Sugar Law Center news release opposing the Smith Corona layoffs

This text was generated automatically from the photograph and has not been corrected. The image is the authoritative record.

pe ANT) LABOR COALITION

ciaetaieabbaberdauaelie ee

GUILD LAW CENTER

MAURICE AND JANE SUGAR LAW CENTER

FOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL JUSTICE:
A PROJECT OF THE NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD
2916 Cadillac Tower * Detrolt, Mi 48226 + Phone 313-962-6840 + Fax 313-963-9185

Jullo H. Hurwitz
Exeeulive Dlkoetot

Board of Ditecleus
Robin Alexandr “NEWS RELEASE-
Charlos Brown
Neal Bush
Reberto Cornalio FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: JULIE HURWITZ
Huey Cotton {323)962-NLGO
Manllyn Mullane (962-6540
Vietorla Roberts SUGAR LAW CENTER OPPOSES LAYOFFS AT SMITH CORONA
Brian Spools
Mary Alice Tholler On behalf of the National Lawyers Guild/Maurice and

Jane Sugar Law Genter for Economic and Social Justice,
in Detroit, Michigan, we are appalled at Smith
Corona's outrageous and immoral treatment of its
Ty employees. The Sugar Law Center oponed its doors on
nehabilee February 1, 1991 as a national Litigation center and
Glearinghouse for workers' and civil rights. The
Center is currently focusing primarily on the plant closing
crisis in this country and specifically on the WARN Act. The
Smith Cornona case captured our attention and the attention of
others from around the country who are concerned about enforcing
this law and addressing its inadequacies.

Chute

Denia Evanson

Experts and professicnals nationwide have been watening this casa
with much interest to see whether and how the WARN Act could be
used to protect these employees. Although it 41s obvious that
Smith Corona knew in advance of its plans to drastically reduce
its work force and relocate its production to the cheaper labor
market of Singapore, 1t nonetheless proceeded to lie to its
employees and to the public,and then, in blatant violation of the
Spirit behind the WARN Act, it systematically laid off over 1000
skilled workers with little or no nothee, Yet, Smith Corona has
soeningly managed to sidestep the law, despite the fact that it
is obviously guilty of violating the intentions of the
legislature when they enacted this law,

This case 16 a glaring example of two major short-falls of the
WARN Act ln 4ts present form:

First, this law 1s not equally enforceable between

organized and unorganized workers. In order to remedy

this, unorganized workers need a mechanism by which they can

antmin. as a matter of right, the information necessary for
ast “eoatactad under the WARN