Thread: Employers Use Mis-Match SSN to Fire Immigrants

Originally Posted by dem4labor

John Gay, chief lobbyist and senior vice president of government affairs and public policy for the National Restaurant Association. "We say enforcement alone won’t do it if you have a broken [immigration] system in the first place."

I wonder why people don't see through this doublespeak.

Been in contract negotiations before Dem4?

I agree obviously if you cannot rectify the mismatch in 60 days it is most likely you are not authorized to work in this country. Therefore the company is allowed to fire you.

I agree obviously if you cannot rectify the mismatch in 60 days it is most likely you are not authorized to work in this country. Therefore the company is allowed to fire you.

This is the system working as it should. So instead of making this a requirement and letting much of the current problem sort itself out naturally, we've wasted months and months listening to the scumbags in Congress debate everything but workplace enforcement. And the floods just keep coming, Americans keep being killed, their jobs taken, and their tax dollars continue to be wasted.

Matching names, social security numbers, and immigration status should have begun 20 years ago. I'm glad government is doing something right!

A couple of things:
1. Workplace enforcement would be more effective than better fences along the border, though some combination of both is best. As the jobs for illegals dry up, they will leave on their own, saving us the expense of deporting them (i.e. they will deport themselves).

2. The fired restaurant worker said he was fired two days after the no match letter. If that's true, he didn't have adequate time to resolve. If he's a legal immigrant or U.S. citizen and he only had two days to resolve a bureaucratic mistake, then he was treated unfairly and does have a case against the restaurant.

3. The Social Security Administrationi DOES MAKE a lot of mistakes with the spelling of names, name changes, etc. The sixty days in the new regulation is essential to ensure citizens and legal immigrants aren't unfairly terminated from their jobs. For the system to work, it must not only find illegal immigrants and prevent them from working, but it can't cause legal immigrants and citizens to lose their jobs either.

The SSA is really pokey about resolving bureaucratic snafus. Everytime I go there to get my wife and daughter's social security cards resolved, they need another four weeks to match records, check with immigration, etc. Both are students and neither of them want to have jobs, but SSNs are needed for tax returns, in-state tuition, etc. No match can be a great tool for workplace enforcement, but they need the clear up the bugs.

Some real life examples:
1. They won't give my legal immigrant wife a social security card with her married name on it, because it doesn't match what they have in the computer database they share with immigration. Apparently no one ever thought about legal immigrants having legitimate reasons for name changes. It will be challenging to change her name at both agencies concurrently.

2. The birthdate on my seven year old daughter's permanent resident card is off by two days and doesn't match her passport or birth certificate. The SSA needs four weeks just to translate her birth certificate and decide what to do next.

the Department of Homeland Security proposed in June that employers re-check the documents of millions of workers with mismatched Social Security numbers – and fire those who cannot resolve the discrepancy in 60 days.

This article is about people who have alredy been flagged as having bad SSNs. What's the problem here?? The employers should have been doing this all along. How simple can you get. Either the number matches or it doesn't. If a typo is the problem, you have 60 days to work it out.

It's my understanding that the illegals that work construction type jobs routinely give fake numbers. At some point the employer gets the letter and when they confront the illegal, the illegal simply leave and goes to work for another employer. It is a continious cycle.

John,

I'm not disagreeing with the new regs, just cautioning that resolving these issues is not as straightforward as you would think. Remember, we're dealing with big government here. If it takes the SSA four weeks to answer every request to resolve a problem, the person gets only one shot...if they need an additional four weeks past the original four then the employee is fired. SSA is one thoroughly messed up government agency. Immigration is another, but at least seems to be moving in the right direction.

Kate, the new regs are being handled through rule-mailing authority already given by Congress. Congress doesn't have to act in order for the new regulations to take effect. DHS did post the proposed regs for comment, review, hearings, etc. I would think they're close to being finalized and have the effect of law for employers. Once finalized employers will be required to follow-up on no-match letters or be considered to "know" they have an illegal immigrant working for them and may be fined $10,000 each time.

