Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
vs.
Defendants.
I. INTRODUCTION
1. This action is brought by four migrant farmworkers who were held in forced labor
and debt peonage by farm labor contractor SALVADOR HERNANDEZ, his wife, CLAUDIA
LABOR CORP. (“SUNRISE LABOR” and, collectively with Defendants Salvador Hernandez,
2. Due to the highly sensitive nature and real danger of physical harm involved in
this case, plaintiffs John Does I, II, III, and IV (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) are seeking leave to
proceed anonymously. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are identified here as John Does I through IV.
charges.
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 2 of 28
to knowingly hire for employment at least ten unauthorized aliens during a twelve month period,
SALVADOR HERNANDEZ was granted a conditional release until his Sentencing, which is
5. In February 2012, the government filed an Indictment in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of New York charging Defendant FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ with
conspiracy to encourage and induce aliens to reside in the United States, knowing and in reckless
disregard of the fact that such residence was and would be in violation of law, in violation of 8
and arraigned on June 4, 2012, during which he entered a plea of Not Guilty. Pursuant to the
6. In February 2012, the government filed an Indictment in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of New York charging Defendant CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ with three
felony charges, namely, conspiracy to bring in and harbor certain aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ was arraigned on those charges on May 25, 2012 and was granted a
undocumented field workers in Mexico and the United States to work on farms (“growers”) and
relied on a pattern of threats, violence, harassment, and indebtedness to force Plaintiffs and other
2
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 3 of 28
the workers between several states including Florida, Illinois, Georgia, Mississippi, and New
York.
migrant farmworkers and, through threats and intimidation, caused Plaintiffs and other migrant
farmworkers to believe that leaving Defendants’ employ would result in being hunted and
9. No Plaintiff received the compensation they were entitled to under state and
federal laws. At times, Plaintiffs and other migrant farmworkers were not paid at all for their
work. They were forced to work even when sick or injured and Defendants SALVADOR
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ instigated and created a hostile work environment, causing two
Plaintiffs to be physically and mentally assaulted by other migrant farmworkers and causing
them to suffer depression and other severe emotional and mental distress.
continued a scheme of threats and intimidation to prevent Plaintiffs from taking action to assert
their rights, and Plaintiffs continue to fear for their lives and the lives of their families.
12. Defendants held Plaintiffs in forced labor and trafficked Plaintiffs with respect to
3
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 4 of 28
13. Defendants routinely failed to pay Plaintiffs the federal minimum wage, as
required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §201 et seq., and unlawfully
deducted from their pay various charges, including the cost of smuggling Plaintiffs into the
United States.
Agricultural Worker Protection Act (“AWPA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq. These include: (1)
failing to disclose in writing the terms and conditions of employment at the time of recruitment;
(2) providing false and misleading information to Plaintiffs at the time of recruitment; (3) failing
to pay the wages owed to Plaintiffs when due; (4) failing to abide by the terms of a working
arrangement; (5) failing to post requirements imposed upon employers and housing providers;
(6) failing to provide each of the Plaintiffs with an itemized pay statement; (7) housing Plaintiffs
in housing that did not comply with federal and state law; (8) failing to post a certificate of
occupancy at the housing occupied by Plaintiffs; and (9) transporting Plaintiffs in unsafe
vehicles.
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ’S harassment of John Does I and II based on their sexual orientation
created a hostile work environment, instigating physical and mental assaults of John Does I and
16. Jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal
1595(a) (TVPRA), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (FLSA), and 29 U.S.C § 1854(a) (AWPA). Jurisdiction
over the Plaintiffs’ claims for declaratory relief is conferred by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
4
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 5 of 28
17. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims raised by virtue of
28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
18. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because the
Defendants are residents of Palm Beach County, Florida and/or a substantial part of the events
19. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants, who are residents of
Florida. Additionally and/or alternatively, Plaintiffs’ claims arise from or relate to Defendants’
activities within Florida and/or the commission of crimes or torts in whole or in part in Florida.
PLAINTIFFS
20. Plaintiffs were employees of Defendant SUNRISE LABOR under the direct
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ, and/or crew leaders whose work they organized, led, supervised,
and/or directed.
21. At the time of their employment with Defendant SUNRISE LABOR, Plaintiffs
22. John Does I and II currently reside in the United States pursuant to T-Visas, a visa
given by the United States Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services only after the applicant demonstrates that he or she is a victim of a severe form of
trafficking in persons.
