We have paid for and installed an interactive website so businesses do not have to pay to advertise jobs, and we have paid for and installed a new automation system so delays are now a matter of only a few days rather than weeks or months.
I believe that this balance is a fair one to both sides: citizens who want jobs, and businesses who want to avoid having to close down. The statistics indicate that most of the permanent loss of jobs during the economic depression has fallen on foreign workers. Their numbers have declined from more than 30,000 in 2005 to fewer than 16,000 today. Even after the garment manufacturers closed down, foreign workers continue to be displaced. More than 2,000 departed the Commonwealth just in the last 12 months. We do not have good statistics on citizen employment because the U.S. Census Bureau does not give the Commonwealth and other territories the same kind of data services it routinely provides to States and counties in the U.S. We are hopeful that our Delegate in Congress can do something about this.
The system is not perfect. Not every citizen will find the kind of job he or she wants. But on the whole, by maintaining a labor-business balance, we will have more citizens employed and keep more businesses open and operating-providing more jobs are available in this economy. I understand the pain and frustration of those individuals who cannot find the jobs they need. The Labor Department is working hard to make available as many job opportunities as possible. I believe we can work our way through this economic depression more successfully with labor-business harmony and this will benefit everyone in our community.
Jacinta M. Kaipat is the Deputy Secretary of Labor and a former House of Representatives lawmaker.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
