Illegal Immigrant raids by ICE

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Illegal Immigrant raids by ICE

palmon · Senior Member

One of our sons worked at a chicken processing plant in VA several years ago. Most of the workers there were working with bought papers. He served a spanishing speaking mission there and after he came home, he went back and lived in the spanish-speaking community.

Hoss Cartwright · Senior Member

And I am sure that the company reps will say "We are shocked SHOCKED to find out that their papers were forged. Can people really do that?"

It is just so easy to check, and any company that wants to can call the SSA and the INS to check the social security number and the green card number of any new hire. I suppose you could also call the driver license bureau, to verify that information.

You would have to do this process with every new hire, lest you be accused of discriminating against Hispanics, but checking every single new hire is completely legal.

But, then that would take away their "plausible deniability" and their steady stream of people who will accept slave wages.

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

As an employer, all I'm required to do is fill out the I-9 verification form and examine the required documents from the list. To do anything more or less will get you into hot water, either with the government or a discrimination lawsuit. From the Handbook for Employers on the I-9 it reads: "You must accept any document(s) (from List A) or combination of documents (one from List B and one from List C) presented by the individual which reasonably appear on their face to be genuine and to relate to the person presenting them. You may not specify which document(s) an employee must present."

Also from the same instructions for the I-9

"New Anti-Discrimination Provisions

For the purpose of satisfying the employment eligibility verification requirements, an employer cannot request that an employee present more or different documents than are required. Also, an employer cannot refuse to honor documents which on their face reasonably appear to be genuine and to relate to the person presenting them. The new law makes these actions unfair immigration-related employment practices. (See Part 4.)

New Document Fraud Provisions

Under the new law, it is unlawful for anyone knowingly to engage in any of the following activities for the purpose of satisfying a requirement of the Act:

*To forge, counterfeit, alter, or falsely make any document;

*To use, attempt to use, possess, obtain, accept, or receive any forged, counterfeit, altered, or falsely made document;

*To use or attempt to use any document lawfully issued to a person other than the possessor (including a deceased individual); or

To accept or receive any document lawfully issued to a person other than the possessor (including a deceased individual) for the purpose of complying with the employment eligibility verification requirements. (See Part 5.)"

If you are interested I have placed the link for the entire PDF document before. There are several sections dealing with discrimination that would scare even a suspicious employer out of doing anything.

http://www.osha.gov/pls/epub/wageindex.download?p_file=F6844/I9_Handbook.pdf

I know a guy that swears he has hired the same guy twice under different names but both times he has supplied all of the correct documentation as required under the I-9. Is it the same guy? Were the documents he presented the first time fake, the second time, or both? If my guy tries to report him and it turns out that his papers are good he risks charges of discrimination. What if this guy is actually the twin brother of the first guy and that's why they look the same? Unless he has some real evidence such as the picture on the drivers license looks totally unlike the guy who got the job or the papers obviously look forged then he really can't do much. Because race is such an issue these days, going beyond the I-9 can get you into deep doo doo.

Hoss Cartwright · Senior Member

And nothing that you posted prevents an employer from verifying every document.

You may accept whatever document the new hire gives you, and veryify it's validity with the federal or state agency which issued it.

If you do that with EVERY new hire and EVERY document, how can that be considered discrimination? That (and the law) are why EVERY new hire is required to do an I-9, even when the new hire is your uncle.

The example that you cited, would be discrimination, because he is singling out a particular employee for investigation.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

The question I have is what did Swift do with the information once it was presented? At a bare minimum, HR was supposed to photo copy the document presented and kept it on file. So, was the information put into their HRIS system as part of the employee record? Seems to me some of it would have to be in order to do proper payroll processing. That is where the red flags should have been going up if duplicate SS numbers were being used. Those are supposed to be unique numbers, mutually exclusive from any other data entry in that field of the company's employee record database. Of course, how then do you account for those with green cards and professionals working in the US from other countries here legally who do not have SSN numbers...

