Thread: Vista sued over day-laborer law by rights groups

http://www.signonsandiego.com

Vista sued over day-laborer law by rights groups


Law described as unconstitutional
By Matthew Rodriguez
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
July 19, 2006

VISTA – Two organizations have sued Vista to overturn a controversial day-labor employment ordinance scheduled to take effect next week.

The lawsuit argues that the ordinance is unconstitutional because it violates free speech and equal protection rights. The American Civil Liberties Union and California Rural Legal Assistance Inc. filed the suit in federal court Mondayon behalf of three Vista residents.

The plaintiffs also have filed for a temporary restraining order to prevent the ordinance from being enforced once it becomes law July 28.

“Essentially, we think that it violates the rights of employers,” said David Blair-Loy, legal director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties.

The Vista City Council passed the ordinance unanimously last month, as dozens of protesters gathered outside City Hall. The ordinance has been supported by the San Diego Minutemen, a group that opposes illegal immigration.

The city had been looking for ways to discourage day laborers from congregating near the intersection of Escondido and South Santa Fe avenues, waiting for employers to drive up and offer them temporary work.

The ordinance has drawn criticism from Latino activists and civil rights groups, who have said that it unfairly targets Latinos, since the majority of the day laborers are Latino.

City officials have said the ordinance would protect the laborers from problems, such as wage disputes.

City Attorney Darold Pieper said the city plans to file a response to the lawsuit by Friday.

“We believe that the ordinance is valid and appropriate and that the claims against it are unfounded,” Pieper said. “We don't believe that it interferes with First Amendment rights or that it was adopted for an improper purpose.”

The ordinance requires employers to register with the city before hiring day laborers from areas that the employers don't own, rent, control or work at as contractors.

Under the law, employers would have to display their registration on their vehicle windows and must keep records of each hire. The employer also would be required to give the worker a form describing the job and rate of pay.

The lawsuit – filed on behalf of an employer and two day laborers – contends the ordinance violates the First and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution that guarantee free speech and equal protection.

“There may be constitutional violations at issue here that the city is trying to skirt by claiming that this is an ordinance that's designed to protect the workers,” said Dorothy Johnson, directing attorney for the Oceanside office of California Rural Legal Assistance.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Virginia Calderon, who the suit says has hired day laborers, and laborers Asuncion Hernandez and Raymundo Serrano.

The suit alleges the ordinance does not prevent officials from unfairly holding up applications. The suit also contends that the intent of the ordinance is discriminatory.

Mayor Morris Vance said yesterday the city had anticipated a lawsuit, based on comments critics of the ordinance made at several meetings.

Some Latino activists had urged the city to help establish a hiring center for the day laborers, rather than passing the ordinance. City officials have said they are looking for a possible site and a nonprofit group to operate a center.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Rodriguez: (760) 476-8245; matthew.rodriguez@uniontrib.com

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/07 ... _19_06.txt

Last modified Wednesday, July 19, 2006 9:38 PM PDT

Vista says lawsuit won't deter regulation

By: CRAIG TENBROECK - Staff Writer

VISTA ---- City officials said Wednesday they won't be deterred by a lawsuit seeking to quash Vista's attempt to regulate the hiring of day laborers, and that employers can begin registering as early as Monday, before the law takes effect next week.

The controversial ordinance, adopted by the City Council on June 27, requires employers to register with the city before hiring day laborers from places they don't own or manage.

They also must display a certificate in their car windows and present written terms of employment to workers.


Assistant City Manager Rick Dudley said the city had been finalizing the registration forms, but hoped to have them ready so that employers can begin signing up Monday.

He said one person had asked to register so far.

On Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego and Imperial Counties joined with California Rural Legal Assistance Inc. to file a federal lawsuit against the city.

The groups seek a temporary restraining order to prevent Vista from enforcing a law they allege is unconstitutional.

City Attorney Darold Pieper said he will file a response to the lawsuit by noon Friday, and that the plaintiffs have until 5 p.m. Monday to respond. Nothing has been scheduled beyond that, he said.

This week, Dudley said, bilingual code compliance officers will start visiting the city's most popular makeshift hiring site ---- a shopping center parking lot near Escondido and Santa Fe avenues ----- to distribute educational leaflets to day laborers, would-be employers and area business owners.

Employer registration forms may also be distributed with the leaflets, but the city does not plan to register anyone at the site, Pieper said.

Instead, Pieper said, those seeking to hire day laborers must first visit the code compliance office at City Hall, 600 Eucalyptus Ave. Registration takes about 15 minutes, and "part of that is simply waiting for the certificate to be printed," he said.

