Tiffany Williams: Silencing Human Trafficking Victims in America

From Other Words:

Women should be able to access victim services, regardless of their immigration status.

Thanks to a wave of anti-immigrant proposals in state legislatures across the nation, fear of deportation and family separation has forced many immigrant women to stay silent rather than report workplace abuse and exploitation to authorities. The courts have weakened some of these laws and the most controversial pieces of Arizona's SB 1070 law have been suspended. Unfortunately, America's anti-immigrant fervor continues to boil.

As a social worker, I've counseled both U.S.-born and foreign-born women who have experienced domestic violence, or have been assaulted by either their employers or the people who brought them to the United States. I'm increasingly alarmed by this harsh immigration enforcement climate because of its psychological impact on families and the new challenge to identify survivors of crime who are now too afraid to come forward.

For the past decade, I've helped nannies, housekeepers, caregivers for the elderly, and other domestic workers in the Washington metropolitan area who have survived human trafficking. A majority of these women report their employers use their immigration status to control and exploit them, issuing warnings such as "if you try to leave, the police will find you and deport you." Even women who come to the United States on legal work visas, including those caring for the children of diplomats or World Bank employees, experience these threats.

Though law enforcement is a key partner in responding to human trafficking, service providers continue to struggle with training authorities to identify trafficking and exploitation in immigrant populations, especially when the trafficking is for labor and not sex. While local human trafficking task forces spend meetings developing outreach plans, our own state governments are undermining these efforts with extremely harsh and indiscriminate crackdowns on immigrants.

Even before Arizona's draconian anti-immigration law went into effect, hundreds of immigrants were arrested and deported without screening that would have identified them as victims. While it's true that victims of crime who are "out of status" or undocumented can access immigration relief in the form of special visas, it will be impossible for service providers and advocates to reach them if their fears of law enforcement are reinforced by "ICE ACCESS" programs. The best known of these is 287(g), which allows local police to enforce federal immigration laws, as well as state legislation like SB 1070.

Approximately five million U.S. citizen children have at least one undocumented parent. A study by the Urban Institute revealed that children are often the real victims of workplace raids--80 percent of the children of workers in their study sites were less than ten years old. When families experience long separations from other family members, the report noted the effects can include significant economic hardship, psychological stress, and feelings of abandonment that can lead to sustained mental health problems.

When the American Psychological Association recently recommended overhauling our detention centers and social service networks to better protect children and maintain family units, it acknowledged the widespread psychological trauma caused by immigration enforcement--including everything from infant developmental delays to dismal academic performance.

Regardless of their legal status, these women are human beings working hard to feed their families. Their home countries' economies have been by shattered by globalization. Our economic system depends on their cheap labor. Yet much of the debate about U.S. borders fails to acknowledge immigrants as people, or appreciate the numerous cultural contributions that ethnic diversity has provided this country. As a result, humane comprehensive immigration reform remains out of reach in Congress.

We're a nation of immigrants and a nation of hard-working families. An economic crisis caused by corporate greed has turned us against each other in desperation and fear. We should band together to uphold our traditional values of family unity, to give law enforcement the tools they need to provide effective victim protection and identification rather than reactionary laws, and ensure that women can access victim services, regardless of immigration status.

I thought this was a particularly effective piece for making the case that you cannot consider immigration policy and anti-trafficking policy as completely divorced from one another. There are two longer journal articles I would recommend, which also touch on this issue: "Misery and Myopia: Understanding the Failures of U.S. Efforts to Stop Human Trafficking" by Jennifer Chacon and "Assessing the U.S.-Mexico Fight Against Human Trafficking and Smuggling: Unintended Results of U.S. Immigration Policy" by Salvador A. Cicero-Dominguez.

Setting the Record Straight

Last week, the Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales, and Northern Island issued a report that found that nearly 10% of prostitutes in the UK are victims of human trafficking (that figure jumps to 15% for migrant women.

Release about the report:

The report, called Setting the Record, involved a widespread collaboration between a number of law enforcement agencies, non-government organisations and has been independently academically reviewed. It also has the support of government as providing the most comprehensive estimate of the levels of trafficking for sexual exploitation.

It found that around 17,000 of the estimated 30,000 women involved in off-street prostitution in England and Wales are migrants. Approximately half come from Eastern Europe and a third from Asia. These women were grouped into three categories: those who were trafficked, those who are vulnerable and those who meet neither threshold.

Of the 17,000 migrant women identified, 2,600 were deemed to have been trafficked and a further 9,200 were deemed vulnerable migrants who may be further victims of trafficking. Most of those trafficked (2,200) are from Asia, primarily China.

ACPO lead on migration and associated matters Deputy Chief Constable Chris Eyre said: “Human trafficking for sexual exploitation involves the most extreme abuse of individuals in our communities.

“We recognise that Project Acumen focuses on only one area of trafficking, but it clearly sets out the scale of the problems that those in law enforcement, victim support, social care and border protection, collectively face.

“It provides us with a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of how migrant women are involved in prostitution - how they are influenced, controlled, coerced, exploited and trafficked. “The publication of this report represents not the end of a process, but the start. We now have a better picture of the extent of trafficking and will look to support from Government to ensure we work effectively with all agencies to make the UK a more hostile environment for traffickers, to shut down trafficking routes into the UK and to prosecute those who are exploiting women for their own gains.”

Read the full report here.

New Minimum Wage for Kuwait's Expat Workers Paves the Way for Domestic Worker Reforms

Despite the overall inaction seen across the Gulf Region to institute a universal minimum wage for workers outside of the public sector, progressive measures are being taken by Kuwait to implement upgrades to its newly approved labor law.

The Trade Arabia News Source released an article recently that revealed the approval of a minimum wage for expatriate workers of approximately 207 USD per month. Although the salary is relatively small, this is a major milestone across the GCC countries, and especially within Kuwait, a country that has traditionally neglected the establishment of legal safeguards to protect its foreign population from exploitation and coercion by Kuwaiti citizens.

Kuwait's new labor law was approved earlier this year, and until that time, had not been reformed in over forty years. Although a minimum wage is certain to improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of Kuwait's foreign workers, domestic workers are currently excluded from the new labor law. The article also focused on promulgating legislation that would enforce a new minimum wage for Kuwait's estimated 600,000 domestic workers, employed as maids, drivers, gardeners and security guards.

A proposed salary of 45 Kuwaiti Dinars (approximately 154 USD) is one of several reforms that will be included in the draft domestic worker law, along with amendments to enforce working hours, payment of wages and protection from abuse.

