Employees Bring RICO Suit to Combat Illegal Immigration
- By Your mom
- •
- 01 Oct, 2006
A group of current and former employees of Mohawk Industries, Inc. filed a Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) suit claiming that the company engaged in a
pattern and practice of recruiting, hiring and harboring thousands of undocumented workers for
its facilities throughout Georgia. Williams v. Mohawk Industries, Inc., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS
24306 (11 th Cir. 2006). Plaintiffs alleged the company’s widespread and knowing conduct
depressed wages for legally hired employees in violation of federal and state RICO statutes. In
denying defendant’s motion to dismiss, the court found that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that
Mohawk engaged in a pattern of racketeering causing injury to plaintiff’s business interests; the
right to be paid market rates that are not artificially depressed through unlawful acts.
Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that Mohawk managers with the aid of several recruitment
firms traveled from Georgia to the Brownsville, Texas area to recruit illegal aliens and
transported them back to North Georgia to work at Mohawk. Further, Mohawk made payments
to its employees and recruiters to locate illegal aliens for employment. The company is also
alleged to have knowingly accepted fraudulent immigration documentation from those it hired.
Finally, Mohawk is alleged to have helped illegal workers avoid detection by law enforcement
personnel during workplace searches and inspections.
These unlawful acts served to reduce area wages paid to those lawfully in the labor
market in and around north Georgia. If proven, employees hurt by Mohawk’s actions could
receive triple damages and attorneys’ fees.
This case highlights new approaches individual workers are taking to deal with the
massive increase in illegal workers throughout the United States. While not the first case to
pursue a RICO claim to recover lost wages from the employment of illegal aliens it certainly will
have widespread ramifications if eventually successful due to the large number of illegals in
Florida and elsewhere throughout the Eleventh Circuit.
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) suit claiming that the company engaged in a
pattern and practice of recruiting, hiring and harboring thousands of undocumented workers for
its facilities throughout Georgia. Williams v. Mohawk Industries, Inc., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS
24306 (11 th Cir. 2006). Plaintiffs alleged the company’s widespread and knowing conduct
depressed wages for legally hired employees in violation of federal and state RICO statutes. In
denying defendant’s motion to dismiss, the court found that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that
Mohawk engaged in a pattern of racketeering causing injury to plaintiff’s business interests; the
right to be paid market rates that are not artificially depressed through unlawful acts.
Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that Mohawk managers with the aid of several recruitment
firms traveled from Georgia to the Brownsville, Texas area to recruit illegal aliens and
transported them back to North Georgia to work at Mohawk. Further, Mohawk made payments
to its employees and recruiters to locate illegal aliens for employment. The company is also
alleged to have knowingly accepted fraudulent immigration documentation from those it hired.
Finally, Mohawk is alleged to have helped illegal workers avoid detection by law enforcement
personnel during workplace searches and inspections.
These unlawful acts served to reduce area wages paid to those lawfully in the labor
market in and around north Georgia. If proven, employees hurt by Mohawk’s actions could
receive triple damages and attorneys’ fees.
This case highlights new approaches individual workers are taking to deal with the
massive increase in illegal workers throughout the United States. While not the first case to
pursue a RICO claim to recover lost wages from the employment of illegal aliens it certainly will
have widespread ramifications if eventually successful due to the large number of illegals in
Florida and elsewhere throughout the Eleventh Circuit.
