Thread: Chertoff to propose changes in illegal-hiring rules

Published: 10.23.2008
Chertoff to propose changes in illegal-hiring rules
SUZANNE GAMBOA
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff plans to announce changes to rules designed to stop businesses from hiring people working in the country illegally.
The rules proposed to force employers to fire workers whose names don't match their Social Security numbers. A Homeland Security official, speaking on condition of anonymity ahead of the announcement Thursday, says Chertoff will describe the changes, which were prompted by a judge's order.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have sued Chertoff over the rules. They say the rules open the door for discrimination against legitimate workers.
A judge had barred Chertoff from implementing the proposed rules. The department has previously proposed changes to address the judge's concerns.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/brea ... 100495.php

The American Civil Liberties Union, the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have sued Chertoff over the rules. They say the rules open the door for discrimination against legitimate workers.

How so? If you don't have a Social Security number or legal permission, you can't work, and I don't care if you are purple or green or where you came from.
Enforcement of laws on the books are not discrimination! That judge should be thrown out of office.

Thank goodness Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is trying to do more. I cannot believe he is trying this hard to protect America. Safety and Security, and Economy is destroyed by not doing this smart safeguard.

Going to be interesting to read the rules! Can't wait!

The American Civil Liberties Union, the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have sued Chertoff over the rules. They say the rules open the door for discrimination against legitimate workers.

How so? I bet you I would be fired if my name does not match my ss card.

It's about time.

There are some legitimate cases where your name can fall out of sync with what's on your card, but you are supposed to fix that quickly. I changed from maiden name to married name and back again, and had my social security records adjusted and a new card issued each time.

This article is now on the USA TODAY Online site. You can post a comment there at this link:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington ... tion_N.htm

Chertoff to pursue changes in hiring rules
SUZANNE GAMBOA ASSOCIATED PRESS
Originally published 04:28 p.m., October 23, 2008, updated 04:06 p.m., October 23, 2008
WASHINGTON (AP) - Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Thursday he'll try again to overcome a judge's objections to a proposal to force employers to get rid of workers whose Social Security numbers don't match their names.

The proposal has been stymied for months by a U.S. district judge in California who blocked the rule after several groups sued. Chertoff said his agency has addressed the judge's concerns with some additions to the proposal, including providing an analysis of the economic costs of the rule.

Chertoff said he expects continued opposition from the groups who sued, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"Groups like the Chamber of Commerce have told us, they haven't been coy about it ... there are many businesses that rely on illegal migration in order to carry out their activities and it would hurt them if they had to carry out the rule," Chertoff said. "In my experience, making money is not a sufficient justification for violating the rule since most people break the rule in order to make money."

Chertoff spoke at a news conference held to list his agency's immigration enforcement achievements. He said the stepped-up enforcement has helped stall illegal immigration and possibly decrease it. But to control illegal immigration for the long term, enforcement must be part of comprehensive immigration reform, he said.

Angelo Amador, the chamber's director of immigration policy, dismissed Chertoff's comment, saying the need for illegal workers is not an argument in the lawsuit.

"The bottom line is this case has never been about illegal workers, it has been about the cost of a badly thought out rule and the cost on legitimate businesses following all the rules and complying with it," Amador said.

He said the department's own analysis, which it was forced to do after the judge blocked the rule, shows that 37,000 to 165,000 legitimate workers would not be able to work because of the rule.

The Social Security administration regularly sends "no match" letters to employers when a Social Security number provided by an employee does not match the name of the employee in their database. The problem can be a clerical error, perhaps the failure of a woman to update her last name after she marries or some other issue. But the no match also is used to identify workers who may be using someone else's Social Security number or a fake number.

The administration's plan is to penalize employers who do not fire workers unable to resolve the no match.

"There are many instances where the reason for a no match is we have an unauthorized worker using phony documentation," Chertoff said. "What the regulation originally proposed is, in that instance, an employer cannot simply put his or her head in the sand, but must take steps to make sure they are brought into compliance."

But groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, AFL-CIO, National Immigration Law Center and the chamber say the plan could lead to discrimination, racial profiling and illegal firing of legitimate workers in the same way babies and Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., mistakenly ended up on the government's "no fly list."

Amador said the administration's requirement that employers fire workers with a no match does not protect them from prosecution for civil rights violations.

"Instead of fixing the database, the Bush administration has turned a blind eye to reality by using the same fatally flawed information that will punish American workers and businesses in the middle of an economic meltdown," said Lucas Guttentag, the ACLU's immigration rights project director.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oc ... g-rules-1/

Department of Homeland Security News Release

DHS Issues Supplemental Final Rule with Guidance For Employers Who Receive Social Security 'No-Match' Letters

Release Date: October 23, 2008

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

Read the Supplemental Final Rule (PDF, 100 pages - 3.53 MB)

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today issued a Supplemental Final Rule that provides additional background and analysis for the department's No-Match Rule. The DHS regulation, which was originally proposed in June 2006 and issued in August 2007 as a Final Rule, clarifies what steps responsible employers can take to resolve discrepancies identified in "no-match" letters issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA). It also provides guidance to help businesses comply with legal requirements intended to reduce the illegal employment of unauthorized workers.

"The additional information in this supplemental rule addresses the specific items raised by the Court, and we expect to be able to quickly implement it," said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "The No-Match Rule, along with E-Verify, will increasingly make the pleas of ignorance from businesses that seek to exploit illegal labor ring hollow, and equip their responsible competitors with the tools they need to hire and maintain a legal workforce."

Implementation of the No-Match Rule has been stayed following a preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last year. In March 2008, DHS published a Supplemental Proposed Rule addressing the issues raised by the Court in its order enjoining implementation of the rule, including a more detailed analysis of how the department developed the no-match policy and a detailed economic analysis of the rule. In the coming days, DHS will return to the District Court to request that the injunction be lifted so that implementation of the rule can proceed.

SSA informs thousands of employers every year via "no-match" letters that certain employees' names and corresponding Social Security numbers provided on the employers' Form W-2 wage reports do not match SSA's records. As many as 4 percent of approximately 250 million wage reports the SSA receives each year belong to employees whose names and corresponding Social Security numbers do not match SSA records.

The No-Match Rule details steps employers may take when they receive a "no match" letter and guarantees that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will consider employers who follow those steps to have acted reasonably. If an employer follows the safe harbor procedures in good faith, ICE will not use the employer's receipt of a no-match letter as evidence to find that the employer violated the employment provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act by knowingly employing unauthorized workers.

###

This page was last reviewed/modified on October 23, 2008.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1224771455239.shtm