Such legislation would vastly improve the lives of domestic workers who are often forced to work 16-hour days. If the current draft law is approved by parliament, working hours for domestic workers would be limited to eight per day, employers would no longer be allowed to withhold passports, and workers would be allowed one day off per week and time-off during national holidays.

Skeptics still question the extent to which the government would be able to enforce the new law given the high sensitivity associated with domestic issues (within private homes) and how they should be regulated by the Ministry of Social Development (responsible for regulating all other foreign workers). For example, the new law would impose fines on employers who fail to pay their domestic workers, but there are no mechanisms in place to enforce or prove that a violation has been committed. Since most sponsors do not allow their domestic workers to contact their embassies or law enforcement agents, most cases go unreported.

Additional Thought to Arizona's Immigration Bill and Human Trafficking

Earlier today, Jennifer wrote about the effects of Arizona's new immigration bill on the ability of trafficking victims to come forward and the likelihood that victims will simply be arrested and deported if they lack status.

Another consideration that hasn't been talked about yet is that undocumented survivors who have already been identified by service agencies and law enforcement could also be arrested and/or deported under a law like Arizona's. Survivors of human trafficking go through various stages of immigration relief and the amount of time between them also varies. A survivor could go months without status while a law enforcement agency applies for continued presence (a temporary status, typically one year, that allows a survivor to stay in the US during an on-going investigation), federal certification or while a legal service provider applies for a T Visa (a more long-term immigration status set up through the TVPA).

During this time, service providers work to assist survivors to gain English skills, temporary housing, in addition to providing for other personal needs, but they are free to explore and walk around their community. While service providers can safety plan with survivors, the idea of explaining a law like that to an undocumented survivor who is waiting for immigration relief seems extremely challenging and, I would safely guess, add to the fear of law enforcement that survivors often already have.

Simply because a survivor is working with a law enforcement or service agency does not prevent another law enforcement agency from arresting and deporting them under this law because other law enforcement agencies would not have access necessarily to that individual's case. And, again, even though a person has been identified as a pre-certified victim of trafficking, they may still be considered undocumented and be without any form of government ID until the paperwork has gone through on any status application. If survivors are arrested or worse, deported, that negative experience could be extremely traumatic to that survivor (or worse) and damage any investigation or prosecution; all of which would be serious injustice for survivors.

Arizona's Immigration Bill and Human Trafficking

Arizona's recent immigration bill has been widely debated, garnering intense criticism from many circles as well as intense support. A number of entities and organizations are threatening or bringing legal challenges and suits, and many believe the bill will be found unconstitutional. If the law is not overturned, though, it will have a strong impact on human trafficking victims. Regardless of the law's future, it raises questions for anti-trafficking work.

The law will be one of the strictest in the nation. According to the New York Times, the bill "would make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime and give the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally."

While some of the bill's defenders have invoked human trafficking and crime reduction as a justification for the bill, the bill has the potential to hurt trafficking victims. Traffickers use people's immigration status to control victims, and the Arizona law is likely to make people more vulnerable to this type of control. Additionally, many people who are in the United States without documents or are out of status will be even more afraid to come to the police when they know about human trafficking or other crimes, or are victims of trafficking or other crimes.

Amanda Kloer argues that the Arizona law "will probably mean imprisoning victims of human trafficking and other crimes. . . The fact is that this law is going to up the chances that undocumented trafficking victims end up detained or deported and documented traffickers walk free." Moreover, in focusing efforts on people in the US without documents, finite resources will be diverted from efforts to address violent criminals, such as traffickers (including US citizen traffickers and traffickers with documents). Former Arizona Governor Napolitano vetoed similar bills for this reason.

A recent Human Trafficking Project piece on a failed Alaska bill pointed out that immigration laws frequently impact trafficking victims, though trafficking victims' needs may not be considered in the crafting of this legislation. While the author's hope that "other legislators give survivors this kind of consideration in similar bills" has not been the case with the Arizona bill, hopefully the broader immigration reform debate this bill has sparked will give serious consideration to the needs of trafficking victims and survivors.

Qatar: How The World's Wealthiest Nation Per Capita Relies on Migrant Worker Labor

In an attempt to further expand the scope of my research, I recently attended a few meetings and conferences in the State of Qatar to better assess the human rights and migrant labor issues that this majestic city-state currently faces.

Qatar hosts the most dramatic demographic contradictions between its local population and the migrant worker community that it must outsource in order to accommodate its rapid and unparalleled Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Industry. With only 350,000 Qatari citizens inhabiting a nation that boasts the highest production and export of LNG in the world, Qatar ranks number one for the world's highest GDP per capita income and embodies a rentier welfare-state in its most basic description.

However, the wealth that Qataris enjoy is at the expense of hundreds of thousands of migrant workers that are brought to the country on two-year contracts to work in nearly every sector and industry that the country has consecrated, mostly because the Qataris have no interest in working in positions that are not managerial or administrative. They hold a reputation that is even more negatively slanted than their Kuwaiti counter-parts, attributed largely to the country's massive natural resource wealth that provides a backbone for lavish lifestyles that are serviced and maintained by the hands of poor, outsourced laborers.

However, it is unfair to immediately dismiss the Qataris in their efforts to regulate and protect their migrant worker population. Higher income for Qataris has trickled down the economic ladder and raised income levels for migrant workers to higher salaries than anywhere else in the region. Legitimacy of private sector employment contracts is upheld and regulated by the Ministry of Interior. Unlike other parts of the region, Qatar maintains a strict turn-over of migrant workers to prevent long-term residency and the potential to reap attractive welfare benefits.

As a result, sponsors are less able to withhold wages and force their employees to stay in the country longer than the 2-year period the law allows. Although issues like withheld passports, coercive employment tactics (i.e. false contracts), and rights to change employers continue to remain crucial issues for anti-trafficking and human rights advocates, Qatar has seen rapid advancements under its labor law, with many foreseeable positive developments on the horizon.

Some of these developments have already come to fruition, and include, the abolition of the Camel Jockey industry. Previous to the Qatari Government's intervention in this regionally cultural tradition, underage children or "camel jockeys" were recruited from south Asia to participate in extremely dangers recreational races for entertainment purposes. Many were seriously injured and malnourished to keep them within race-weight standards. Now, the industry has made use of electronic jockeys instead, which has allegedly stopped the flow of the children who were previously trafficked into the country and exploited.

Another major development is the incorporation of anti-trafficking statutes under the current labor law. I will underscore that there is still no anti-trafficking law (although talk of drafting one has been reported); nevertheless, statutes exist that make use of similar language and highlight relative clauses that penalize trafficking of laborers. Qataris have even been tried, convicted, and imprisoned under these statutes-something barely seen in arguably more labor-friendly countries like Bahrain.

