Showing posts with label contract workers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label contract workers. Show all posts

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Guess worker

I heard a rumor today that S.2739 had passed the House, bringing us one step closer to the wonderful world of U.S. Immigration and Labor laws. Not true, of course, but it made me decide to tie a string around my blog with the box in the upper left of this page. We won't be fooled again.

A salesman friend told me the story; we've been having a running conversation about the feds for about 18 months and he hears some hilarious hokum on the coconut telegraph. My view: he was hearing tales from liars or dreamers. Wishful thinking.

He'd even heard that illegal ('Out of Status' in U.S. newspeak) workers would get a break as soon as the bill was signed. That was my chance to be boring at great length about existing contracts, transition periods and the arcana of proposing and finally promulgating regulations. I predicted a complicated and uncertain time for legal workers. When his eyes unglazed, I said the others had no chance: it wasn't in the bill and the No Amnesty crowd in the mainland would crucify anyone who added it to the regulations.

The only prediction I would make at this point is that nobody will like what INS, Labor and their pals come up with. Not enough for guest workers, too much for large businesses and a paperwork blizzard for small businesses. Large processing fees. Residents will have to wait a year, or five, for things to settle down. More pocket money, sure, but energy costs are forcing businesses to raise prices and higher labor costs just add a percentage to that percentage. Expect to run if you want to stay even.

Think of it as methadone, weaning the CNMI from its addiction to unlimited cheap labor.

Nobody's Fault But Mine

Oh, I ran across John Bowe's website while I was checking on the bill. You might remember him as the author of Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor and the Dark Side of the New Global Economy. I recommend the book, the Saipan section is pretty good. If you haven't bought or borrowed it you can get a pretty good synopsis by puttering around in the stories and links.


And...an update: over on Unheard No More there's a link that says there will be a vote on S.2739 next Tuesday (Wednesday afternoon here).

Thursday, March 27, 2008

No news is bad news


Another Saipan garment factory is shutting down. (Marianas Variety), but that's not really news, is it? Let's see, 154 people will lose their jobs. And if 13 are residents, the percentage is...? 8.44%.

There are extenuating circumstances, maybe, but the low percentage isn't news either. My friends (mostly contract workers) in the Human Resources departments of various big companies* tell me they're having a hard time getting twenty percent, never mind thirty percent.

I played a friend in my pool league a couple of weeks ago. He was glad to see me, because he was hired by JAL on Guam and was leaving in a few days. That's not news, I've had the same conversation about once a week for more than two years.

I've talked to two local job-hunters this week. They sounded desperate. Nothing new there.

What's wrong with this picture?

What about the hundreds of high school kids who will be dumped on the street in a couple of months?

*
No names, please; just say they have more than one vote in the Saipan Chamber of Commerce and leave it at that.

To be continued

Friday, March 21, 2008

Who's listening anyway (Immigrate Expectations Part II)

S.2739 is in the news bigtime. Locally. I challenge you to find a story in the national media that mentions Saipan or the CNMI and the bill.

The U.S. economy is melting down, Iraq is a mess, and the presidential campaign is in full swings(sic).

OK sure, immigration is part of the national debate and a lot of businesses want a guest worker program. Some states don't want to wait, but we're not the poster child for how to do it.

Has a single Senator or Congressman spoken up opposing U.S. control of CNMI immigration ('federalization')? I don't think so, but correct me if I've missed one. That's understandable, we're the Typhoid Marianas because of Jack Abramoff, Tom Delay, Mark Zachares, et al. The petri dish has been contaminated. I'll let you be the judge of whether the ten-year, er, delay was worth it, but who's going to stick their head up now?

I don't even think they're paying attention to our local media. A few congressional staffers, maybe. We hear from them occasionally, but it always sounds like they've been asked for comment. They defend what's already proposed.

So why all of these stories from local politicians, businesses and business organizations? Who are they trying to influence? Each other?

Oh, and contract workers? I've heard for more than twenty years that there might be a path to naturalization 'someday'. I always thought it was wishful thinking. I still do. It's not about the numbers, that's a drop in the bucket nationally. It's the precedent--which makes it a controversial provision that was dropped from the legislation. It's not about fairness either. Sorry. For most national politicians it's about politics.

Realistically, a retreat on the minimum wage law is much more likely. Again, I'm not talking about fairness, but politics. Republican administrations are always against minimum wages*. I'm amazed any one was surprised when OIA came out for a freeze.

Democrats hold the majority in both houses of Congress, of course, and they are the minimum wage party. Only, I still wonder about that six-month Oldaker Biden & Belair contract. They did some "minimum wage" work back in the Abramoff days, too.

*Case in point: Kansas Republicans blocked raising their state minimum above $2.65 per hour. Surprised? I was (Lawrence Journal World & News)

**
I also wondered about David Cohen's resignation from the Office of Insular Affairs. The timing is awfully close. Pulas' line about not wanting the job because it's political gets a new twist. While I still think he was just trying to beat the rush of lame duck Bushketeers waddling to the unemployment line, it's at least a possibility.

Two immediate thoughts: 1) He might have disagreed but not wanted to be disagreeable or, 2) He might have agreed, but not wanted to spoil his image as the godfather of the poor and dispossessed. We'll probably never know unless somebody like TPM Muckrakers gets hold of some emails.