According to the ordinance, an employer will be asked to show a photo ID, and provide a name, address and telephone number. The application will ask for the names and addresses of anyone authorized to represent the employer for the purpose of hiring a day laborer, as well as "other information, if any, as deemed relevant."

Dudley said he did not know the current level of public awareness of the law.

"Hopefully, the people that are hiring day laborers are reading the paper and have a relatively high level of awareness, but who knows," Dudley said.

Upon registering, employers will receive information about the ordinance and samples of the term sheets they will be expected to provide day laborers, Pieper said. They will also receive supplemental materials about workers' compensation, insurance, minimum wage, and other employer obligations under state and federal law.

The ordinance takes effect July 28, but for the first three days, the city will simply issue informational materials, Pieper said. The next week, code compliance officers will issue notices of violation. After that, employers who have not registered can be hit with citations, he said.

Violations will be misdemeanors punishable by up to six months imprisonment or $1,000.

While code compliance officers will be in charge of enforcement, they will be, at least initially, supported by San Diego County Sheriff's Department deputies, Dudley said.

"We want to be sure that everything goes well and there's a decent period where everyone gets adjusted to it," Dudley said.

How much time they spend at hiring sites will depend on the need, Dudley said.

City officials have said the law is intended to prevent day laborers, predominantly Latino men, from being taken advantage of by unscrupulous employers. Opponents have countered that it will instead discourage hiring of day laborers in the city.

Contact staff writer Craig TenBroeck at (760) 631-6621 or ctenbroeck@nctimes.com.

http://www.signonsandiego.com

Vista files answer to bid to halt labor law


Employers oppose registration rule
By Matthew Rodriguez
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
July 22, 2006

VISTA – The city yesterday filed its response to a request for a temporary restraining order that would prevent the city from enforcing a day labor employment law set to go into effect Friday.

The American Civil Liberties Union and California Rural Legal Assistance sued the city of Vista in federal court Monday to block the law.

As part of the lawsuit, the groups are seeking a temporary restraining order to prevent the ordinance from taking effect while the legal challenge is pending.

The city's response yesterday primarily addressed the plaintiffs' motion for the restraining order. The city hasn't filed its full reply to the lawsuit.

Last month, the City Council passed a day-labor employment ordinance requiring employers to register with the city before hiring day laborers at locations that they don't control.

In its legal response, the city argues that the registration process will impose a minor inconvenience and not cause employers “irreparable harm.” The city also argues that public interests, such as the fair treatment of workers, override minor inconveniences.

The city says its ordinance shouldn't be confused with prior ordinances in other cities that sought to restrict day laborers. The city's ordinance merely regulates employers who hire day laborers.

The lawsuit filed by the ACLU and California Rural Legal Assistance Inc. – filed on behalf of employer Virginia Calderon and day laborers Asuncion Hernandez and Raymundo Serrano – says the ordinance violates free speech and equal protection rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

The city's response challenges the lawsuit's allegation that the ordinance is unconstitutional.

“Plaintiffs cannot show a likelihood of success because their First Amendment arguments are destroyed by the facts,” the city's response states.

The city says it would face more hardship than the plaintiffs would under the new ordinance if a temporary restraining order were granted. The city also reiterates that the ordinance is designed to protect day laborers from abuses, such as wage disputes and an absence of workers' compensation.

The ACLU lawsuit says the ordinance violates the First Amendment because it gives the city “unbridled discretion” and doesn't specify a time limit for certificates to be issued.

The city yesterday said that “entire argument is nullified by the Administrative Policy, authorized by the ordinance itself. The policy establishes that the registration is a purely ministerial process which shall be completed in not more than two working days, and in most cases, on the spot.”

A copy of the city's Administrative Policy, which the city completed and made public on Thursday, was included in the response. The policy specifies that certificates should be issued immediately, but it allows up to two business days if “exceptional circumstances” arise.

The day labor employer, Calderon, stated in a declaration that the registration process “subjects me to a prior restraint and chills and threatens my ability to engage in lawful speech.”

The city disagrees.

“The ordinance may impose a slight, one-time inconvenience on Ms. Calderon, but it does not inflict irreparable harm,” the city states.

The city says the ordinance will ensure that workers are treated fairly and that employers abide by city, state, and federal laws.

“Obviously, these are public interests of the highest order,” the city argues, “and the minor inconvenience of applying for a simple registration certificate cannot trump them.”

The plaintiffs have until Monday to reply. After that, attorneys for the plaintiffs say they will await a decision from the judge. The attorneys said yesterday it was unclear whether federal Judge James Lorenz would ask for oral arguments on the temporary restraining order or simply issue a ruling.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Rodriguez: (760) 476-8245; matthew.rodriguez@uniontrib.com