Migrant Workers Win Compensation After Alba Services Fraud

1) Overview: Migrant workers compensated after fraudulent recruitment

Two recent cases show how government enforcement can put money back in workers’ hands—and sometimes help stabilize immigration status for victims of exploitation. One is a state restitution settlement involving Alba Services, Inc. in New York. The other is a federal criminal investigation and prosecution tied to recruiter Jorge Vasquez and alleged H-2A visa fraud centered in Santa Maria, California.

“Fraudulent recruitment” is a plain idea with serious consequences. It often means a recruiter or employer promises a job or visa, then demands unlawful fees, lies about terms, or uses threats to control workers. “Labor exploitation” can include wage theft, retaliation, coercion, or keeping workers in debt so they feel trapped.

Both anchor cases involve large numbers of Migrant Workers and immigrant workers. Both also show a key point: enforcement actions (state labor cases and federal prosecutions) may lead to restitution—compensation meant to repay people for harm. Sometimes, victim cooperation in these investigations may also connect to immigration protection options, such as deferred action, U-Visas, or T nonimmigrant status. Eligibility depends on facts and requires careful screening.

2) Alba Services Restitution Settlement (Oct 2025 – Early 2026)

October 21, 2025 marked a major public milestone in the Alba Services matter, when New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a settlement tied to alleged exploitation of immigrant construction workers. Payments then continued into Early 2026.

Alba Services, Inc. operated in a construction and demolition setting in New York City, where immigrant labor is common and injury risk can be high. New York’s case focused on how alleged workplace practices affected workers’ safety, pay, and willingness to report harm.

Letitia James described the conduct in blunt terms: “For years, Alba Services exploited hardworking immigrant New Yorkers, denying them their rightful benefits and retaliating against those who stood up for their rights.” The settlement, she said, sent “a clear message” that labor exploitation would not be accepted in New York.

What the alleged misconduct looked like

• Underreporting injuries to reduce workers’ compensation costs
• Threats and intimidation, including deportation threats tied to injury reporting
• Retaliation tactics, including “bounty flyers” naming workers who filed claims

Even when a case ends in a civil settlement rather than criminal charges, it can still deliver meaningful relief. Money is part of it. So are rules that reshape conduct at the jobsite.

What “restitution” means in a state settlement

Restitution is compensation intended to repay workers for specific harms. In many labor settlements, payments are distributed through a process that can include outreach, identity checks, and some form of claim verification. Exact mechanics can differ by case. What stays consistent is the goal: getting funds to the workers who were harmed.

Non-monetary terms that change day-to-day conditions

New York’s settlement also included compliance measures aimed at future protection. Public terms described anti-harassment policies and independent oversight/monitoring for three years. Those measures matter because they can:

• Set clearer boundaries for supervisors and managers
• Create reporting channels that are less tied to fear of retaliation
• Add outside monitoring, which can deter repeat conduct

Money helps quickly. Guardrails help longer.

3) Jorge Vasquez H-2A Visa Fraud Scheme (Jan 2026 Update)

A separate matter updated in January 2026 highlights how labor recruitment fraud can begin long before a worker reaches a U.S. worksite.

In this case, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)—a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—worked alongside the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Each agency plays a different role. HSI investigates criminal conduct. DOL enforces labor standards. DOJ prosecutes federal crimes.

How an H-2A fraud scheme can operate

The alleged model was recruiter-driven. Workers were reportedly promised farm jobs and lawful status through the H-2A program, then pressured to pay large sums. The harm can follow workers into the fields through:

• Debt that must be repaid from wages
• Wage deductions tied to the debt
• Threats used to keep victims quiet, including threats across borders

Vasquez was arrested after an immigration raid in Santa Maria, California in November 2025. Court records described at least 163 farmworkers directly impacted in a defined period, while officials also referenced a broader network exceeding 350. That gap is common in trafficking and fraud cases. Identified victims in court filings can be fewer than the people affected in practice, especially early in an investigation.

