Skip to main content

Caribbean International News Corp. has been ordered by a federal court to restore more than $1.2 million

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — Caribbean International News Corp. has been ordered by a federal court to restore more than $1.2 million to the El Vocero de Puerto Rico Union Employees Savings and Investment Plan, a retirement plan established for the benefit of the company's unionized employees. The corporation does business as El Vocero de Puerto Rico, a newspaper based in San Juan.

A lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Labor simultaneously with the judgment alleges that El Vocero violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by failing to deposit into the plan contributions withheld from employees' wages and to collect matching employer contributions during the period from 2003 to 2006. The suit also alleges that the company owed $1,432,233 to the plan.

"Protecting workers' retirement funds is one of the highest priorities of this administration," said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "The Labor Department's legal action orders El Vocero to restore more than $1.2 million to ensure that these workers are made whole and that money is set aside to pay benefits."

The court judgment orders the employer to pay immediately the full amount owed to the plan. The amount now due is $1,282,233, which is the original amount found due minus $150,000 already paid by El Vocero between December 2008 and July 2009 to reduce its obligation to the plan.

This case was investigated by the department's Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) Miami District Office at the direction of the agency's Atlanta Regional Office. The legal actions announced today were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico.

Employers and workers can contact EBSA at 404-302-3900 or toll-free at 866-444-3272 for help with any problems relating to private sector pension and health plans. In fiscal year 2008, EBSA achieved monetary results of $1.2 billion related to pension, 401(k), health and other benefits for millions of American workers and their families. Additional information is available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa.

Solis v. Caribbean International News Corp. doing business as El Vocero de Puerto Rico
Civil Action Number: 09-CV-2064

Read this news release en Español.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.
Post a Comment
Read more

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...
3 comments
Read more

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...
Post a Comment
Read more