The importance of immigration issues to U.S. citizens fluctuates with the U.S. economy and perceived threats implemented by political figures and various media outlets. Given our xenophobic history here in the U.S., it is no surprise that human liberties are being denied in the face of murky laws and internal fears. Previously, border patrolling and immigration policy have revolved around rhetoric and presentation. Immigration policy is utilized when needed for national moral. Beefing up border patrol, building fences, creating pathways for naturalization and a myriad of other policies all create desired and undesired consequences. Historically the U.S. public holds little concern for immigration issues until demonizing rhetoric is implemented as a means of distraction or political leverage. If immigration is truly influencing the daily lives of citizens then it would prove helpful if those affected peoples decided what their stance was concerning the issues and backed their viewpoints up with action. While immigration remains a topic that is debated when necessary, many people are struggling to sustain their mental and physical security and people are losing their lives. If eradicating illegal workers in the U.S. is the desired goal, than building walls and haphazardly firing employees without merit will do little to help the cause. Will this haphazard firing lead to undocumented workers slipping into marginalized echelons of the U.S. workforce? Does the U.S. have or adhere to a policy of basic human rights? The system and processes concerning immigration are fragmentary at best and until resolved will continue to do little good for U.S. citizens, business owners, documented and undocumented workers, policy makers and all those who disregard this social issue deemed a threat and problem.

Originally Posted by Shay

The importance of immigration issues to U.S. citizens fluctuates with the U.S. economy and perceived threats implemented by political figures and various media outlets. Given our xenophobic history here in the U.S.,...

Um... you just outed yourself.

Originally Posted by Shay

... it is no surprise that human liberties are being denied in the face of murky laws and internal fears.

The only "liberty" being denied is the non-existent "liberty" to violate our laws with impunity and invade our borders without respect for our sovereignty. The law is not "murky." It says that you may not work here unless you are a U.S. citizen or have been granted a valid work visa that has not expired. That's pretty simple to normal, intelligent people. It's only lunkheaded third-worlders who seem to have a problem with understanding it, but then they often have problems with other elementary concepts like learning the language of the country in which they wish to work.

Originally Posted by Shay

Previously, border patrolling and immigration policy have revolved around rhetoric and presentation.

Upon what factual basis do you make this claim?

Originally Posted by Shay

Immigration policy is utilized when needed for national moral.

I think you mean "morale," but that's another false and utterly unsubstantiated claim.

Originally Posted by Shay

Beefing up border patrol, building fences, creating pathways for naturalization and a myriad of other policies all create desired and undesired consequences. Historically the U.S. public holds little concern for immigration issues until demonizing rhetoric is implemented as a means of distraction or political leverage.

How many of these absurdist unsubstantiated claims are you going to make bquasius, I mean "Shay"?

Originally Posted by Shay

If immigration is truly influencing the daily lives of citizens then it would prove helpful if those affected peoples decided what their stance was concerning the issues and backed their viewpoints up with action.

As did the people of Farmers Branch, Tx.? I suspect that you are not on board with the decisive action they took...

Originally Posted by Shay

While immigration remains a topic that is debated when necessary, many people are struggling to sustain their mental and physical security and people are losing their lives.

Surely you are referring to those 4000+ Americans who are documented as losing their lives at the hands of irresponsible and criminal foreign interlopers?

Originally Posted by Shay

If eradicating illegal workers in the U.S. is the desired goal, than building walls and haphazardly firing employees without merit will do little to help the cause.

Without merit? Using falsified identification or lying on or failing to provide an I-9 is cause for immediate termination according to the law.

Originally Posted by Shay

Will this haphazard firing lead to undocumented workers slipping into marginalized echelons of the U.S. workforce?

When you say "haphazard," I assume you mean "prescribed by federal law," and when you say "slipping into marginalized echelons," I assume you mean "having to return to Mexico or whatever other third world dump the lying bastards sneaked in here from."

Originally Posted by Shay

Does the U.S. have or adhere to a policy of basic human rights?

Yes. Invading our country and working here illegally or overstaying a visa are not among those rights.

Originally Posted by Shay

The system and processes concerning immigration are fragmentary at best and until resolved will continue to do little good for U.S. citizens, business owners, documented and undocumented workers, policy makers and all those who disregard this social issue deemed a threat and problem.

Read: "I don't like your laws and policies and so I will call them bad names, like "fragmentary.""

Run along, OBL spokesperson.

Someone should send this article to Rep. Bennie Thompson.