Like its neighbors, Qatari labor law maintains a crucial fault with regard to its domestic worker population (including housemaids, drivers, cooks and gardeners) who are not offered any legal protection under the current labor law or benefits that are awarded to private sector employees. Salaries, days-off and contracts are the responsibility of the sponsor and offer considerable room for ambiguity and abuse to exploitative employers. However, in response to growing criticisms from the international communities towards Qatar and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), new interest has developed in drafting a formal labor law that will better regulate Qatar domestic worker population.

Featured on the front page of one of the country's principle English-speaking newspapers, The Peninsula, an article described the development of a new domestic labor law being drafted by a special panel tasked with finalizing the regulation of rights and duties of domestic workers. The panel will incorporate representatives from several government agencies and will review with other GCC countries. The draft law may finally provide privileges to domestic employees, like end-of-service benefits, annual leave, and free medical care. These and other formal arrangements would have to be included in contracts between sponsors and their employees and would require endorsement by the Labor Department to be considered legally valid. The law might also regulate the functioning of manpower agencies and their role in hiring domestic workers in the country, The Peninsula reported.

And finally, the sponsorship system. Found in all countries except for Bahrain officially, but actually found in all countries of the Gulf unofficially, Qatar's sponsorship system seems to be the most archaic and limited with regard to a worker's access to mobility. As is required in Kuwait, Oman, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, a sponsor must provide consent for his employer to change to a different sponsor. In Qatar, the process is further complicated with the addition of a second party that must approve a change of employment as well-the Ministry of Interior. Qatar, like Bahrain, Oman and Kuwait has embraced a new economic development model that "ization-izes" the national population and encourages locals to enter the job market. Limiting positions for expatriates is an effective way to open up the job market to locals but discourages the professional development of expatriates.

Qatar presents an intriguing case study for human trafficking and migrant worker issues in the Arabian Gulf. I intend to keep my attention partially focused on the peninsula as it embarks on a proactive course of action to improve its labor laws and the lives of its expatriate workforce. I am sure there will be some follow-up.

Proposed Labor Town to Rid Bahraini Neighborhoods of Migrant Workers

Recent reporting from the TradeArabia News Source revisits the Bahraini Government's interest in constructing "labor towns" for thousands of migrant workers, with the goal of eliminating the hundreds of make-shift labor camps dotted throughout the country and segregating expats from Bahraini neighborhoods.

This new proposed labor town, which plans to accommodate a 10,000 worker capacity would be established in central Bahrain's East Rifaa District on a selected vacant piece of land behind several factories and plants that are already located in the area. According to the article, the project has already been approved by the Southern Municipal Council and received the backing of surrounding Municipalities and the Minister of Agriculture.

Rifaa's Municipal Councilor and pioneer of this initiative has stated that a new labor town is a necessary mechanism to cope with the expanding expat community currently living, and negatively affecting Bahraini residents in the area. Grouping migrant workers together is argued to improve the lives of Bahraini citizens who often complain of having to live in such close proximity to make-shift labor camps within their neighborhoods. The Municipal Councilor further noted that Bahraini citizens are being forced to move from the area due to deteriorating living conditions-like sewage overhaul-and increasing incidence of crime as a result of the increasing population of migrant workers.

New accommodations are argued to improve the lives of the migrant workers living in cramped, dilapidated housing complexes.

Rifaa is not alone in its quest to rid its national population of migrant workers. Requests for labor townships from all of Bahrain's governates have been made following years of complaints from local Municipal Councils.

The Minister of Agriculture recently banned a request to enact formal legislation that would prevent migrant workers from living in residential areas alongside Bahraini citizens; however, a proposed draft law has been submitted to Parliament by the Municipal Councils that would allow landlords the right to rent property only to expats and professionals, disallowing migrant laborers and unskilled bachelors from acquiring a residence and permitting only 6 months for such individuals currently living in designated areas to vacate before being evicted.

Rifaa's Municipal Councilor is still in the process of locating the landowners of the proposed area for the labor town to approach them about acquiring the plot.

Labor Reforms in Bahrain Tackle Local Unemployment Crisis

According to the Arabian Business News Source, recent reforms to Bahrain's labor market have begun to drive up the cost of employing cheap and unskilled laborers, increasing competitiveness of Bahraini citizens in the job market. This topic has been a pressing issue for the Bahraini Government in its efforts to expand job opportunities for Bahrainis and drive down its foreign population.

In a recent interview with Reuters News Agency, the Chief Executive of Bahrain's Labor Market Regulatory Authority (LMRA) Ali Radhi revealed the cost of employing expatriate workers is rising, and although the cost increase is not significant, it presents an upward moving trend. Recent reforms have imposed monthly 26.5 USD training fees paid by the employer for each expatriate worker brought to the island Kingdom.

Another significant reform occurred last year when Bahrain became the first Arab Gulf state to eliminate the employment sponsorship system, which LMRA officials hoped would allow workers to change sponsors without consent and encourage them to freely negotiate higher salaries with employers, making them less attractive for hire in comparison to their Bahraini counter-parts.

LMRA data shows that there has been an increasing trend in workers who have decided to change their sponsors under this new system, and that the gap in wages between locals and foreigners has decreased by 15 percent in some sectors, like construction. Radh noted that the effects of these reforms will be more significant once the current contracts of outsourced laborers expire and employers can choose between hiring locals instead of foreigners for the first time.

The next phase of labor reforms will be the implementation of an adaptable cap on foreign employment in certain sectors that will be determined by economic growth and industrial output. The employment ceilings have not been released to the public yet, but are awaiting approval by the board of the LMRA and reflect recent data collected from various industrial sectors.

Many Arab Gulf states are looking to Bahrain's economic transformation policies with envy, as they also attempt to address similar struggles of incorporating young people into the job market. Countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have embraced bottom-down reforms that have forced companies to hire locals (and sack foreigners) in the recent economic downturn.

Bahrain is also working to tackle illegal employment of foreign workers, often perpetuated by local employers who recruit them to Bahrain but allow them to pursue other employment opportunities in exchange for a portion of their salaries, which throws them into financial and legal uncertainty, as well as, a higher likelihood of trafficking.

Alaskan Bill Had Raised Concerns About Effects on Trafficking Victims

From Fairbanks Daily News-Miner: JUNEAU — The state House rejected a bill Monday that aimed to let Alaska tailor drivers’ licenses for visa holders and other international visitors to last only as long as they can legally stay in the United States. State regulations require state-issued driver licenses to be valid for five years, regardless of whether a holder’s immigration papers expire sooner than that, state Division of Motor Vehicles director Whitney Brewster said.

