Fourteen former employees of Tomo Sushi, a restaurant located on the Upper West Side, alleged that their former employer Tsu Yue Wang discriminated against unionizing workers and purposely closed shop to avoid legal responsibility. The workers decided to join employees at Wang's other restaurants in Flushing to stage a large scale protest against the sweatshop practices and discrimination.

Wang responded that closing Tomo Sushi was a business decision. The restaurant was losing business, and he closed the restaurant at the end of the lease. He believed that the workers misunderstood his practices. He also did not know anything about the protest and had not heard from the union.

According to a deliveryman, Li, some of Wang's employees had been working at Tomo Sushi for as long as 10 years. Their boss only paid them $1.50 to $2.50 per hour. Each week, they had to work more than 65 hours without overtime compensation.

"When I was robbed during a delivery, my head suffered some injuries. My boss not only did not care about my injuries, but he made me pay for the stolen food. It was very upsetting to me physically and emotionally," he painfully recalled.

Another worker stated that starting in 2006, the workers could not endure the mistreatment anymore. They decided to unionize and start a strike. After Wang found out what happened, he cut the hours and work for those who were participating in the strike. On January 15, 2009, he also announced the closing of the restaurant.

A representative from Union 318 said that Wang had a history of violating labor laws. His other restaurant, Ollie's Noodle Shop and Grille, had about 100 employees who also could not endure their alleged mistreatment and sued in court. From that case, the Judge ordered the restaurant to compensate $2.3 million to the workers; however, the restaurant immediately applied for bankruptcy and its workers still have not been compensated.

Wang countered that back in April, the Federal Labor Relations Authority had already made a final judgment as to whether the workers were discriminated against for trying to unionize. The Federal Labor Relations Authority found no evidence of discrimination or harm and dismissed the case. He claimed that what the workers said was not completely accurate. He also believes that they need to comply with the judgment and that even though the workers have the right to protest, it would not change the present situation. He would not make any further comments.