23. John Doe III and IV also currently reside in the United States.
24. John Doe III recently applied for a T-Visa and is awaiting its issuance.
5
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 6 of 28
26. During their employment with Defendant SUNRISE LABOR, Plaintiffs were
migrant agricultural workers within the meaning of the AWPA, 29 U.S.C. § 1802(8)(A).
Plaintiffs were employed in agricultural employment of a seasonal or other temporary nature and
27. During their employment with Defendant SUNRISE LABOR, Plaintiffs were
engaged in agricultural employment within the meaning of the AWPA, 29 U.S.C. § 1802(3).
28. Plaintiffs were employees of Defendant SUNRISE LABOR within the meaning of
29. At the time of their employment with SUNRISE LABOR, Plaintiffs were engaged
in commerce or the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the FLSA, 29
U.S.C. § 203(s)(1)(i).
DEFENDANTS
corporation incorporated in 2008 with a principal place of business at 2323 Del Prado Blvd. S,
31. At all relevant times, Defendant SUNRISE LABOR was an agricultural employer
within the meaning of the AWPA, 29 U.S.C. § 1802(2). It recruits, solicits, hires, employs,
32. Defendant SUNRISE LABOR was authorized to do business in the state of New
York.
33. At all relevant times, Defendant SUNRISE LABOR employed more than four
persons.
6
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 7 of 28
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ are a married couple residing at 1132 NE 28th Street, Lot 32, Belle
currently detained and awaiting trial in the Northern District of New York.
HERNANDEZ, and CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ were farm labor contractors within the meaning
State Individual Contractor for the state of Florida, Registration Number 1036, expiring on
August 31, 2012, and as a Farm Labor Contractor with the United States Department of Labor,
State Individual Contractor for the state of Florida, Registration Number 1193, expiring on
7
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 8 of 28
September 30, 2012, and as a Farm Labor Contractor with the United States Department of
bookkeeping, secretarial, and other managerial tasks requisite to recruit, hire, employ, transport,
44. At all relevant times, Defendants were Plaintiffs’ “employer” within the meaning
engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the
with various growers located in several states across the United States, including Florida, Illinois,
Georgia, Mississippi, and New York, to harvest, pack, and store the growers’ agricultural crops.
47. To accomplish this, Defendant SUNRISE LABOR employs crew leaders who
each recruit, transport, supply, hire, and supervise crews of 35 to 40 Hispanic migrant
farmworkers. Some crew leaders are additionally responsible for supervising other crew leaders.
48. The crew leaders’ work requires that they, with the assistance of a bookkeeper,
inter alia, arrange documentation, transportation and housing for the migrant farmworkers;
8
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 9 of 28
determine the work schedule of the migrant farmworkers; supervise the migrant farmworkers in
their work; and calculate wages and pay the migrant farmworkers.
49. Soon after its incorporation in 2008, Defendant SUNRISE LABOR hired
Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ, who had worked for Defendant SUNRISE LABOR’S
perform bookkeeping, secretarial, and other managerial tasks for Defendant SALVADOR
HERNANDEZ’S crew and the crew of other crew leaders directed by him.
SALVADOR HERNANDEZ also organized, led, supervised, and/or directed other crew leaders,
including a crew leader known as “Mejia,” and other employees of Defendant SUNRISE
LABOR that performed bookkeeping, secretarial, and other managerial tasks (“bookkeepers”),
FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ also organized, led, supervised, and/or directed other crew leaders,
traveled with Defendant CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ) traveled with their crews, which often
included Plaintiffs, between growers located in or near Florida, Illinois, Georgia, Mississippi,
and New York, often returning to the same growers at the same time each year.
9
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 10 of 28
and to and from the fields on repainted school buses that had an insufficient number of seats,
FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ often required additional employees to travel with the crews, to
perform such functions including, inter alia, preparing meals for the migrant farmworkers for a
purported fee, operating a commissary at the migrant farmworker camp, and driving the school
farmworkers.
recruited Plaintiffs and other migrant farmworkers personally and through agents in Mexico and
in Belle Glade, Florida between 2001 and 2008. They knew that nearly all of the migrant
farmworkers workers recruited were undocumented, Hispanic, typically did not speak English,
58. Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ paid for the smuggling of John Doe I and
transport of John Doe II to Belle Glade, Florida, for which John Does I and II and/or their
59. John Does I and II were told they had to work for Defendants as repayment of that
purported “indebtedness.”
