DONNA RAMOS, United States Magistrate Judge
Came on to be considered "Adams Defendants' Motion to Change Venue," which is brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). (Instrument #22.) This Court has considered the record and applicable law. ( See, e.g., Instrument #24.)
This Court finds that venue is proper in this District and Division, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1854(a). Stewart v. Woods, 730 F. Supp. 1096, 1097 (M. D. Fla. 1990) (stating that 29 U.S.C. § 1854(a) "confers venue co-extensive with personal jurisdiction"); see also Astorga v. Connleaf Inc., 962 F. Supp. 93, 96 (W.D. Tex. 1996).
Whether or not this cause should be transferred is a question of balancing the conveniences of the parties and their witnesses. See Aguero v. Christopher, 481 F. Supp. 1272, 1275 (S.D. Tex. 1980). The Plaintiffs' choice of forum will not be disturbed unless the Court finds the balance to be strongly in favor of the Defendants. Id. The Defendants carry a heavy burden of showing the balance to be in their favor. See Gurrola v. Griffin Brand Sales Agency, Inc., 524 F. Supp. 115, 117 (S. D. Tex. 1980).
It is well known that many migrant laborers do not have the financial resources necessary to prosecute a claim hundreds of miles from home. Gurrola, 524 F. Supp. at 118; Aguero, 481 F. Supp. at 1275. Thus noted, it appears to be less burdensome on the Defendants to defend in this District and Division than it would be on the Plaintiffs to prosecute their claims in the Northern District of Texas. Aguero, 481 F. Supp. at 1275. Additionally, the Defendants have not demonstrated that a trial in this District and Division would prejudice their rights to a fair trial. Id.
Finally, it should be noted that factors of public interest also have a place in determining whether or not to transfer this cause. Id. This Court finds that requiring Plaintiffs to prosecute their claims in the Northern District of Texas would seriously dilute the Congressional effort to protect migrant workers, as set forth in 29 U.S.C. § 1854. See generally id. Indeed, persons whose occupation is, by definition, migrant would be placed at considerable disadvantage in redressing their rights if they were forced to return to the judicial district in which the offending parties reside. Stewart, 730 F. Supp. at 1097 n. 1. As such, policy considerations also dictate that this action should remain in this District and Division.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that "Adams Defendants' Motion to Change Venue" is hereby DENIED in all things.
Notice to Parties
The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to the parties via certified mail (return receipt requested).