Restitution in a criminal case

Criminal restitution works differently from a civil settlement. A court may order restitution after conviction, using evidence of losses. In this matter, officials referenced $135,389 in restitution tied to a prior similar scheme as a point of comparison for recovery efforts. The current case remains ongoing, with trial timing referenced for August 2026. Outcomes can change as evidence develops.

Table 1: Restitution and affected individuals across cases

4) Context and Significance: Policy shifts and enforcement priorities

Victim-centered enforcement is a practical idea: protect workers first so they can report harm safely, then pursue fraudsters and recover funds. That approach can include witness support, safety planning, and steps to reduce immigration fear that keeps victims silent.

DHS has also pointed to coordinated initiatives such as Operation PARRIS (2025-2026), aimed at fraud schemes that promise legal status for a fee and at recovering victim losses. These efforts sit alongside labor enforcement, not in place of it.

⚠️ Restitution and relief possibilities depend on case-specific eligibility and ongoing investigations; do not assume guaranteed outcomes. Cooperation can help an investigation, but it does not automatically produce immigration status or a payment. Each program has legal tests, and each case has its own evidence.

How cooperation can intersect with immigration protection options

Some exploited workers may qualify to request:

• Deferred action, a discretionary decision that can temporarily defer removal and may allow work authorization in certain situations
• U-Visas, generally for victims of certain crimes who help law enforcement
• T nonimmigrant status, generally for victims of severe trafficking who meet specific requirements

A key distinction matters here. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) decides immigration benefits like U and T. Enforcement agencies—DHS/HSI, DOL, and DOJ—investigate, prosecute, and seek restitution. Those tracks can inform each other, but they are not the same system.

Briefly, readers sometimes ask how this compares to H-1B workers. H-1B cases can involve exploitation too, including improper fees or retaliation. Still, the core issues here center on migrant worker restitution and victim protections tied to trafficking and crime. H-1B processes are not the focus of these two cases.

5) Impact on Affected Individuals

Restitution can do more than repay money. For migrant workers who borrowed to get a job, funds can reduce debt pressure and help families avoid losing housing or land. For workers already in the United States, payments can also support rent, food, and medical care after job disruption.

Workplace protections can also change the daily risk calculus. In the Alba Services settlement, anti-harassment rules and outside monitoring can give workers clearer pathways to report injuries and retaliation. A policy on paper is not enough by itself. Oversight and consequences can make it real.

Immigration-related protections, when available, can also stabilize life during an investigation. T nonimmigrant status and U-Visas are often discussed in labor trafficking and labor fraud settings because they can support victims who fear coming forward. Typical themes in these cases include proof of victimization, evidence of harm, and documentation of helpfulness to law enforcement where required. Legal screening matters because small facts—who made threats, what crime category fits, what records exist—can change eligibility.

✅ What affected workers should know about restitution, protections, and possible immigration relief pathways

• Restitution usually flows from an enforcement case, not from a private promise by an employer or recruiter.
• Settlement protections like anti-harassment rules and monitoring can give safer reporting options at work.
• Cooperation with HSI, DOL, or DOJ may support requests like deferred action, U-Visas, or T nonimmigrant status, but each has strict legal requirements.
• USCIS decides immigration benefits, even when an investigation is led by other agencies.
• Preserve documents when safe to do so, such as receipts, contracts, messages, pay stubs, and names of recruiters.

6) Official Sources and Further Reading

DOJ materials have described H-2A fraud prosecutions and restitution orders in related matters, which helps explain how criminal restitution can be structured:

• U.S. Department of Justice page

USCIS provides official updates on anti-fraud work and related agency activity. USCIS is not a labor enforcement agency, but its fraud posture can affect how cases are reviewed:

• USCIS Newsroom

This article discusses legal actions and potential immigration relief; readers should consult qualified counsel for individual cases. Outcomes shown are based on publicly available cases and do not guarantee future results.