10
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 11 of 28
60. John Doe I was a minor at the time that Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ
paid for the smuggling of John Doe I into the United States and required John Doe I to work as
Mexico. He promised John Doe III an annual salary of over $30,000 and the provision of
comfortable housing. He also spoke of his urgent need for migrant farmworkers and/or truck
drivers in the United States and encouraged John Doe III to travel to Belle Glade, Florida
immediately.
62. Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ instructed that John Doe III have a
specific coyote – a person that smuggles individuals across the United States-Mexican border –
smuggle him into the United States. Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ promised that he
would pay the coyote’s fee upon John Doe III’s arrival in Belle Glade, Florida, for which John
63. John Doe III followed the instructions of Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ
for the smuggling of John Doe III upon his arrival in Belle Glade, Florida.
65. John Doe III became purportedly “indebted” to Defendants for the fee paid to the
coyote’s associate.
HERNANDEZ, after his arrival in Belle Glade, Florida, John Doe III did not receive an annual
salary of $30,000 or comfortable housing, nor did work exist immediately upon his arrival.
11
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 12 of 28
68. During the meeting, the agent promised guaranteed work in corn and sugarcane
fields in Florida. The agent stated that: wages would be discussed upon the recruits’ arrival in
the United States, each recruit would be charged a specified amount to be smuggled across the
United States border, and that the recruits need only appear at a certain house at a specified time.
69. John Doe IV was told that he could borrow the money needed to pay for his entry
into the United States, which purported “indebtedness” he would repay while working in Florida.
70. John Doe IV, along with other recruits, appeared at the appointed house at the
appointed hour and was smuggled into the United States and then transported to Belle Glade,
Florida.
71. Upon John Doe IV’s arrival in Belle Glade, Defendant SALVADOR
HERNANDEZ paid the coyote’s fee for his border crossing, as well as the fee of other recruits.
72. John Doe IV became purportedly “indebted” to Defendants for the fee paid to the
coyote.
73. During their recruitment, or at any other time, Plaintiffs were not provided with
74. Upon Plaintiffs’ arrival in Belle Glade, Florida, Plaintiffs were hired by
12
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 13 of 28
well as other crew leaders they directed, supervised Plaintiffs from their hiring dates, between
76. At no time prior to their arrival in Belle Glade, Florida, were Plaintiffs told that
they could not work for an employer other than Defendant SUNRISE LABOR while repaying
77. However, soon after Plaintiffs’ arrival in Belle Glade, Florida, Defendants
Plaintiffs that they could not seek employment with any employer other than with Defendants so
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ at times controlled the balance of Plaintiffs’ and other migrant
“indebtedness,” by controlling the work schedule of Plaintiffs’ and other migrant farmworkers.
79. For example, despite promising John Doe III that migrant farmworkers were
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ did not schedule John Doe III to work for approximately three weeks
after his arrival in Florida, during which time, Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ and/or
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ charged John Doe III for food, “rent,” and remittances to his family,
threatened that migrant farmworkers, including John Doe II, who left the employ of Defendant
SUNRISE LABOR while he or she purportedly remained “indebted” would be violently beaten.
13
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 14 of 28
migrant farmworkers of his ability to hire agents to violently beat migrant farmworkers.
minor.
farmworkers.
84. Plaintiffs believed these threats and feared violence, based at least in part on
violence suffered by acquaintances; the presence of many injured migrant farmworkers at the
housing camps provided by Defendants in Belle Glade, Florida; and from accounts told by other
migrant farmworkers of previous violent beatings performed pursuant the orders of Defendant
SALVADOR HERNANDEZ.
unlawfully kept portions of John Does I, III and IVs’ wages in purported “repayment” for the
to half of Plaintiffs’ and other migrant farmworkers’ wages each pay period as “repayment” of
14
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 15 of 28
HERNANDEZ kept all of John Doe I’s wages as “repayment” of purported “indebtedness” for
disclose the balance of Plaintiffs’ and other migrant farmworkers’ purported “indebtedness” to
Defendants, nor did they disclose the wages kept as repayment of that purported “indebtedness.”