The bill, introduced more than a year ago, had been quiet for almost a year. It drew plenty of attention Monday, with supporters saying it would appropriately help ensure illegal aliens can’t hold a state driver’s license. Opponents said it would saddle Alaska with the responsibility of helping oversee immigration laws and worried it could could complicate the license application process for victims of human sex trafficking. The House rejected the bill 23-17 but sponsor Rep. Bob Lynn, R-Anchorage, said he’d seek another vote under legislative reconsideration rules. Six other Republicans co-sponsored the bill, including Fairbanks Rep. Jay Ramras.

It bounced through the House committee process last winter, drawing questions along the way, before falling dormant. But Brewster followed revived debate last week by writing to Lynn Thursday explicitly supporting the bill. Brewster said the bill would let the state issue drivers licenses that expire when the holder’s legal stay in the United States expires. He said the bill is not about immigration: It would leave the Division of Motor Vehicles simply checking drivers’ qualifications and legal documents. The bill would change nothing for license holders who need to renew their licenses every five years, he said. “Immigration is a problem but it’s a federal problem and we need to keep it that way,” he said. He said Alaska is one of four states that lack such a measure.

Opponents said the plan could be a back door to compliance with part of the 5-year-old federal REAL ID Act. Some also said the change would make it difficult for victims of human trafficking to gain licenses. It was unclear from the debate Monday how the bill would affect that population, which Rep. Anna Fairclough, R-Eagle River and one of a handful of Republicans to vote against the bill, estimated at roughly 200 in Alaska. A clause in the bill would have let the division issue licenses to a sex or human trafficking victim while he or she applied for permanent or conditional resident status. Fairclough and Rep. Beth Kerttula, D-Juneau, said they remained unconvinced the bill would protect that population. Rep. Tammie Wilson, R-North Pole, called the bill “well-intentioned” but opposed what she said would saddle state workers with a responsibility — overseeing citizenship — appropriately left to the federal government.

Various clauses in the bill explicitly forbid the state from issuing identification cards “solely to bring the state into compliance” with the 2005 REAL ID Act, which sought to homogenize the process used to issue state-level drivers licenses across the country. One line reads that the bill “may not be construed as support for, or compliance with, the federal REAL ID Act.” The Legislature has also passed other bills in recent years barring the state from taking similar steps from complying with the federal law. The bill is House Bill 3.

This is a really interesting news piece, and I am pleasantly surprised to see that consideration for the way this bill would have affected victims of human trafficking by its passage was given as much weight as it received. A lot of the issues that are debated concerning immigration affect victims of human trafficking, particularly those who are undocumented. Most people don't realize the amount of time it takes for non-governmental organizations, legal service providers and law enforcement agencies to assist survivors in adjusting their immigration status if they are undocumented - it could take many months or even years before they have the documentation to be able to become more self-sufficient while they are restarting their life outside of their trafficking situation. That time in limbo can be extremely difficult and frustrating for the survivor to deal with, and this is in part due to the kind of restrictions that are placed on them by their lack of status. I hope other legislators give survivors this kind of consideration in similar bills.

Peruvian Sheepherders File Lawsuit Against Ranch

*Picture from CLS's Migrant Farm Worker Division

From the Denver Post

Two Peruvian sheepherders who left a Craig ranch with only the clothes on their backs filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday saying they were abused by ranchers with a 20-year record of federal labor complaints.

John Peroulis & Sons Sheep Inc., Louis Peroulis, Stanley Peroulis and Crisologo Damian — a recruiter of workers for the ranch — are named in the suit filed in U.S. District Court in Denver.

Roel Espejo, 25, and Juvencio Samaniego, 32, are experienced sheepherders who participated in the federal H-2A visa program, which allows foreign workers to come to the U.S. for temporary agricultural work.

Espejo arrived in Colorado in March 2009, and Samaniego came in June with the promise of a $750 monthly salary, a camper to sleep in and food provided by their employer.

While both men worked on the Peroulis ranch in Colorado, they did not know each other because they were there at different times that year.

The lawsuit, filed by attorney Jennifer Lee of Colorado Legal Services, says each man paid Damian thousands of dollars in recruitment and travel fees to come to the U.S., fees prohibited in the H-2A program.

The men claim Stanley Peroulis confiscated their passports and visas so they couldn't leave the ranch. Much of the time, they were hungry because they didn't have enough food, the suit says.
"The workers we meet are very much about working hard, and they take pride in how they work," said Lee, who litigates cases involving migrant farmworkers. "They don't expect amazing conditions, but they expect to be treated fairly."

Stanley and Louis Peroulis did not return a call seeking comment.

Both men are accused of verbally abusing the sheepherders and not allowing them to take more than 15 minutes to eat or to read books. The suit claims Stanley Peroulis knew about the recruitment fee that the workers paid to get to the U.S.

The lawsuit accuses Louis Peroulis of kicking a sheep and hitting a horse with a plank of wood when he was in a rage over the performance of his workers.

Samaniego says he was beaten.

In July, Samaniego left the ranch and walked for 10 hours until he came across help. In November, Espejo walked two hours on a highway in order to get away from the ranch, and police officers took him to a hotel for the night.

Lee filed the lawsuit after she was made aware of the workers' complaints by the Peruvian Consulate. The U.S. Department of Labor is investigating the complaints.

In 2000, the Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against Peroulis & Sons alleging similar complaints of worker abuse.

Peroulis & Sons settled the case without admitting wrongdoing but had to produce a handbook on proper working conditions made available to workers and prohibit acts of workplace violence.

As early as 1990, the Department of Labor levied fines against the Peroulis ranch for mistreatment of immigrant workers, according to a 2000 Denver Post story.

In September 2000, federal agents, including some from the FBI, raided the ranch but criminal charges were not filed.

Felisa Cardona: 303-954-1219 or fcardona@denverpost.com

Yet another case highlighting the broken system of our H-2A guestworker program here in the U.S. The laws guiding the program look good on paper - for example, H2A workers are not supposed to pay recruitment and transportation fees. As the article points out, however, in this case and in other cases, guestworkers have been forced to pay these fees to the tune of thousands of dollars. With immigration reform about to come to the table again, hopefully a comprehensive model will pass that incorporates better oversight of the H-2A and H-2B programs so as to prevent these abuses and help prevent cases of human trafficking (this particular case does include TVPRA claims). I mention oversight specifically because the program already has some protections and benefits on paper (establishes wage rates, worker protection, safety and health standards, etc.), but a lack of oversight leaves these workers extremely vulnerable to abuse. Close to Slavery by the Southern Poverty Law Center is worth a read if you want to learn more about how vulnerable guestworkers really are. Colorado Legal Services also produced a report called Overworked and Underpaid: H-2A Herders in Colorado.