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Hoss Cartwright wrote:

And nothing that you posted prevents an employer from verifying every document.

You may accept whatever document the new hire gives you, and veryify it's validity with the federal or state agency which issued it.

If you do that with EVERY new hire and EVERY document, how can that be considered discrimination? That (and the law) are why EVERY new hire is required to do an I-9, even when the new hire is your uncle.

The example that you cited, would be discrimination, because he is singling out a particular employee for investigation.

Yea why not. I'm sure every company should just bend over and do another unpaid job for the feds. It isn't the employers job to track down counterfitters. That's the feds job. Frankly, I'm sick and tired as an employer of doing unpaid labor for the government. I wouldn't mind submitting the information to a central place but why should I make phone calls to the social security administration and the DMV on every new hire? Neither organization has their act together and could handle it anyway. My California Driver's license and DMV record says I'm a female and still has my weight and height from when I was 16 years old. I have tried to get it fixed but they can't seem to get it right to this day. Still I'm a woman who weighs a buck fifty seven according to them. Then the social security idiots. I requested a duplicate social security card. When I got it in the mail they had changed my name from Jason to Juan on the card. I took it into the social security admin office and they said they would fix and send me a new one. They at least fixed the name but never sent a new card. Fortunately, my mom found my original so I didn't need to trudge back to the social security office for a third time and wait in line again. And you expect these folks to be able to verify the I-9 required docs? Fat chance.

The illegal immigration problem isn't the fault of businesses. It is the federal government. According to the law I am required to accept them at face value and that's all. If you think I should do more then write your congressman. I spend the equivilent of a week of my valuable time each quarter just doing government paperwork. Paperwork that adds no $$$ to my bottom line. Unfunded government mandates. I'm expected to collect payroll and sales taxes for the government thus I am a tax collector. I'm expected to collect and or pay social security, workers compensation insurance payments, and state and federal disability and unemployment insurance. I'm also expected to collect garnishments for unpaid taxes by federal, state, and local governments. Then my personal favorite....I'm expected to collect monies from dead beat dads via garnishments for child support. None of which do I recieve a dime for my time from the government. If you add in the other permits and required reporting forms it is a wonder that any small business can make it in the U.S. anymore. How many small businesses can afford to hire someone just to government paperwork and how many owners can correctly wade through the paperwork written in a foreign language I like to refer to as legalese. My quarterly sales tax reporting form alone has around 8 pages that have to be filled out with numbers. It takes hours to fill out this form alone.

I don't mean to come of sounding like a whiner but this isn't a business problem. The government could end this sort of thing tomorrow if there was any political will to do it and the illegal immigrants themselves are breaking multiple federal and state laws by using forged documents and being in this country illegally. How many of them will actually be prosecuted?

Hoss Cartwright · Senior Member

salesortonscom wrote:

Frankly, I'm sick and tired as an employer of doing unpaid labor for the government.

The government could end this sort of thing tomorrow if there was any political will to do it....

Excellent points in your post, even for a svelt chick named Juan.

You are, of course, correct.

Not all employers are as honest as you. Some of them actually send orders to the coyotes for a certain number of men to be brought over from Mexico. They then conveniently look the other way on the documents, which is easy to do, given the contradictory rules on the I-9.

Employers, at the very least should be held harmless when they do question a document. I think I will write my senators and my representative.

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

I think I will write my senators and my representative.

Me too. Hey Juan, can I cut and paste your diatribe into my letter?

arbilad · Head Chef

The local papers are complaining about how the mean feds have picked on the poor illegal immigrants and their emloyer. They paint a picture of a factory at a standstill, and the economic impact. And all I can think is "Cry me a river".
BTW, Jason, while I have no doubt that employers throughout the nation have similar problems, your's are augmented by the fact that you live in the People's Republic of California. The don't exactly have a reputation of being "employer friendly" for the past decade.

Melissa · Veteran Member

Here's another thing to cry a river over.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=725009

I do feel for the families of these people, but when the law is broken, justice needs to be served, even if there are children left behind.