90. In an attempt to determine the amount of his purported “indebtedness” and control
alleged repayment of that purported “indebtedness,” John Doe I requested that he receive his full
wages, from which John Doe I would make payments to Defendants. Defendant SALVADOR
91. Only after repeated requests by John Doe II did Defendant CLAUDIA
HERNANDEZ note the balance of John Doe II’s purported “indebtedness” on the envelope
converted migrant farmworkers’ wages by keeping the wages and distributing only the paystub,
contending that the migrant farmworker’s work was allegedly unsatisfactory to him.
him forced John Does I and III to perform the work of other migrant farmworkers without pay or
wages.
15
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 16 of 28
HERNANDEZ distributed paystubs that falsified the hours that Plaintiffs and other migrant
farmworkers had worked during a pay period, such that it appeared that Plaintiffs and the other
migrant farmworkers, who were actually paid by piece, were paid in accordance with hourly
and provided to Plaintiffs false identification, including but not limited to false social security
increased Plaintiffs’ purported “indebtedness” by amounts of at least $150 for the false
identification.
SALVADOR HERNANDEZ arranged for John Doe I stated a false date of birth, such that John
Working Conditions
HERNANDEZ, and other crew leaders they directed did not permit Plaintiffs and other migrant
farmworkers to take breaks, despite grueling labor and very high temperatures. Even 15 or 20
100. At times, Plaintiffs and other migrant farmworkers did not even have access to
16
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 17 of 28
101. At times, John Doe III and other migrant farmworkers often suffered fatigue or
102. When a migrant farmworker suffered fatigue or fell ill and stopped working,
Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ or his agent forcibly moved the migrant farmworker,
threatened to violently beat the worker if he or she did not begin working, or forced the migrant
farmworker to walk from the fields in which they worked to the migrant farmworker housing,
hire someone to beat up or kill a migrant farmworker that had fallen ill.
SALVADOR HERNANDEZ carried and brandished a handgun as he paced the fields where
Plaintiffs and other migrant farmworkers worked. At times, to intimidate Plaintiffs and other
migrant farmworkers, he shot birds and other objects located in the fields with the handgun.
farmworkers and brandishing of his handgun, Plaintiffs felt they had no choice but to work under
harsh conditions, and continued to do so despite illness, fatigue, injury, or ill effects from the
heat.
directed prohibited work breaks, John Doe III and other migrant farmworkers were repeatedly
sprayed with pesticides, as pesticides were applied to the crops while they worked in Indianola,
Mississippi.
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ regularly denied medical treatment to Plaintiffs and other migrant
17
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 18 of 28
farmworkers when they fell ill while working, suffered fatigue while working, or were injured by
and CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ threatened that Plaintiffs or any other migrant farmworker who
HERNANDEZ’S threats, migrant farmworkers often returned to work while seriously injured.
Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ had knowledge of this because of the visibility of the
continuing to work despite illness and fatigue, and being denied medical treatment, John Doe III
continues to suffer serious and debilitating physical symptoms and emotional distress.
Housing Conditions
111. In Belle Glade, Florida, Defendants housed John Does II, III, and IV in isolated,
overcrowded, and unsanitary conditions. Housing consisted of two-bedroom trailers that housed
between ten and twelve migrant farmworkers. The trailers suffered rodent and insect
112. Defendants charged John Does II, III, and IV varying amounts of at least $100 per
month as purported “rent” for this housing which Defendants unlawfully withheld from the
Plaintiffs and other migrant farmworkers at no charge in Illinois, Georgia, Mississippi, and New
18
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 19 of 28
York, Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ threatened to charge migrant farmworkers for this
114. In Bainbridge, Georgia, John Doe II was housed in a four-bedroom house with
approximately 25 other workers; he was forced to sleep on the floor. The bathroom was
115. The housing provided to Plaintiffs and other migrant farmworkers in King Ferry,
New York housing did not have hot water and had unsanitary bathrooms.
116. Beginning Summer 2006 and continuing through Fall 2009, Defendants
began making threats of violence and repeated, obscene, offensive, and discriminatory jokes
concerning the sexual orientation of John Does I and II and others in the presence of other
migrant farmworkers.
117. These repeated offensive and discriminatory jokes created a hostile work
environment in which migrant farmworkers who worked with John Does I and II made obscene,
offensive, and discriminatory jokes concerning the sexual orientation of John Does I and II.
