It is a fight to level the playing field to be able to compete for jobs and careers on the basis of skills and make available apprentice training to all. In 1973 Al Percy launched a class action lawsuit to give workers like him a chance to better their lot in life. It would also ensure the availability of skilled workers to build the infrastructure of the future.
Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 58 Page of 154 58 of PageID 154 #: 314 (ultimately increasing their own profit) instead of investing in higher levels of staffing and PPE.” AG Report page 6. 412. The DOH failed to require nursing homes to comply with labor practices that prevent nursing homes from pressuring employees to work while they have COVID-19 infection or symptoms, while ensuring nursing homes obtain and provide adequate staffing levels to care for residents’ needs. AG Report page 7 413. Nursing homes did not invest sufficiently in effective training so staff can fully comply with infection control protocols or hold operators accountable for failure to have clinically appropriate policies in place and to effectively train staff to comply with them. AG Report page 7 414. There was inadequate planning regarding post-mortem care needs and implementing and training staff on policies for dignified care of the remains of deceased residents. AG Report page 8. 415. Basic protocols are expected of nursing homes: required isolation of residents, proper sterilization and storage of all equipment to prevent the spread of infection, were not followed. Facilities are required to mandate basic infection control practices including ensuring staff wash their hands after each direct resident contact and properly handle and store linens. AG Report page 18. 416. Lax employee screening put all residents and staff at increased risk of harm. AG Report page 21. 417. The Program sponsoring Employers so negligently oversaw the operation of the Program by failing to maintain proper controls, policies and procedures regarding control of the Plan assets so as to carelessly and recklessly allow Plan assets intended for the Program to be taken for illegal and unauthorized uses, utilizing these Plan assets for their own purposes, which were purposes not permitted or allowed by the Program because they are prohibited transactions under ERISA. 418. This led to violation of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 for neglect of the Owner Operator Defendants to adopt and implement the Program as an Alternative Employment Practice. The denial of the Alternative Employment Practice is directed at disadvantaged persons based upon race and color as permitted proof on a 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2 action allowed by the US Supreme Court in Ricci v DeStefano 557 U.S. 557, a violation shown by the refusal to adopt the Alternative Employment Practice, injuring the Class as disadvantaged persons based on race and color, warranting the award of damages and injunctive relief as detailed herein. Intervention Pg. 8 Par 6. 419. The Union Defendant failed to implement training. The Union Defendant made peace with the Owner Operator Defendants failing to pursue and implement apprentice 58
Case 1:21-cv-01421-NGG Case MDL No. 3011 Document 1 25-6 Filed 03/17/21 Filed 06/24/21 Page 59 Page of 154 59 of PageID 154 #: 315 training to provide the skill level and knowledge necessary to handle a communicable disease, such as COVID 19. The Union Defendant is part of the problem having failed in its duty to protect the interests of its members, the Union Defendant is part of the mess, the Union Defendant is part of the default in protecting the interests of the employee Class Defendant. 420. What happened is that the Owner Operator Defendants, in the course of the management of the Program deviated drastically from the purposes of the Program and ERISA by failing to put their Plan assets in trust, but instead took funds of their Plan to other personal purposes of wrongdoing Owner Operator Defendants and Party-in-Interest Defendants, permitting these persons to utilize Plan assets for prohibited personal transactions, all of which had nothing to do with their Plan or Program. The Owner Operator Defendants continued to misuse or allow others to misuse the fiduciary control over the Plan assets. This Complaint describes a pattern of conduct of the Owner Operator Defendants and Party-in-Interest Defendants who were wrongfully aided and abetted by State Officer Defendants, which has caused their Plan to deny benefits to the employee Class Plaintiff. Intervention Pg. 9 Par 8. 421. Exposed greed in the scheme of the Owner Operator Defendants and Party-in-Interest Defendants involves nursing home and healthcare facilities and businesses named herein, manipulating Medicaid and Medicare paid to nursing home and healthcare facilities, a fixed payment per bed based on costs of operation. Under the scheme the Owner Operator Defendants gutted labor costs upon acquiring employer facilities by hiring new employees with very limited skills and little or nonexistent experience. The Owner Operator Defendants provided little, if any, training or continuing education to raise the level of competency of the workforce as well did not provide other benefits under their Plan. Instead, the Owner Defendants and Party-in-Interest Defendants hid, laundered and reaped the tens of millions of dollars in reported costs not spent on benefits for training, education, apprenticeship and employee benefits, getting away with these laundered funds embezzled to illicit prohibited transactions, the very funds intended to pay employee benefits. The Defendants probably would have gotten away with their illegal enterprise, if not for the unexpected and unprepared for COVID-19 pandemic event, exposing the greedy and illegal enterprise of stealing employee benefits. Intervention Pg. 8 Par 5. 422. The funds involved in prohibited transactions were diverted, converted and embezzled by the Owner Operator Defendants and Party-in-Interest Defendants, under color of law with the complicity of the State Officer Defendants. The State Officers at a minimum grossly neglected responsibility to monitor the use of Medicare/Medicaid payments. Accrued and expensed costs were diverted, converted and embezzled by the Owner Operator Defendants and the Party-in-Interest Defendants under the nose of several 59