I watched a show about a man who had murdered his wife and then a few years later was sent to prison. The defense played it all up about how the kids were now losing their father. The prosecuter said that we can't not prosecute someone for murder just because they have kids. Illegal immigration isn't murder, but the same concept applies.

The plant in Utah is in my hometown. My husband used to work there. Hits close to home.

Hoss Cartwright · Senior Member

The fact that children are going to be adversely affected by the enforcement of the law really does break my heart.

How extremely unfortunate that bad parental choices are causing pain for the children.

Can't the parents take their children with them when they are deported? Or would some of the parents stoop so low as to leave them "behind" in order to make a political statement? Or is life so unbelievably bad in their country of origin that the children will be better off here in foster care than there with their parents?

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

I apologize if my rant came across a little strong. Being forced into the role of a hispanic female this late in life really has placed some strong mental pressure on me. My female drivers license did get me out of a ticket when my wife and I were dating. I pulled out of the K Mart parking lot at night and forgot to turn on my headlights until I got onto the street due to how bright the parking lot lights were. A policeman immediately pulled me over and told me that one of the signs of a drunk driver is failure to turn on your head lights. The officer asked for all my documents (driver's license, insurance, registration.) He asked if all the information was correct and I told him "no". He got real concerned and asked what was in correct. I told him the DMV gave me a sex change. He looked at the license, looked at me, looked back at the license handed it back to me and said, "You folks have a nice evening" as he quickly walked away. I could see every nerve in his face straining not to bust up laughing.

TitusTodd · Senior Member

The local news is good at glossing over the fact there were identity theft felonies committed. I imagine the national news is doing the same. This is not a victimless crime. There is a large identify theft network involved here.

We have a Swift plant north of here that, from what I understand, had the greatest number of illegals taken (295). 397 kids of those detained have been impacted. This has hurt the small community of 2,500 that many Swift employees live in. Is that the fault of those detained or the fault of the government?

Who will take the jobs of those 295? Are there others (who are legal) willing to take them? I will be interested in seeing what happens.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

While those are valid concerns from an emotional standpoint, the problem of staffing that plant (or any of the other plants impacted by the raids) is actually the problem of Swift and Swift's alone. The municipalities they are located in should be looking at this as a long term boon, because in order for Swift to maintain a positive bottom line, they need to get those plants back up and running to full capacity again. That means offering decent wages to legal immigrants and citizens. That in turn means more cash influx to the local communities, even if the company ends up having to "bus" legal workers in from other communities just to fill the need.

But, the truth is, everyone is just going to look at the short term picture more than likely. Swift may decide whether or not it makes sense to have all these plants still in operation since they now know they are on the list for hiring cheap labor via illegal immigrants. They may not be as profitable to run any longer...

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

If you were one of the children in one of these families, born a legal citizen of the United States of America garanteed by the Constitution of this country, would you an allegiance to this country and its people, or to your family?

Stupidity breeds stupidity.

--Ray

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

rayb wrote:

If you were one of the children in one of these families, born a legal citizen of the United States of America garanteed by the Constitution of this country, would you an allegiance to this country and its people, or to your family?

Stupidity breeds stupidity.

--Ray

I'm not sure I follow how that comment fits in with the topic. I would have to say that the children (even if they are adults now) will ultimately owe their allegiance to their family, and that those who are old enough will feel less inclined to think amicably of the nation they were born in. But, as you say, stupidity breeds stupidity (or as Forrest Gump is keen to say 'Stupid is as stupid does')... So would their consternation at their parent(s) being deported be the fault of the US government and its laws or the fault of their parent(s) not obeying those laws?

eta... Did you happen to hear that Swift is already warning that the price of meat is going to go up now? Higher wages will have to be in place (not a shortage of meat, because if I understood the reports, it wasn't all types of meat plants, just pork processing plants, that were targetted) because they can no longer get away with paying sub-minimum wages to illegal immigrant workers. Of course, that means they have to pass the increased expense on to their customers because they can't justify absorbing the additional expense and let it erode their profit margin... Oh yeah, I did see that coming... standard business practice... doesn't mean it is dealing honestly or ethically to make up for one wrong by perpetuating another to cover the financial impact.