19
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 20 of 28
120. The obscene, offensive, and discriminatory jokes, sexual assaults, and physical
and mental abuse occurred while John Does I and II worked under the supervision of Defendants
HERNANDEZ, and CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ, in King Ferry, New York, migrant farmworkers
used a rifle belonging to Defendant SALVADOR HERNANDEZ to mentally abuse John Doe II.
HERNANDEZ, and CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ of the sexual assaults and physical and mental
123. Defendant SUNRISE LABOR provided no other avenue for John Does I and II to
register complaints of the sexual assaults and physical and mental abuse.
124. When told of the sexual assaults and physical and mental abuse, Defendants
treated the events as a joke; made obscene, offensive, and discriminatory jokes concerning the
events; denied John Does I and II medical treatment; and threatened to call ICE.
125. Additionally, after John Doe II sought required medical treatment after a physical
danger by informing the migrant farmworkers that John Doe II was to blame if ICE began
deporting them.
Threats to Plaintiffs
126. After John Does I, II, and III left the employ of Defendant SUNRISE LABOR,
20
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 21 of 28
HERNANDEZ threatened the lives of John Does I, II, and III such that John Does I, II, and III
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ additionally threatened at least one other former employee who
assisted the United States federal law enforcement in criminal cases against Defendants
128. During some of the threats they received, John Does I and II believed they would
be imminently killed.
129. The threats severely traumatized and afflicted John Does I and II with serious
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ, and their agents have continued a scheme of threats and scare tactics
V. CAUSES OF ACTION
131. Paragraphs 1 through 130 are realleged and incorporated by reference as if fully
132. Plaintiffs bring this civil claim pursuant to the civil remedies provision of the
21
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 22 of 28
134. Defendants knowingly used serious harm or threats of serious harm to Plaintiffs
and other migrant farmworkers to obtain the labor and services of Plaintiffs in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1589(a)(2).
135. Defendants knowingly abused or threatened to abuse the law or legal process to
136. Defendants knowingly used a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause Plaintiffs
to believe that, if Plaintiffs did not perform labor or services, that Plaintiffs or another person
138. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1595, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and any other relief deemed appropriate for Defendants’
wrongful conduct.
139. Paragraphs 1 through 138 are realleged and incorporated by reference as if fully
140. Plaintiffs bring this civil claim pursuant to the civil remedies provision of the
transported, provided, or obtained Plaintiffs for labor or services through a violation of 18 U.S.C.
22
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 23 of 28
143. Defendants did so by using force, physical violence, intimidation, legal coercion,
144. The holding was for a term continuing until Plaintiffs repaid their purported
“indebtedness” to Defendants.
147. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1595, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and any other relief deemed appropriate for Defendants’
wrongful conduct.
148. Paragraphs 1 through 147 are realleged and incorporated by reference as if fully
149. By failing to pay minimum wages to John Does I, II, and III, Defendants violated
the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 206 et. seq. and its implementing regulations.
150. By failing to make, keep, and preserve records of hours worked by John Does I,
151. Defendants violated 29 C.F.R. § 531.31 by making deductions from the wages of
John Does I, II, and III which violated federal, state, and/or local law.
152. Defendants’ violations of the FLSA were willful within the meaning of 29 U.S.C.
§ 255(a), in that Defendants knew or showed reckless disregard for whether Defendants’ conduct
23
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 24 of 28
153. Defendants’ failure to comply with the FLSA minimum wage protections caused
154. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), John Does I, II, and III are entitled to unpaid
155. Paragraphs 1 through 154 are realleged and incorporated by reference as if fully
156. By failing to provide Plaintiffs at the time of recruitment with a written disclosure
of the terms and conditions of employment, Defendants violated the AWPA, 29 U.S.C. §
1821(a).
157. By knowingly giving false and misleading information to Plaintiffs at the time of
158. By failing to pay the wages owed to Plaintiffs when due, Defendants violated the
160. By failing to post requirements imposed upon employers and housing providers,
161. By failing to provide each of the Plaintiffs with an itemized pay statement,
162. By housing Plaintiffs in housing that did not comply with state and federal law,
24
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 25 of 28
163. Upon information and belief, by failing to post a certificate of occupancy at the
164. Upon information and belief, by transporting Plaintiffs in unsafe vehicles, the
Defendants violated the AWPA, 29 U.S.C. § 1841(b)(1)(A), and its implementing regulations, 29
165. The violations of the AWPA as set forth in paragraphs 155 through 163 were the
natural consequence of the conscious and deliberate actions of Defendants and were intentional
166. Defendants’ failure to comply with the AWPA caused Plaintiffs to suffer
damages.
167. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1854(c), for each violation of the AWPA, Plaintiffs are
entitled to recover from Defendants, jointly and severally, actual damages or up to $500 per
168. Paragraphs 1 through 167 are realleged and incorporated by reference as if fully
169. Defendants are employers under New York Human Rights Law.
170. The workplace of John Does I and II, in New York and elsewhere, was permeated
with discriminatory intimidation based on the sexual orientation of John Does I and II that was
25
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 26 of 28
171. The harassment was attributable to both the co-workers of John Does I and II and
HERNANDEZ.
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ additionally supervised the co-workers who harassed John Does I
and II.
CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ had actual knowledge of the harassment of John Does I and II.
HERNANDEZ’S, and CLAUDIA HERNANDEZ’S supervisory role over the co-workers who
harassed John Does I and II, the knowledge of Defendants SALVADOR HERNANDEZ,
176. Defendant SUNRISE LABOR provided no reasonable avenue for complaint and
177. Defendants discriminated against John Does I and II because of their sexual
178. As a result of this discrimination, John Does I and II suffered physical and mental
injuries.
26
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 27 of 28
179. Pursuant to New York Executive Law § 297(9), Plaintiffs are entitled to
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this court enter an order: Declaring that
the Defendants have knowingly and intentionally violated the TVPRA, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1581 and
1589, and their prohibition on forced labor and debt peonage; Granting judgment in favor of
Plaintiffs and against Defendants on claims brought under the TVPRA, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1581 and
1589 and awarding Plaintiffs actual damages, punitive and exemplary damages, as well as
attorneys’ fees, where permissible; Declaring that Defendants have knowingly and intentionally
violated the TVPRA, 18 U.S.C. § 1590, and its prohibition on trafficking into forced labor;
Granting judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants on claims brought under the
TVPRA, 18 U.S.C. § 1590, and awarding Plaintiffs actual damages, punitive and exemplary
damages, as well as attorneys’ fees, where permissible; Granting judgment in favor of Plaintiffs
and against Defendants on their claims of violations of the FLSA and AWPA and awarding
Plaintiffs actual damages, punitive and exemplary damages, as well as attorneys’ fees, where
permissible; Granting judgment in favor of John Does I and II and against Defendants on their
claim of violation of the New York Human Rights Law and awarding John Does I and II actual
damages, punitive and exemplary damages, as well as attorneys’ fees, where permissible;
27
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/20/2012 Page 28 of 28
d. Granting such further relief as this Court deems just and equitable.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
(Counsel)
and
(Counsel)
28
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 85 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/16/2013 Page 1 of 2
Plaintiffs,
v.
Defendants.
/
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs and Defendant Sunrise Labor
Corp.’s (“Sunrise”) “Stipulation of Dismissal of Fair Labor Standards Act Claims Against
Defendant Sunrise . . .” (the “Notice”) [DE 81] filed on October 7, 2013. Plaintiffs and Sunrise
have settled the claims against Sunrise, including claims brought under the Fair Labor Standards
Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201–219, and jointly represent that the amount agreed to be paid by
Sunrise fully compensates Plaintiffs for all claimed FLSA wages. While settlement of FLSA
claims typically requires court approval, see Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d
1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982), where a plaintiff is offered full compensation on his or her FLSA
claim, no compromise is involved, and judicial approval is not required. See Mackenzie v.
Kindred Hosp. E., LLC, 276 F. Supp. 2d 1211, 1217 (M.D. Fla. 2003). Furthermore, here, where
Plaintiffs are represented by counsel (pro bono), the concern present in Lynn’s Food—
advantageous settlements on the cheap of employees who do not know their rights—is not
present.
1
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 85 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/16/2013 Page 2 of 2
While Plaintiffs and Sunrise have additionally agreed to settle non-FLSA claims, judicial
approval is not necessary for non-FLSA claims, and therefore the Court makes no finding with
respect to the settlement of these other claims. See Church v. Conrad Yelvington Distribs., Inc.,
No. 10-cv-1100, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136203, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 10, 2011) (“[T]o the
extent this [settlement] amount is for release of non-FLSA claims, it is extraneous to the matters
Accordingly, it is hereby
1. Plaintiffs and Sunrise’s joint request in their Notice [DE 81] is GRANTED.
2. This action against Sunrise is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to
bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs with respect to such FLSA claims discussed
herein.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida this 15 day of
October, 2013.