Migrant Workers Melt Like Candles in the Gulf to Give Light to Their Families Back Home

Recent shocking statements made by Chairman K V Shamsudeen of the Pravasi Bandhu Welfare Trust (PBWT) divulged that only five percent of Indian expatriates living in Bahrain would lead a comfortable lifestyle from their earnings if they were forced to return home today. These findings reflect the extravagant lifestyles their families are creating with the hard-earned remittances received from their migrant worker relatives and a disregard for responsible saving habits. The Sharjah-based representative said that this problem occurred amongst other national groups as well, including Filipinos, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans and Pakistanis.

Consequently, the TradeArabia News Source reported that this startling percentage of low and middle income migrant workers from India who have worked in the Gulf States for decades are returning home with little or no resources to further support their families.

The survey from which this information was derived was conducted by the PBWT and included 10,100 migrant workers from India living in the Gulf Corporation Council (GCC) countries, including 1,500 from Bahrain who admitted that their sacrifices and self-deprivation in exchange for the well-being of their families back home yielded little long-term benefit.

Shamsudeen stated that only 2% of Indian families were responsibly saving portions of the remittances they receive, and encouraged migrant workers to discuss the harsh and often unforgiving conditions they face while living in the Gulf with their families, as a way to encourage more conservative spending habits, explore wiser investment opportunities, and inspire greater appreciation for the money they receive, especially given the precarious nature of their jobs vis a vis the recent global economic downturn. Shamsudeen eloquently explained that saving in small drops will eventually make an ocean.

80% of workers surveyed were married, but only 10% had their families living with them in the Gulf.

To add insult to injury, migrant workers are often ignored by their families if they do not receive remittances. Families in India were said to not appreciate the sacrifices that their spouses/relatives make while trying to support them; many often enjoy only one meal a day and live in deplorable conditions.

5 Million "Non-Resident Indians" as they are called live and work in the GCC countries, 60% of whom come from the Kerala region in southern India.

This article is particularly au courant given recent initiatives taken by regional governments to forcibly deport migrant workers living in the GCC countries illegally, including Bahrain. Knowing that the hard work invested by these workers will yield nothing once they return home is heart-wrenching.

Kuwait's New Private Sector Labor Law Still Neglects 1/3 of its Population

Kuwait's new labor law became official on February 21 following its publication in the government-produced Kuwait Gazette Al Kuwait Al Youm, marking a new, significant, and uncomfortably overdue step forward taken by the Kuwaiti Government to protect its private sector workers. Shockingly, no reforms were made to the country’s previous archaic and historic labor law in over 45 years, promoting a racially-discriminate law that tended to only favor Kuwaiti employers/sponsors and neglected the rights of the majority of Kuwait’s workforce outsourced from abroad.

The new law includes updated provisions that address issues of salaries, working hours, public holidays, paid leave, sick leave and suitable end of service payments was approved by the National Assembly in 2009 and approved by His Highness Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, the Amir of Kuwait for endorsement.

Despite these highly anticipated gains, housemaids and domestic drivers are absent from this law’s jurisdiction, and even today, despite encouragement from local enthusiasts and an indication that such a law is forthcoming, there is still no legislation that addresses the rights of these domestic workers in private homes.

Such a law is said to be forthcoming but delayed since its jurisdiction will fall under the Ministry of Interior, given the sensitivity of addressing legal disputes that emerge in the privacy of the homes of Kuwaiti citizens. Many are hopeful that this law will be presented in Parliament within the next six months, hopefully ending the perpetual cycles of abuse and illegal withholding of wages and documentation that leave an estimated 800,000 housemaids vulnerable to coercion. I will underscore that there are 800,000 maids working in Kuwait within a total population that is just under three million.

Many remain skeptical as to how these new provisions will profoundly impact or improve conditions in the private sector and question whether the new law will actually be implemented. According to an anonymous journalist interviewed by the Kuwait Times, employers can still easily devise schemes to puncture loopholes in the new law and avoid paying indemnities or other forms of remuneration payable to workers. For example, an employer can transfer workers to a different division within their company or simply fire them and find new workers to avoid paying salaries. For detailed information on the new labor law’s provisions, click here to be taken to the Arab Times Online.

Kuwait still struggles to responsibly accommodate its expatriate population, which currently amounts to over 65% of the country’s total population. A renewed focus on its previously dormant labor law demonstrates the Kuwaiti Government’s interest in reform; however, 45 years of neglect indicate that continued reform will be an arduous process that will require expanded legislation to better address vulnerable contracted and domestic workers that are excluded from current jurisdiction, a legal mechanism to confront perpetrators of human trafficking, and the abolishment of Kuwait’s sponsorship system.

Recent news sources have revealed that new legislation to protect Kuwait's domestic workers is now in the works. Kuwait's Minister of Social Development, Mohammad al-Afassi revealed that a new law would be issued as early as this coming May. A new interest in passing legislation that addresses Kuwait's domestic labor force, affecting housemaids, drivers and landscapers follows international pressures, NGO lobbying, and heightened criticism over the grievances that were not addressed in the new private sector labor law.

The Kuwait Times profiled several interviews with domestic housemaids, asking them what they believed would be the most important clauses the new labor law should include. One worker insisted that matters dealing with domestic workers should be addressed by civilian authorities, and not the "scary and unfriendly" uniformed representatives of the Ministry of Interior. Two other housemaids highlighted the need for one day off during the workweek. They stated that they had been working for their current employers for 5 years and were only allowed one day off a year under their current contracts!

The vulnerability of domestic workers and the lack of freedoms they are awarded under the current laws has been exposed recently with heightened statistics on suicide rates in the country. There is currently no option for employees to switch employers without consent, and low or sometimes non-existent salaries in exchange for their work make it impossible for most to repay the debts they owe for their work visas.

One Kuwaiti official has suggested reducing the number of domestic workers who are allowed to enter Kuwait and shortening the current validity periods of worker visas to shift current demographic ratios and potentially prevent human trafficking.

Amnesty Offered to Illegal Workers Under Bahrain's New "Easy Exit Strategy" Campaign in Response to its Growing Expatriate Population

Following the release of new labor data on Bahrain's rising expatriate population and startling unemployment figures, the Kingdom's Labor Market Regulatory Authority (LMRA) in cooperation with the General Directorate for Nationality, Passport and Residence, and several local embassies and government ministries has offered amnesty to illegal workers in Bahrain who have overstayed their work visas or failed to apply for extensions. Under this campaign, workers will not face prosecution as a result of their illegal status in the Kingdom but will be required to pay a fine that will be determined by the LMRA and immigration authorities and will reflect the length of time they have overstayed. Any worker involved in pending court cases will not be eligible for deportation under this temporary campaign.

