Notices From the CNMI Department of Labor

May 19, 2008






















Here are some recent notices from the CNMI Department of Labor. This "Overstayer Notice" published May 12, 2008 says:

Notice is hereby given that according to records maintained by the Commonwealth with respect to permits expiring or administrative actions taken during the first quarter of 2008, the following persons have overstayed the permission granted upon their entry to the Commonwealth. Persons in an overstayer status are required to depart the Commonwealth immediately.

Permissions granted upon entry may have been extended or the entry status may be changed under a number of different permissions of Commonwealth law, but all extensions and changes must be documented and the applicable fees paid. If the necessary applications and supporting documents have not been correctly completed or filed or recorded, a name may appear in overstayer status although upon completion or recording of the necessary documentation an extension will be granted.


If your name is on the list set out below and you have or should have a current permission or a current status allowing you to remain in the Commonwealth, please report to Jeff Camacho, Chief, Labor Enforcement Unit, Department of Labor, second floor, Afetna Square Building, San Antonio before may 30, 2008 to correct the records.


Isn't the last employer of record responsible for repatriating the guest worker? Has anyone read whether DOL contacted these employers to purchase the tickets, or is DOL paying for these tickets? I am assuming when the DOL states, "Persons in an overstayer status are required to depart the Commonwealth immediately" that the department has located the last employer of record to purchase the ticket for each "overstayer." I have not seen any word on who will be repatriating these alleged "overstayers."
























DOL also published this "Notice of Orders Entered Labor Cases and Agency Cases" that listed only labor case number and names of the employers or the companies. There are no employee names on this published notice. Are these hearings only for the employers or business owners? Are employees with these cases numbers expected to attend these hearings? Aren't the parties entitled to be notified by personal delivery, by mail, by telephone or another reliable contact first before resorting to the method of notice by publication?

0 comments: