‘We are being defrauded,’ worker says
Miguel Deniz told reporters his employer owes him wages. (Photo by Claire Bushey)
The only people who stand outside in 9-degree weather are the ones waiting for a bus or trying to make a point.
This morning, for the well-bundled group standing on the sidewalk outside a Wal-Mart on Chicago’s West Side, it was the latter. Workers for a temp agency that staffs a Wal-Mart warehouse in Elmwood, Ill. announced at a press conference they’re suing the agency in connection with wage theft.
“We are being defrauded,” said temp agency employee Miguel Deniz through a translator.
The class-action lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County claims that SelectRemedy, a California-based staffing agency with offices nationwide, failed to pay employees for all the hours they worked. Deniz, who makes $8 an hour loading and unloading containers of merchandise, showed a pay stub that indicated he’d worked for 57 hours and been paid for 35. The lawsuit also alleges that SelectRemedy failed to pay overtime and paid some workers less than minimum wage.
Michelle Bradford, a spokeswoman for Wal-Mart, said the company works “to comply with all labor law, and we rely on our third-party vendors to do the same.” Wal-Mart is not currently named in the suit, but advocates said it could be in the future if suing SelectRemedy proves unsuccessful.
SelectRemedy did not return calls seeking comment by deadline.
The workers filed the suit under the Illinois Day Labor and Temporary Services Act. The reason the workers filed their suit under this particular law is because it specifically allows workers to target so-called “third-party clients” — Wal-Mart, in this case.
Workers rights advocates argue that companies like Wal-Mart hire temporary agencies to drive down the cost of doing business. The temp agencies compete against each other to the point where “the only way to make a profit is to cheat workers,” said Chris Williams, executive director of the Working Hands Legal Clinic. The Illinois day labor law explicitly permits workers to sue third parties, to force companies to take responsibility for their supply chains.
Deniz said he was tired of the mistreatment at the warehouse.
“I don’t want to be threatened with being terminated because I want my money,” he said. “It’s so much work. Who profits from this? Wal-Mart. And we don’t see one cent of that.”
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Actually, it’s not necessarily the third party that profits. In fact, a company like Wal-Mart hires day labor, pays the hourly to the agency and saves in benefits and administrative costs. It the agency that keeps back money.
We had an issue in my neighborhood (Uptown) where a day labor agency wanted to come in. People were opposed to it for a variety of reasons but the real opener was when other social service organizations came out against, based on the agency’s history of predatory practices. It keep a percentage of the pay from workers, paid in chits or certificates that could only be cashed on site (for a fee of course), and was in general found to be far worse than employers like Wal-Mart that have a bad reputation (however deserved or undeserved, but that’s another post).
There’s this idea that day labor is a good stop gap for people who need work. In theory it is. But in reality, in my limited exposure, it’s another way to profit from the poor and desperate.
The temp agencies that employ these workers and then mistreat them absolutely bear first responsibility for that mistreatment. The point the workers rights advocates were trying to make is that such mistreatment is often unofficially condoned by the third-party client, because it saves money to not have those workers directly on the client’s payroll.
According to activists, using temp agencies is a deliberate tactic by these companies to profit from cheap labor and yet maintain deniability when there are labor law violations. Abraham Mwaura, an organizer for United Electrical Workers, described it as “a shell game.”
I’d be curious to know which day labor agency caused the ripples in Uptown. We must discuss.
In response to another comment. See in context »Labor Ready. And there were a host of other things wrong. The Alderman had to rezone the street, Sheridan Rd., as a light industrial zone from commercial/residential (which she did), and it was within a few feet of two schools, a Boys & Girls Club and a church. As a result, the Day Labor and Temporary Services Act in Illinois has been ammended to expressly prohibit a location within 1,000 feet of these types of facilities.
Huh. That’s really interesting. When did all this happen?
In response to another comment. See in context »About a year or two ago. There was a whole movement complete with Web site. Stoplaborready.org
It was such a bad idea all the way around. The only support it got was from the local Organization of the Northeast. However, it turns out this chapter was speaking out of turn. The national group came out against and said it was regularly opposed to Labor Ready. Locally, ONE is in lock step with what the 46th Ward Alderman wants. Which is how I got interested. Also, Labor Reader was planning to use the alley behind my house for loading and waiting.