Illegal workers are being encouraged to approach their embassies for assistance in returning home and are reminded of the benefits presented by this temporary immunity from legal prosecution and fast-tracked paperwork processing for their deportation. Local embassies are also being encouraged to forward lists with specific names of illegal workers to help the Bahraini Government facilitate the campaign. In an article from the TradeArabia News Service, quoted officials from the Indian, Pakistani, and Filipino Embassies underscored the positives associated with this initiative, noting that illegal workers should make best use of this chance to leave Bahrain without being arrested. Embassy involvement in this campaign may encourage more workers to step forward, since many are reluctant to deal with local Bahraini authorities alone for fear of being arrested by immigration when attempting to return to their countries of origin.

No reliable figures are currently available on the population of Bahrain's illegal workers; however, the TradeArabia News Service cites figures released in early February 2010 by the General Federation of Bahrain Trade Unions documenting around 46,000 runaways - approximately 10% of the entire workforce.

This "Easy Exit Strategy" to rid Bahrain of illegal workers immediately follows the release of official figures by the LMRA last week stating that for the first time in its history, Bahrain's expat population outnumbers national citizens at a 51.4% majority, and official economic data indicating that employment opportunities for Bahrainis are declining, attributed partly to its endless supply of cheap labor outsourced from abroad.

Two key questions must be raised in response to this campaign. First: Does this new strategy allow the voluntary deportation of illegal workers who remain indebted to an employer under previous contracts? If workers are forced to remain in Bahrain until their debts have been repaid, they become victims of trafficking when held against their will with no flexibility to escape their debt or to find other means of legal employment to pay back the debt, risking arrest when they attempt to secure another job without a legal work visa. Second: What happens if illegal workers are unable to pay their determined "exit fine" if they utilize this "easy exit strategy?" This is an important point that needs to be considered given the minimal incomes that most migrant workers earn while living in Bahrain legally; incomes for illegal workers are certain to be less given the precarious nature of their status and the leverage employers have (and use) to threaten workers by revealing their status and encouraging their deportation.

But for those who refuse these carrots, alternative sticks are waiting. A recent article from Dubai-based Maktoob Business provides information on the alternative approach that is being employed by the Ministry of Labor to facilitate the deportation of illegal workers who choose to stay in Bahrain. The Ministry of Labor has publicly stated that it plans to deport 20,000 illegal workers through new initiatives that will drive vendors off the streets and detain workers that do not hold appropriate work visas or residency permits.

According to a senior member of Bahrain's Ministry of Labor,
"Tackling illegal workers in Bahrain is a national duty to protect the country's national economy and security. There are many negative repercussions from the presence of massive numbers of illegal foreigners on all aspects and we therefore need to eradicate this dangerous phenomenon through joint action with all ministries."

Nearly 60,000 workers were voluntarily deported or became legalized in an earlier five-month campaign organized by the Bahraini Government which ran until January 31 of 2008, coincidentally in the immediate wake of Bahrain's Anti-Trafficking Law; second in the region behind the United Arab Emirates.

Now that incentives have been presented to illegal workers under a newly announced period of amnesty, workers who refuse to turn themselves in voluntarily will face an unforgiving and radical alternative.

Prevention

By the time someone has been trafficked, we've already failed. Obviously efforts to help victims, empower survivors, and punish perpetrators are extremely vital. At the same time, ultimately we should be working towards a world where trafficking does not occur in the first place. Prevention efforts can be nebulous, though, and even with the best of intentions can do more harm than good. A few weeks ago I attended a panel on preventing human trafficking. Numerous experts who are working in the anti-trafficking movement in various capacities expressed some common themes about what needs to happen to address the roots of trafficking.

Denise Brennan, an associate professor in the Department of Anthropology at Georgetown University, is the author of What's Love Got to Do With It? Transnational Desires and Sex Tourism in Sosua, the Dominican Republic. She is currently working on a book about survivors of human trafficking entitled Starting Over: Life After Trafficking into Forced Labor in the United States. Brennan suggests that efforts to prevent human trafficking must begin with efforts to promote the rights of migrants. From her research she has found that migrants are extremely vulnerable to trafficking because even when they are not trafficked, their basic rights are often violated. Since they are treated as though they have no rights, they are also less likely to come forward to law enforcement when they are exploited. Brennan also argued that migrants rights groups must be a part of the anti-trafficking conversation. She also advocated for increased opportunities for human trafficking survivors to connect with one another and to shape the anti-trafficking movement.

Martina Vandenberg is a partner at Jenner and Block LLP, and she does pro bono representation of women trafficked to the US for forced labor, including civil litigation on behalf of survivors. She echoed many of Brennan's points about migrants rights, and highlighted several prevention efforts that have actually been harmful. First, she argued that efforts to discourage migration do not work and ultimately leave migrants more vulnerable when they do migrate.

Vandenberg also said that anti-prostitution efforts are counterproductive, making women more vulnerable to commercial sexual exploitation. As a corollary, she pointed out that prostitutes can become victims of human trafficking; the idea that if someone once consented to being a sex worker means that she can never be trafficked is both false and extremely harmful. Finally, she argued against efforts to buy people out of slavery, pointing out that such efforts actually increase the demand for slavery.

Vandenberg went on to discuss what should be being done to prevent human trafficking, focusing on the root causes. She emphasized that this work is not glamorous, but it is necessary if we are serious about preventing this human rights abuse.

First, we need to work to fight discrimination against women and girls. Statistically, women and girls still make up the majority of trafficking victims, and due to gender discrimination, they are especially vulnerable to trafficking. On a related note, Vandenberg argues that anti-trafficking efforts must go hand-in-hand with work to address domestic violence. She noted that sometimes money is diverted from domestic violence work to anti-trafficking work, which actually can make people more vulnerable to trafficking when they are desperate to leave a domestic situation and lack options.

In a slightly different direction, Vandenberg advocated for due diligence: we need to seriously look at where US' money is going, particularly in military contracts. She also addressed deterrence, including criminal prosecution and civil litigation on behalf of survivors. Finally, she also discussed the importance about educating migrants about their rights and enforcing labor laws.

Ben Skinner, a fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, journalist, and author of A Crime So Monstrous: Face-to-Face with Modern-Day Slavery, focused his remarks on a call to action. He argued that slavery is the main human rights issue of our generation, and how we respond to this atrocity will be a sign of our commitment to a more just world. Preventing human trafficking, he suggested, must start with each of us and the daily choices that we make.

