Is Danbury's dishonest mayor breaking state labor laws?
Thursday, May 29, 2014 Time: 8:49 AM
Maybe someone at State Central should take a look at Danbury's dishonest mayor's desperate attemnpt to collect signatures and make sure he's not violating the state's labor laws.
It might not do much to ease unemployment among Republicans, but Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton is offering what he says is a quick buck.
The Boughton campaign is advertising to hire petition circulators, at $2 per signature plus bonuses, in his effort to amass at least 8,190 signed names by June 10.
[...]
The campaign checked with the Sate Elections Enforcement Commission on paying circulators, but not with the state Department of Labor.
If the workers are considered employees, they need to receive at least the minimum wage for all hours they work. If they’re contractors, the arrangement must pass a so-called ABC test. Workers must be “free from direction and control,” for example, and they must be engaged in an “independently established trade.”
Nancy Steffens, a Labor Department spokeswoman, said it was impossible to tell from Boughton’s materials whether the arrangement would meet the standards.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
Maybe someone at State Central should take a look at Danbury's dishonest mayor's desperate attemnpt to collect signatures and make sure he's not violating the state's labor laws.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
