Union Reaches Settlement on Behalf of Workers Fired Based on Social Security No-Match Letters

IMMIGRANTS & EMPLOYMENT

Immigrants' Employment Rights and Remedies

SAN FRANCISCO CENT. TRAVELODGE JOINT VENTURE V. HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 2: UNION REACHES SETTLEMENT ON BEHALF OF WORKERS FIRED BASED ON SOCIAL SECURITY NO-MATCH LETTERS
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 15, No. 8, Dec. 20, 2001

The Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees (HERE), Local 2, has reached a settlement agreement with the San Francisco Central Travelodge Joint Venture that provides seven housekeeping employees with $50,000 in back pay and conditional reinstatement.

Travelodge had fired the seven Latina employees on Apr. 17, 1999, after it received "no-match" letters from the Social Security Administration (SSA) stating that the women's names and the Social Security numbers they had provided to Travelodge did not match the SSA's database. The terminated employees filed a grievance and subsequently arbitrated the issue, alleging that their termination violated their union contract's prohibition against union members being fired without "just cause." The employees were successful in the arbitration, and the arbitrator issued a decision on May 3, 2000, finding that Travelodge's firing of the workers based solely on its receipt of the SSA no-match letters was indeed a violation of HERE Local 2's contract. The arbitrator ordered the workers reinstated with full back pay.

Because the parties were not able to reach an agreement as to the remedies owed to the seven employees, both parties submitted further briefs to the arbitrator. Particularly, the employer argued that it could not reinstate the workers because, after it terminated the employees, it contacted the Immigration and Naturalization Service to verify the validity of the immigration documents the workers presented to Travelodge at the time they were hired. Travelodge claimed that the INS agent confirmed that some of the documents were not legitimate. It argued that since it now had constructive knowledge that some of the workers were undocumented, it could not rehire them. Likewise, Travelodge asserted that workers are not entitled to back pay for any period of time they are employed while being undocumented. The arbitrator rejected both of these arguments in her decision of Dec. 27, 2000, affirming her earlier award of full reinstatement and back pay to all seven workers.

Travelodge subsequently petitioned the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco to vacate the arbitrator's award or to modify it. The parties reached an agreement in the matter, which, in addition to providing the seven workers with the lump sum back pay award, also gave them six months to decide if they want to return to work. If they decide to return, they must establish that they are eligible to be employed in the U.S. before they can be reinstated. Once they are reinstated, the employment eligibility-related information they provide to the Travelodge at that time will be the only such documentation kept in their file in order to minimize any risk of their being charged with document fraud for previously using false documents. Since a settlement was reached, the underlying arbitrator's decisions are still standing and thus can be used by other advocates facing similar issues.

San Francisco Cent. Travelodge Joint Venture v. Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union, Local 2, No. C-01-1371 (MMC)(N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 6, 2001).