On a personal note, I have been thinking about prevention a lot lately. This summer I am interning with an agency doing casework with people who are homeless or at risk of being homeless. These people are extremely vulnerable to numerous forms of exploitation. The Colorado Advisory Committee on Homeless Youth recently recommended that all agencies that work directly with people who are homeless should be trained on human trafficking, because traffickers target this population. Working daily with people who are homeless has again reinforced for me the importance of comprehensive efforts to address poverty, discrimination, and other factors that make people easy prey for traffickers.

Picture taken by Kay Chernush for the U.S. State Department.

Civil Judgment Successful for Farmworker Victims of Trafficking in Denver

From the Denver Post:

Fields of fear for Colorado illegal farm laborers
For a group of farm laborers working in the U.S. illegally, it wasn't jail or deportation that scared them - it was their "contractor."
By Felisa Cardona and Kevin Vaughan of The Denver Post

They lived in squalor — ratty tile floors, holes in the walls, mold, disgusting bathrooms, unsafe water — and worked jobs that left them bone-weary.

They were migrant farmworkers, Mexicans who slipped into the country illegally and found work in the fields of northern Colorado, and from the outside, their lives looked typical for people living on society's fringes.

But in a fenced-in compound on the edge of the Weld County town of Hudson, the five men lived in fear — not of the authorities, who could kick them out of the United States, but of the man who arranged to smuggle them into America, who gave them a place to live and found them jobs and who signed their paychecks, but who they said carried a gun to keep them in line.

They eventually banded together, filing a federal lawsuit against Moises and Maria Rodriguez, the agricultural contractors who brought them to America and forced them to live as virtual prisoners as they worked off their debts.

A federal judge in Denver recently awarded them $7.8 million in what immigration experts described as the largest judgment of its kind in the country.

That ruling came after the contractors offered no defense to charges that they deducted smuggling fees, rent and cleaning charges from the workers' paychecks and used the threat of violence to make sure the men complied.

Caught up in the suit was one of Colorado's best-known organic farmers. Andy Grant of Grant Family Farms denied that he knew anything about the way the men were being treated, but settled for $10,000 — $2,000 for each worker.

For Grant, the suit was a kick in the gut — an "affront" to a man who grew up playing with the children of Mexican farm workers, who pays above minimum wage, who describes himself as having "an absolute commitment to social justice for workers."

But the implications of the suit go far beyond Grant.
The size of the judgment — more than $1.5 million for each worker - stunned Denver attorney David Simmons, who specializes in immigration issues. He called it "unprecedented."

And Texas immigration attorney Dan Kowalski, who runs Bender's Immigration Bulletin, said he had not seen a case like it.

"I'm sure it's at the top," he said of the judgment. "I haven't heard of anything bigger than that."

Behind a mask of legitimacy

Moises Rodriguez was well known in the farm fields of northern Colorado. He was a "contractor" — a businessman who could supply a crew when a farmer needed to plant a field, or weed it, or harvest it. The farmers paid Rodriguez a lump sum to cover the wages, insurance and taxes for the workers, and he would, in turn, cut it into individual paychecks. His wife, Maria Rodriguez, handled the books. The Rodriguezes provided documents to farmers that purported to show that all their employees were legal workers.

The arrangement is common in farming.

But Rodriguez was much more than just a contractor, according to a sheaf of documents filed as part of the lawsuit and a criminal investigation conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. They detail an elaborate system for smuggling workers into the United States.
For those workers, the stories begin in Mexico, where they all heard the same instructions — to find their way to a hotel, to ask for a mysterious man.

For some, it was El Girasol in Agua Prieta, and a man named El Radio. For others, it was room No. 19 at the Hotel San Carlos in the town of Palomas and a man named Gerardo.
A smuggler — a "coyote" — would lead the men out into the desert, where they would walk for days, crossing the border into Arizona.

North of the town of Douglas, the coyote would place a call on a cellphone, and a little later a pickup with a camper shell on the back, or a van, would arrive. Then men would pile in for a ride to a safe house in Phoenix.

The next step of the journey would involve a long, cramped ride in the back of a pickup to Denver. In some cases, Rodriguez himself would do the driving.

From there, the journey would continue to a fenced-in compound on a 9.14-acre tract on Hudson's northeast edge. There sat the two barracks-like apartment buildings — 20 units in all — separated by a small, filthy bathhouse.

Suffering to live in squalor

Moises and Maria Rodriguez lived in town, in an 1,100-square-foot house at 657 Birch St. From the front stoop, they could look to the east, across the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway tracks, and see the compound. Their son, Javier Rodriguez, lived in a mobile home near the old apartment buildings, which had originally been constructed by a pickle company for its field workers.

The men lived two, three or four to an apartment. A videotape of the units, filmed by federal agents executing a search warrant, shows floors with broken and missing tiles, walls with holes in them, splotches of mold and red signs hanging above the sinks, warning that the water wasn't safe to drink.

And the men apparently contributed to the mess — the video shows trash strewn about, dirty dishes and open cans of food on the broken- down counters.

Each day during the growing season, the men piled into an old school bus and rode to a farm field, then put in 12 hours planting, or weeding, or harvesting vegetables.

In the summer of 2004, Grant hired Rodriguez to bring in a crew to work some of his 2,000 acres. Among that crew were the five men.

It was hard work, which they expected. But according to the lawsuit, the reality went far beyond that.

It was a veritable prison, the workers alleged, a place where Rodriguez held them in a form of debt bondage. For example, Rodriguez contended that each man owed him money for smuggling them into the U.S. — he put the price somewhere between $1,100 and $1,300.

He charged them $100 a month for rent, $96 a month for a transportation fee, and money for bathroom cleaning — even though most of the toilets didn't work and the one that did was filthy. He charged them Social Security taxes but didn't turn that money over to the federal government.

Split shoes, swollen feet

Sister Molly Munoz, a nun who also works as an advocate for migrant farmworkers, visited the Hudson compound regularly.

"They were in very poor conditions," Munoz said. "When the high winds came, the apartments would sway. There were no screens on the windows and they had rashes all over their arms."
Munoz held Mass for the men in the front yard of the camp just inside the fence that surrounded the barracks. She brought them toothpaste and they quietly told her about their plight, how they had crossed the border with only a knapsack. She saw their swollen feet and their tennis shoes, split apart after endless hours in the fields.

"It's very tough work," she said.

She also saw something else: Terror among the men.

"They were desperate to talk and they could not talk," she said.