-- Edited by Cat Herder at 08:33, 2006-12-15

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

Cat Herder wrote:

eta... Did you happen to hear that Swift is already warning that the price of meat is going to go up now? Higher wages will have to be in place (not a shortage of meat, because if I understood the reports, it wasn't all types of meat plants, just pork processing plants, that were targetted) because they can no longer get away with paying sub-minimum wages to illegal immigrant workers. Of course, that means they have to pass the increased expense on to their customers because they can't justify absorbing the additional expense and let it erode their profit margin... Oh yeah, I did see that coming... standard business practice... doesn't mean it is dealing honestly or ethically to make up for one wrong by perpetuating another to cover the financial impact.

Cat, are you actually making an argument against capitalism? Why, in our society, is it unethical for a company to raise prices to remain profitable? The market's amoral. We shouldn't expect anything different.

I say we Bountifulites band together and either become socialists or vegetarians in protest!

Hoss Cartwright · Senior Member

It will be interesting to see if Swift can compete on a short term basis. They can't just pass on their higher costs to the customer automatically.

Basically, the price they charge for their product will be what the market dictates. If you have a package of bacon from Swift that's $1 more than Bar S Brand (or whatever brand), if they are substantially equal in quality, you're going to buy the cheaper one for the most part, leaving Swift out in the cold.

So all of Swifts competitors have a competitive advantage over Swift, because the competitors still have cheap illegal workers producing their product. Swift might have to say "hey, we can't pay slave wages here, so we'll move all of our plants to Mexico where our slave wages will be welcomed with parades and rejoicing."

Many businesses don't make ethical steps, because it puts them at a competitive disadvantage to their unethical competitors. For example, a company could do as I suggested earlier and double check every document on every I-9, and have zero illegal workers. If they take that step, it is likely that they wouldn't be able to be fully staffed without raising wages significantly. So, they have higher labor costs, and they have extra costs associated with the extra checking on the I-9.

Ideally, the government would be checking this stuff more closely, so all of the businesses were on the same playing field, but it doesn't.

This is a similar reason why Marriott has porn movies in its hotels. That one item represents a huge portion of every hotel's profit margin, and Marriott would not be able to compete without selling its own porn.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

Yeah, when I heard that Marriott had porn in the rooms, Matt 16:26 came to mind: For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Chick-fil-A was founded by S. Truett Cathy, a devout Baptist. They're not open on Sundays, even though all their competitors are. Yet they've been profitable for over 60 years. Cathy states, ""Our decision to close on Sunday was our way of honoring God and directing our attention to things more important than our business. If it took seven days to make a living with a restaurant, then we needed to be in some other line of work." Marriott should have said the same thing about porn.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

but porn is a garanteed profit maker... aren't we supposed to "Follow the profit?"

-- Edited by rayb at 00:30, 2006-12-17

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Vegitarian socialist Bountiful-ites unite! {sound of crickets chirping in response...}

My point is that I don't buy the impact of raising the wages to legal minimums is going to have as great an impact on their overall expense as what the increase in cost to the consumer is going to be on an incremental basis.

Sure, expenses will increase, but profitibility will too as the increased revenue will outstrip the increased expense. Particularly if all the industry players "collude" to raise prices.

Yeah, not making a comment against capitalism, but amoral and unethical use of capitalism.