2
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/16/2013 Page 1 of 4
CaseNo.:12-cv-80883-RYSKAM P/HOPKlN S
Plaintiffs,
VS.
disclose the identity of a person, a date of birth, relatives, or similar identifying factors.
ldentifying Inform ation includes inform ation from any source, whether currently in the
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/16/2013 Page 2 of 4
possession ofthepartiesto thissuitorobtained from athird party, including any state orfederal
2. DesignatedPersonsDefined:idDesignatedPersons''means(i)lawyersand staffof
Sunrise's counsel(Fisher& PhillipsLLP),(ii)RussellB Reaves and (iii)a staffmemberof
.
3. Confdentialitv of ldentifvinc Inform ation: Sunrise and its counsel shall not
to anyone or by any m eans, including butnot limited to any other Defendantin the above-
Agreem ent:ln connection with the Settlem ent Agreement, Plaintiffs will provide Designated
Persons certain lndentifying lnformation, including Plaintiffs' legalnnm es. Such information
shallbe entered into the computer databases of YCO & Associates Inc.and/or YCO Labor
,
Corporation by a D esignated Person. A Designated Person may take other actions insofar as
necessary to permitthe issuance ofchecks in accordance with the Settlem entAgreement the
,
Identifying lnform ation only to the extent required. Following the issuance of the checks
,
and/orYCO LaborCorporation,asfollows:(i)theidentitiesofthePlaintiffsaspartiestoabove-
captioned action shall not be noted in the databases;and (ii) although certain Identifying
lnform ation will be contained in computer databases that are accessed by staff of YCO &
Associates, lnc. and/or YCO Labor Com oration that are not Designated Persons, Plaintiffs'
captioned action.
Plaintiffs.
. Sumise m ay disdose ldentifying lnform ation insofar as provided in and in
9. Use of Identifving Inform ation: Sunrise and its counstlm ust use Identifying
Term: TheprovisionsofthisProtectiveOrdershallterminatefive(5)yearsfrom
thedateofthe entry ofthisProtective Order.
DO NE AND ORDERED in Cham bers atW est Palm Beach, Floridathis1f dayof
October,2013.
NNETH L.RYs
NITED STATESDISTRICTJUDG
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 87 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/16/2013 Page 1 of 2
Plaintiffs,
v.
Defendants.
/
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon on Plaintiffs’ motion for final default
judgment [DE 73] filed on July 3, 2013. Defendants have not responded, and the time to do so
Plaintiffs John Does I-IV (“Plaintiffs”) seek final default judgment against Defendants
Salvador Hernandez (a/k/a “Chavas”), Francisco Hernandez (a/k/a “Poncho”), and Claudia
Hernandez (a/k/a “Claudia Jimenez”) (collectively “Hernandez Defendants”) for, inter alia,
forced labor and human trafficking under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act
(“TVPA”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1589, 1590, 1595, the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker
Protection Act (“AWPA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1801 et seq., the New York State Humans Rights Law
(“NYSHRL”), New York Executive Law § 296(1)(a), and the Fair Labor Standards Act
(“FSLA”), 19 U.S.C. §§ 201 et. seq. Plaintiffs allege the Hernandez Defendants held them in
forced labor and debt peonage, relying on indebtedness, threats of violence, and deportation to
1
Case 9:12-cv-80883-KLR Document 87 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/16/2013 Page 2 of 2
force Plaintiffs to perform strenuous manual labor, and repeatedly physically and sexually
harassed Plaintiffs.
A Clerk’s default was entered against the Hernandez Defendants on February 26, 2013.
See [DE 32]. The Court may thus accept as true Plaintiffs’ well-pled allegations of fact, which
Defendants may not contest on appeal. Buchanan v. Bowman, 820 F.2d 359, 361 (11th Cir.
1987). Upon careful consideration of the motion, applicable law, and pertinent portions of the
record, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have sufficiently stated a claim against Defendants under
the TVPA, AWPA, NYSHRL, and the FLSA. As such, default judgment is warranted under
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs’ motion for final default judgment [DE
against the Hernandez Defendants, jointly and severally, in the following amounts:
The Clerk of Court is direct to CLOSE this case and DENY any pending motions as
MOOT.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida this 15 day of
October, 2013.