Results 1 to 10 of 12
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
-
03-08-2005, 12:36 AM #1
Court declines to review immigrant case
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... pagefrom=1
review immigrant case
By HOPE YEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider whether an employer can inquire about the immigration status of Latina and Southeast Asian women who are suing the company for job discrimination.
Justices let stand a lower court ruling that said NIBCO Inc.'s questions during the early stages of the lawsuit were irrelevant to the issue of whether the company violated the Title VII federal law barring discrimination based on national origin.
Martha Rivera and 22 other immigrant workers, formerly employed at NIBCO's Fresno, Calif. plant, sued the pipe and valve maker for discrimination after it required them to take a job skills test that was administered only in English. After performing poorly, the workers were demoted, transferred and eventually fired in 1998.
During the lawsuit's fact-finding phase, NIBCO asked the workers about their immigration status, saying the information was needed to determine their entitlement to back pay and other potential money damages. The Elkhart, Ind.-based company said it would not disclose the workers' immigration status to outside parties.
The former employees protested, citing a potential chilling effect on immigrants' willingness to assert workplace rights.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. In an opinion by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the court noted that there are 5.3 million undocumented workers in the country, many of whom are reluctant to report discriminatory employment practices.
"Granting employers the right to inquire into workers' immigration status in cases like this would allow them to raise implicitly the threat of deportation and criminal prosecution every time a worker, documented or undocumented, reports illegal practices or files a Title VII action," Reinhardt wrote.
The case is NIBCO v. Rivera, 04-936.
So they performed poorly on the the test which was being administered in english. And no one thinks it's important to check the status of these workers, being legal or illegal, for fear of him/her being discriminted against. Judge Reinhardt, whats up with that?RIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn
-
03-08-2005, 12:36 AM #2
Court declines to review immigrant case
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... pagefrom=1
review immigrant case
By HOPE YEN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider whether an employer can inquire about the immigration status of Latina and Southeast Asian women who are suing the company for job discrimination.
Justices let stand a lower court ruling that said NIBCO Inc.'s questions during the early stages of the lawsuit were irrelevant to the issue of whether the company violated the Title VII federal law barring discrimination based on national origin.
Martha Rivera and 22 other immigrant workers, formerly employed at NIBCO's Fresno, Calif. plant, sued the pipe and valve maker for discrimination after it required them to take a job skills test that was administered only in English. After performing poorly, the workers were demoted, transferred and eventually fired in 1998.
During the lawsuit's fact-finding phase, NIBCO asked the workers about their immigration status, saying the information was needed to determine their entitlement to back pay and other potential money damages. The Elkhart, Ind.-based company said it would not disclose the workers' immigration status to outside parties.
The former employees protested, citing a potential chilling effect on immigrants' willingness to assert workplace rights.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. In an opinion by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the court noted that there are 5.3 million undocumented workers in the country, many of whom are reluctant to report discriminatory employment practices.
"Granting employers the right to inquire into workers' immigration status in cases like this would allow them to raise implicitly the threat of deportation and criminal prosecution every time a worker, documented or undocumented, reports illegal practices or files a Title VII action," Reinhardt wrote.
The case is NIBCO v. Rivera, 04-936.
So they performed poorly on the the test which was being administered in english. And no one thinks it's important to check the status of these workers, being legal or illegal, for fear of him/her being discriminted against. Judge Reinhardt, whats up with that?RIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn
-
03-08-2005, 06:54 AM #3
- Join Date
- Jan 1970
- Location
- desktop
- Posts
- 1,760
All I gotta say is ... just when you think you've heard it all - you hear something more insane! This is outrageous! But nowadays that seems par for the course.
"This country has lost control of its borders. And no country can sustain that kind of position." .... Ronald Reagan
-
03-08-2005, 06:54 AM #4
- Join Date
- Jan 1970
- Location
- desktop
- Posts
- 1,760
All I gotta say is ... just when you think you've heard it all - you hear something more insane! This is outrageous! But nowadays that seems par for the course.
"This country has lost control of its borders. And no country can sustain that kind of position." .... Ronald Reagan
-
03-08-2005, 10:58 AM #5
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- Oak Island, North Mexolina
- Posts
- 6,231
Typical Supreme Court ruling. Now let me see if I have this right. An employer can be charged with a felony if the hire an illigal alien. But the Supreme Court says they can not inquire if they are illigal. This is typical lawyer double talk.
Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)
-
03-08-2005, 10:58 AM #6
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- Oak Island, North Mexolina
- Posts
- 6,231
Typical Supreme Court ruling. Now let me see if I have this right. An employer can be charged with a felony if the hire an illigal alien. But the Supreme Court says they can not inquire if they are illigal. This is typical lawyer double talk.
Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)
-
03-08-2005, 12:03 PM #7
-
03-08-2005, 12:03 PM #8
-
03-08-2005, 01:05 PM #9Originally Posted by CharlesoakislandRIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn
-
03-08-2005, 01:05 PM #10Originally Posted by CharlesoakislandRIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn
If You Don’t Build It, They Will Come: The BorderLine
03-29-2024, 07:37 AM in illegal immigration News Stories & Reports