By then, the men had also begun telling their story to Patricia Medige, an attorney for Colorado Legal Services. The nonprofit organization is devoted to providing legal help to the indigent.
In a videotaped interview conducted by Medige in the fall of 2004, one of the men tried to explain the fear he felt. On one hand, he said, Moises Rodriguez did not beat or threaten him. But he described how powerless he felt, given the money Rodriguez demanded, and how scared he felt after hearing his boss had tracked down one man in North Carolina.

"We wanted to leave," the man said in Spanish, "but he said we couldn't leave 'til we paid."

Grocers distant from process

The fruits and vegetables that sit on grocery shelves come from a variety of sources — conventional farms and organic operations like Grant's. Some of the produce is grown in Colorado, some in other parts of the country, some even outside the United States.
Almost all of it, at some point in the process or another, involves manual labor.
For grocers, monitoring the labor conditions of farm workers is a difficult proposition.
"Part of our core values is to care about not just the products we sell but people who help make these products," said Libba Letton, spokeswoman for Whole Foods.

Letton said the company relies on government agencies to monitor labor laws.
"We do as much as we reasonably can do other than growing and harvesting with your very own hands," she said.

King Soopers spokesman Trail Daugherty said if the grocery chain's management learned of unethical practices by a supplier, it would reconsider doing business with the company.
"Since we are a grocery retailer, we depend upon the Department of Labor to keep us current on their findings of human-rights violations," he said.

The government was keeping tabs on Moises Rodriguez.

In 2004, inspectors from the Colorado Department of Labor concluded that Rodriguez's camp in Hudson was not livable, and they denied his application to be a crew leader who provides housing to migrant farmworkers.

"One of the outreach workers with the Adams County Workforce Center inspected the property and found it improper for habitation and told him at that time that the housing was inhabitable and he would not be allowed to be a crew leader providing housing," said Bill Thoennes, spokesman for the Department of Labor. "She said at some point she suspected that he was ignoring that information and was simply bringing in people and housing them anyway."

The state notified the federal Department of Labor, and Rodriguez was denied a permit to be a crew leader. Then his wife, Maria Rodriguez, applied to become a crew leader.
"An inspection was done later and it was found to be inhabitable again," Thoennes said of the property.

U.S. Department of Labor inspectors conducted another investigation and learned that many of the people working for Rodriguez were not in the country legally, and immigration officials were notified.

Medige, the attorney working for the five men, helped convince them to cooperate with federal investigators even though it could mean deportation.

"What is the price tag on your freedom?" Medige asked. "They just decided in the course of the season to take a stand. We kept meeting with them and they would not stand for it. . . . they said, 'We are not going to let this happen to somebody else.' "

A grand-jury indictment

In the fall of 2004, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents began surveillance on the camp.

They documented dozens of men living there in cramped, filthy conditions. But they also saw the men coming and going in their own cars, and talking on telephones.
A grand jury indicted Moises and Maria Rodriguez and their son, Javier Rodriguez, on charges of harboring and transporting illegal immigrants. Federal authorities seized the property and more than $128,000 in cash. When they searched the two mobile homes near the barracks, they found two pistols and ammunition.

In 2006, Moises and Maria Rodri guez each served nearly a year in jail and were then deported to Mexico. Javier Rodriguez — an American citizen — also pleaded guilty in the case and was sentenced to home detention. Family members who answered the door at his apartment in Brighton last week said he did not want to be interviewed for this story.

But while the workers told investigators they were being mistreated and were being held against their will — at least psychologically — federal prosecutors did not pursue charges of involuntary servitude against the Rodriguezes.

The reason was simple: The surveillance tapes showed the workers coming and going, and it would have been difficult to convince a jury that they couldn't have escaped.

"We have a higher burden of proof in the criminal matter than in the civil matter, and we would have to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt," said Jeffrey Dorschner, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Denver.

For their cooperation, the men were granted temporary visas allowing them to stay in the United States — but they were told they could be deported once the case was concluded.

Town buys compound land

In April 2006, Medige, the legal services lawyer, filed a civil lawsuit against Moises and Maria Rodriguez and against Andy Grant and Grant Family Farms. The suit alleged violations of the Agricultural Worker Protection Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act by Moises and Maria Rodriguez. They asserted that Grant should have known how the workers were being treated and, therefore, condoned it.

U.S. District Judge Lewis Babcock allowed the men to withhold their identities because they feared retribution. Each was given the name "John Doe" and a Roman numeral.
Grant, who took his farm into bankruptcy reorganization after years of drought and other problems wreaked financial havoc on his operation, reached a settlement, and the suit against him was dismissed.

Judge Babcock ultimately entered a default judgment against Moises and Maria Rodriguez. Then, on April 14, he awarded more than $1.5 million to each of the five men for numerous violations of federal law.

At an auction conducted by the federal government, the town of Hudson bought the land where the compound sat. The winning bid was $37,000.

Barracks, not fear, destroyed

In late April, mud clogged the driveway leading to the barracks and weeds overgrew the camp. Portions of a chain link fence that once surrounded the compound were down or missing.
The apartments looked as if someone left in a hurry: Shirts hung in a closet, an uncooked bag of beans lay on top of a stove, and a television set, its screen smashed, sat on a chair.

Many windows and doors were missing. Signs remained above the kitchen sinks in some units, warning that the water was not safe to drink.

Photographs of some of the migrants' children were left in a half-empty album on the kitchen counter.

Town manager Joe Racine said the town had to demolish the rickety old barracks. Racine said the company hired to clear the land said it would be easier — and cheaper — if the barracks were burned down, and so on May 2, local firefighters torched them.

They — and two ramshackle mobile homes on the property — went up quickly.
Ultimately, the land will be home to Hudson's public works department, and more playing fields in an extension of the city's park.

Of the men who filed the lawsuit, Medige remains protective. Some have returned to Mexico, but others remain in Colorado, working in the fields.

They still fear retribution from Moises Rodriguez, she said, even though he's no longer in the U.S.

Fantastic article covering this case. I say this because it really covers almost every aspect of what happens in a farmworker trafficking case: from the involvement of the recruitment of workers in their home country to the incredible control and power of crew leaders to where the growers and grocers stand (or claim to stand) in this situation. It was a little disappointing that the charges of involuntary servitude or trafficking weren't pursued against the Rodriguezes, but such is the situation with many trafficking cases where the traffickers are given lesser charges due to the difficulty of prosecuting a trafficking case.

Despite the fact that trafficking of farmworkers is one of the most common forms of trafficking in the United States, it is rarely covered by the media and even those involved in the counter-trafficking movement don't understand the problem as well as we should. This does bring a lot of really good news for legal service providers representing trafficking victims across the country, though. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is one of, if not the first successful civil suits against traffickers in the U.S. I'm looking forward to hearing about more successful civil suits in the future on behalf of victims.