It is kind of like whenever the price of a barrel of oil goes up. Nothing else in the expense side of the equation has changed, nor has the demand really changed. The process of fractional refining a barrel of oil results in multiple products, with a net result of more output than input to the process. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refining
As a barrel of oil is 42 gallons of crude, if the only product was 42 gallons of gasoline, then for every $1.00 of increase in crude price, you should logically expect the price to only increase by about 2.5 cents per gallon of gas, right? http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/crudeproduction.html But, actually, 19.4 gallons of gasoline are the result of 1 barrel of crude (plus all the other products), so even if it was only 19.4 gallons, for every $1 increase in crude, one would think the price of the product should only increase about 5 cents per gallon? Right? Well, when the price of oil goes up, the price of all the products goes up, and each barrel of oil results in 44 gallons of product, so each product should go up less than 2.5 cents per gallon for every $ of crude increase. But it doesn't, the price increases exponentially more by the time it gets to the consumer on all petroleum products. Hence, the great financial windfalls that oil companies see. And it is pure profit and is "blamed" on increase in expense which is actually only nominal in the long run.

Part of the problem with Marriott could be that it is publicly traded and the Marriott's may not have a controlling amount of the stock any longer. I don't know about Chick-fil-a being on the same level of magnitude as Marriott, if it is a publicly traded company. Maybe it ended up having to be a compromise for those who did not share the Marriott's religious preferences in exchange for their agreeing to continue allowing copies of the Book of Mormon in every guest room.

Oh yeah, there is the start of another urban legend! Go Cat! Go Cat!

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

I still don't buy it with Marriott. If Comfort Inn, Ramada, Howard Johnson, Hyatt, Holiday Inn, Radisson, Days Inn, and Best Western can run their business without offering porn (according to CleanHotels.com), then why not Marriott?

Chick-fil-A is a franchise. Even though each restaurant is independently owned, closing on Sunday is a stipulation of the franchise. So I guess in that case, Cathy "forces his religious beliefs on others."

TitusTodd · Senior Member

I haven't heard about Swift raising meat prices because of the raids but they will probably have to payer higher wages to attract employees to their rural location here. They could not have been paying sub-minimum wages to their workers who they claim they thought were legal or that would have been illegal. The typical meat packing jobs average $10-$15 an hour. With a low cost of living in rural areas, Swift employees probably do just fine on those salary rates. There is a greater risk of injury with such jobs, however, that make attracting employees more difficult.

Hoss Cartwright · Senior Member

I wonder if illegal workers (especially those using forged papers) would be significantly less likely to file a "walk it off" workers comp claim.

I mean, there are certain workers comp claims that have to be done, and a visit to the doctor cannot be avoided. But, I have seen a whole lot of workers comp claims where you just want to tell the person "couldn't you just take a tylenol, take a couple of sick days, and avoid charging our self-funded plan for a completely unecessary $700 visit to the emergency room?"

If these nuisance workers comp claims are curtailed (thus lowering workers comp insurance claims long-term) that could be another incentive to hire illegals. Man, the exploitation opportunities just keep on coming. Of couse, in Mexico they probably wouldn't have coverage even for the catastrophic claims.

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Hoss Cartwright wrote:

I wonder if illegal workers (especially those using forged papers) would be significantly less likely to file a "walk it off" workers comp claim.

I mean, there are certain workers comp claims that have to be done, and a visit to the doctor cannot be avoided. But, I have seen a whole lot of workers comp claims where you just want to tell the person "couldn't you just take a tylenol, take a couple of sick days, and avoid charging our self-funded plan for a completely unecessary $700 visit to the emergency room?"

If these nuisance workers comp claims are curtailed (thus lowering workers comp insurance claims long-term) that could be another incentive to hire illegals. Man, the exploitation opportunities just keep on coming. Of couse, in Mexico they probably wouldn't have coverage even for the catastrophic claims.

I don't know about workman's comp claims but as far as victims of crimes and witnesses to crimes illegals do not report them. I know a guy that hit and killed people in an intersection crosswalk. It was an accident in the early morning. He was looking at some jail time but all the witnesses disapeared. It was a farming community and they hit the road. The DA dropped the charges because no one could be found to testify in the trial other than the cop who arrived on the scene. Since there was no alcohol or drugs involved the DA just let it go. He figured he would lose with no witnesses showing up.

palmon · Senior Member

Hmmmm. Looks like there are legal residents that want to work there.
lining up for jobs vacated by raids