Arrested Strikers Settle Suit With O.C.

Nearly a decade after Orange County’s largest mass arrest, county supervisors have paid $280,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by more than 100 laborers who were jailed during a bitter strike by local drywall workers.

The settlement--the largest civil rights payout against the Sheriff’s Department in years--ends the legal saga over the 1992 detention of drywallers accused of conspiring to kidnap replacement workers.

Sheriff’s deputies jailed 153 of the strikers. But within weeks, the charges were reduced or dropped. The strikers went on to win their labor dispute and sued the county, charging that the deputies violated their civil rights.

Under the settlement, which was finalized earlier this year, each drywaller received about $1,200. The case will cost taxpayers more than $600,000 including lawyers’ fees.

The Sheriff’s Department did not admit wrongdoing in the court settlement. But in a memo to supervisors, Sheriff Mike Carona acknowledged that some strikers did not receive hearings to determine if there was enough evidence to keep them in jail.

The close of the case drew mixed reactions from the laborers. They expressed satisfaction that the county is providing compensation, but many said it’s not enough.

“They treated us like criminals during this whole thing,” said Israel Espinoza, who was jailed for nine days before criminal charges against him were dropped. “I did nothing wrong.. . . What we went through is worth a lot more money.”

Antonio Vazquez, 64, who spent nearly a week in jail along with his two sons, said the $1,200 is too little too late. “We’re not very satisfied. It took so long for it to be resolved and this was all we could get. I wasn’t the only one who suffered. My wife also had to go through a lot of anxiety because of this.”

In settling the case, Sheriff’s Department officials told county supervisors that detention policies have been altered, but lawyers for the drywallers question whether enough has been done to prevent deputies from conducting similar mass arrests in the future.

Drywall workers, who install plasterboard that forms the inner walls of most new homes, struck in June 1992 for higher wages and a union contract. Amid rising tensions between strikers and crews still at work, about 150 strikers arrived at a Mission Viejo construction site on July 2 to stage a work protest.

Construction company officials complained that scores of strikers ran onto the site, stole tools and bundled replacement workers into their cars and drove off with them, authorities said.

With No Answers, Deputies Arrested Many

When deputies stopped a convoy of strikers driving away, about a half-dozen replacement workers claimed they had been forced off the building site and were not allowed to return. But unable to decide which strikers took part in the kidnappings, deputies arrested every striker at the scene, accusing them of a conspiracy.

“It was outrageous,” said Peter A. Schey, a lawyer for the strikers and president of the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law. “You cannot arrest a group of 150 people just because you cannot figure out which five or 10 actually committed a crime.”

The jailed strikers claimed they were forced to sleep on a concrete floor. Some alleged they were pushed, kicked and slapped by jail deputies, according to court records. Federal immigration officials deported at least a dozen of the men after checking their legal status when they arrived at the jail, Schey said.

In the following weeks, charges against 70 strikers were dropped for lack of evidence. About 70 more pleaded guilty to disturbing the peace, though some said they did so only to secure their release from jail. About a dozen pleaded guilty to more serious charges, including assault and battery. None were charged with kidnapping.

Espinoza said some strikers were left shaken by the experience, despite being released. The arrest broke some strikers’ resolve to fight on, he said.

“Many men,” Espinoza said in Spanish, “didn’t want to continue the strike for fear of getting arrested again.”

But the arrests inspired a harder fight and ultimately galvanized support for the strike. By the end of the year, construction companies agreed to most of the strikers’ demands.

Policies for Mass Arrests Changed

Weeks later, 105 of the arrested strikers filed a claim against the county, each demanding more than $70,000 for pain and suffering caused by their detention. The Board of Supervisors ultimately settled the case for a fraction of that amount.

In a letter to supervisors, Sheriff Carona said jail policies have been changed to ensure all inmates receive timely hearings. Under the new procedures, he wrote, deputies will call in extra judicial officers to review evidence against inmates involved in mass arrests.

But the strikers’ attorney said the new policy fails to address what lies at the heart of the claim. Mass arrests are almost always unconstitutional, Schey said, and deputies need training on the type of evidence necessary to justify arresting large groups.

Instead, Schey said, the new policy only helps deputies “process people illegally arrested a little more efficiently.”

But Sheriff’s Department officials disagreed, saying the new policy will streamline jail procedures should there be a future mass arrest.

“Deputies are out there to maintain peace and order,” said Asst. Sheriff George Jaramillo. “If a deputy makes a decision that 150 people need to go to jail to provide for that, then we have to back that person up.”

Times Staff Writer Daniel Yi contributed to this report.